Heads up, updates to pypolicyd-spf and python3-py3dns in Rawhide

The former is an update to the latest version of spf-engine, which rejigs the package, among other thing, so this will require careful testing. The latter had async IO pulled out, because Python 3.12 no longer supports the APIs that were used. Once again, careful testing will be required.

Re: F38 updates stuck in pending

https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11508 -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: F38 updates stuck in pending

Yeah, a ticket may be a better idea. I am not a maintainer of those packages, so don't want to overstep. -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of

F38 updates stuck in pending

If anyone reading this email has special powers to get some of the week old F38 updates unstuck from pending, please click the magic button.  An example of such an update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-ef0e8e36fc Thanks, -- Bojan

Re: Firefox builds broken on F38/39

Hi Fabio, Kevin pointed to llvm/rust bugs in that FF bug already: - https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/61932 - https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/109934 So, yeah - folks are already aware of this. For Firefox, using older rust for builds worked. -- Bojan

Re: Firefox builds broken on F38/39

Thank you for the pointer Kevin! Trying to build with older rust in corp now: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/bojan/FF/build/5862010/ -- Bojan -Original Message- From: Bojan Smojver To: Fedora Development List Subject: Firefox builds broken on F38/39 Date: 30/04/23 12:05:11

Firefox builds broken on F38/39

Looks like build infrastructure is having trouble building Firefox for these two at the moment. More info here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2189964 It you have any ideas of what could be causing this, please feel free to share. Thanks, -- Bojan

Re: Bodhi 7.0.1 deployed to prod

Yay! Thank you! -- Bojan -Original Message- From: Mattia Verga Reply-To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Bodhi 7.0.1 deployed to prod Date: 17/01/23 16:39:49 - Frozen releases updates will now be forced into testing before being pushed

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

FF 107.0 shipped in all current Fedora releases a while ago. You can find all that in bodhi. If you mean 107.0.1, that will depend on the FF maintainers. Maybe they see no reason to respin, because the bugs fixed in that release are not something that is important in Fedora - not sure. -- Bojan

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

107.0.1 build for F37/x86_64: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/bojan/FF/ If you want/need or are obsessive about version numbers, like yours truly. ;-) -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

Of course, relevant build overrides had to be provided, because required version of nss was not in stable at the time I started these scratch builds. Thought I'd mention it for completeness. -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list --

Re: FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

Everything except F38 completed fine. -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

FF 107.0 scratch builds - just for fun

Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time. No idea how this is going to end up, but the tasks for F3{8,7,6,5} are here, if anyone is interested:

Re: Direct to stable updates

Maybe push them to both, if they've never been to testing? In other words, never skip testing. Sure, there will be some duplication of packages for a cycle or two, but eventually, they anything that's already in stable will be kicked out of testing, right? -- Bojan

Direct to stable updates

Quick question about direct to stable updates in bodhi, such as FF 106.0.4 and kernel 6.0.7 that are lined up for F37 right now. Such updates often end up being in nowhere land for quite some time, because they skip testing to go to stable directly, but the push to stable cannot happen for

Re: Building two conflicting binaries from the same source

Possibly in one of the future versions. I am not even sure at this point how well (if at all) glamor support works with xorgxrdp. -- Bojan -Original Message- From: Hans de Goede To: Development discussions related to Fedora Cc: Bojan Smojver Subject: Re: Building two conflicting

Re: Building two conflicting binaries from the same source

It was for packaging xorgxrdp with glamor support. Submitted to bodhi now, so all good. -- Bojan 4 Nov 2022 7:38:17 pm Hans de Goede : Hi, On 11/3/22 21:31, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > This may be a trivial question, but my friend Goo

Re: Building two conflicting binaries from the same source

Thank you! -- Bojan 4 Nov 2022 8:48:25 am Florian Weimer : * Bojan Smojver via devel: > Sure, it is easy enough to configure/build repeatedly and stash the > results into non-conflicting paths of buildroot, but how does one then >

Re: Building two conflicting binaries from the same source

Cool, thank you! I think this is exactly what I was looking for (unsuccessfully). -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: Building two conflicting binaries from the same source

PS. I am aware of the alternatives approach, but looking to see whether there is something that rpm specs have natively for this. -- Bojan 4 Nov 2022 7:31:14 am Bojan Smojver : This may be a trivial question, but my friend Google is not showing me any

Building two conflicting binaries from the same source

This may be a trivial question, but my friend Google is not showing me any obvious answers, so I will ask here at my own peril. Say one needs to configure and build the same source with two (or more) different sets of options that generate different binary RPMs, but which have files in exactly

Re: Firefox/nss behaviour change in F36?

Ah, cool. Totally missed that in release notes. 臘‍♂️ Thanks, -- Bojan 6 June 2022 8:13:10 pm Alexander Sosedkin : On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 12:03 PM Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > > Before I open a bug on this, the latest firefox/nss so

Firefox/nss behaviour change in F36?

Before I open a bug on this, the latest firefox/nss software that is in F36 - is it not accepting SSL certificates without matching subjectAlternativeName on purpose? I still have to complete more tests, but it seems that if SSL certificate is issued to CN abc.example.com and if that name is

F34: httpd package stuck in bodhi

Could someone with sufficient permissions please get httpd package unstuck in bodhi? It's been sitting there for a few days, waiting to get to stable, but it keeps getting kicked out, because some automated tests did not pass. The package contains security fixes. Thanks, -- Bojan

Re: Rawhide: noarch package built differently on different architectures

V Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 06:40:48PM +1000, Bojan Smojver via devel napsal(a): > Example: > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=76099482 > > Built the same thing on F35/34/33 and EPEL8/7 and that worked. Did > something change in Rawhide that I should be aware

Rawhide: noarch package built differently on different architectures

Example: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=76099482 Built the same thing on F35/34/33 and EPEL8/7 and that worked. Did something change in Rawhide that I should be aware of or is this just a temporary thing? Thanks, -- Bojan ___

FF builds

Just being devil's advocate for a second here... Two days to build FF in koji? Has it gotten that big or are the builds that slow? :-) -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: F33: kernel 5.10.x

2021 23:22:12 + Before be submitted in bodhi , we can test here: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jforbes/kernel-stabilization On Fri, 2021-01-08 at 22:40 +, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > Just wondering whether there is a particular reason 5.10 kernel has > not been sub

F33: kernel 5.10.x

Just wondering whether there is a particular reason 5.10 kernel has not been submitted for testing in bodhi for F33. Or is it simply an oversight? -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: Firefox 78.0.2 for F32

Cool, thanks! -- Bojan___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines:

Firefox 78.0.2 for F32

Would someone with sufficient powers mind queueing up this update? Thanks, -- Bojan___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: Status of bodhi

OK, thanks for the pointer. -- Bojan___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List

Status of bodhi

There was a note recently in one the the kernel packages about bodhi being a tad temperamental recently and not pushing updates out. Anyone knows what's going on with that? Is the fix on the horizon? -- Bojan___ devel mailing list --

Xorg 1.20.4-7.el7

Just tried building a scratch build of xorgxrdp, but this still pulls in the old Xorg, before RHEL 7.7 version. Could someone please change that, so that builds pick the latest package up. All in relation to: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738669

Re: Firewalld v nftables

Awesome! Thank you. -Original Message- From: Eric Garver To: Development discussions related to Fedora Cc: Bojan Smojver Subject: Re: Firewalld v nftables Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 10:36:12 -0400 On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:14:49AM +1000, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote: > This was patc

Firewalld v nftables

This was patched out, because an official feature was never submitted. Now that RHEL8 is using that combo, maybe it's time to try again? :-) -- Bojan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to