FedoraRespin-30-updates-20190816.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 2/31 (x86_64) ID: 432615 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/432615 ID: 432619 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL:

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2019-08-17 - % PASS

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/08/17/report-389-ds-base-1.4.1.6-20190816gitca915d5.fc30.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[EPEL-devel] Re: Automatic python dependency generation on EPEL 8

> On 8/16/19 7:45 PM, Scott Talbert wrote: > > It seems to be working for me - not sure what the "official" stance is. Strange, it didn't seem to work here, for example: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1323057 ___ epel-devel

[EPEL-devel] Re: Getting packages into EPEL-8

On 8/16/19 12:16 AM, willi.feh...@t-online.de wrote: Dear EPEL developers, I would like to request a handful of packages for EPEL-8. Name of the packages and short description and a reason why the package is needed. *Fail2Ban:* Fail2Ban is an Intrusion Prevention Software which protects

[EPEL-devel] Re: Automatic python dependency generation on EPEL 8

On 8/16/19 7:45 PM, Scott Talbert wrote: Is automatic python dependency generation supposed to work on EPEL 8? It seems to be working for me - not sure what the "official" stance is. -- Orion Poplawski Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office

[EPEL-devel] Automatic python dependency generation on EPEL 8

Is automatic python dependency generation supposed to work on EPEL 8? ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Something odd going on with the Fedora mirror manager?

This site: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager/ Shows releases for 25835, 25788, 25775, 25757 and 25748. -- Jonathan Billings ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

looking to orphan docker-distribution..

I'm looking to give up ownership of the docker-distribution package. Current co-maintainers aren't keen on owning it either, but I heard registry.fp.o depends on it. So, just checking if anyone would like to own it before I orphan it. -- Lokesh IRC, GitHub: lsm5 GPG: 0xC7C3A0DD

Re: unable to branch to epel8

On 8/16/19 2:40 AM, Dave Love wrote: > Kevin Fenzi writes: > >>> Also, I don't get any notifications from pagure (as with various other >>> -- most? -- services), despite turning on anything relevant-looking in >>> the notifications app. I've asked several times about lack of >>> notifications

[Bug 1742814] perl-Test2-Suite-0.000124 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742814 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|perl-Test2-Suite-0.000123

[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2019-08-19 Fedora 31 Blocker Review Meeting

Hey folks! I'm proposing we cancel the blocker review meeting for Monday; there are no proposed blockers and only one boring accepted blocker on the list. Thanks everyone! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net

[Test-Announce] 2019-08-19 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2019-08-19 # Time: 15:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! We didn't meet for a few weeks, so let's check in on where we're at. If anyone has any other items

[Bug 1742814] New: perl-Test2-Suite-0.000123 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742814 Bug ID: 1742814 Summary: perl-Test2-Suite-0.000123 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Test2-Suite Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1742608] perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.51 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742608 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- the-new-hotness/release-monitoring@fedoraproject.org's scratch build of perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.51-1.fc29.src.rpm for rawhide completed

[Bug 1742782] New: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.066 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742782 Bug ID: 1742782 Summary: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.066 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-PPIx-Regexp Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1742765] New: perl-DBD-Pg-3.9.1 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742765 Bug ID: 1742765 Summary: perl-DBD-Pg-3.9.1 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-DBD-Pg Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1741078] Upgrade perl-BSON to 1.12.1

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741078 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-BSON-1.12.1-1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See

[Bug 1742706] New: perl-Test-Smoke-1.73 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742706 Bug ID: 1742706 Summary: perl-Test-Smoke-1.73 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Test-Smoke Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1742698] New: perl-Mojolicious-8.23 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742698 Bug ID: 1742698 Summary: perl-Mojolicious-8.23 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Mojolicious Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1385002] Upgrade perl-Pod-PseudoPod-LaTeX to 1.20190729

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385002 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #5 from

[Bug 1741078] Upgrade perl-BSON to 1.12.1

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741078 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1742608] perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.51 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742608 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1604994 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1604994=edit [patch] Update to 1.51 (#1742608) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC

[Bug 1742608] New: perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.51 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742608 Bug ID: 1742608 Summary: perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.51 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Scalar-List-Utils Keywords: FutureFeature,

[Bug 1655461] w3c-markup-validator-20150216 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655461 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|w3c-markup-validator-201410

[Bug 1655461] w3c-markup-validator-20150216 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655461 --- Comment #3 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- The following Sources of the specfile are not valid URLs so we cannot automatically build the new version for you. Please use URLs in your Source declarations if possible. -

Re: Fedora 31 Beta blocker status email #3

On Fri, 2019-08-16 at 12:38 -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > 2. kernel — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1733388 — NEW > > Circular locking often causes btrfs installs to hang with > > kernel-5.3.0-0.rc0.git7.1.fc31 and later > > > > Installations since kernel-5.3.0-0.rc0.git7.1.fc31

Re: Fedora 31 Beta blocker status email #3

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:04 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > Action summary > > > Accepted blockers > - > 1. dracut-modules-olpc — Cannot be installed due to unsatisfied > 'bitfrost' dependency — NEW > ACTION: dracut-modules-olpc to resolve dependency on desired

Re: Fedora 31 Beta blocker status email #3

On Fri, 2019-08-16 at 12:35 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > Action summary > > > Accepted blockers > - > 1. dracut-modules-olpc — Cannot be installed due to unsatisfied > 'bitfrost' dependency — NEW > bitfrost package was retired, which prevents

Re: Announcing EPEL-8.0 Release

On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 08:12, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 14. 08. 19 v 16:50 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a): > > The EPEL Steering Committee is pleased to announce that the initial > > EPEL-8 is ready for release. We would like to thank everyone in the > > > > ## Known Issues: > > Can someone

Fedora 31 Beta blocker status email #3

Action summary Accepted blockers - 1. dracut-modules-olpc — Cannot be installed due to unsatisfied 'bitfrost' dependency — NEW ACTION: dracut-modules-olpc to resolve dependency on desired bitfrost package. Proposed blockers - 1.

[EPEL-devel] Re: Getting packages into EPEL-8

On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 02:17, willi.feh...@t-online.de wrote: > > Dear EPEL developers, > > > > I would like to request a handful of packages for EPEL-8. > > > > Name of the packages and short description and a reason why the package is > needed. > > > > Ansible: > Ansible is required for

Re: Missing arches on EPEL 8 for LibRaw?

On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 09:52, Troy Dawson wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:40 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > wrote: > > > > On 16.08.2019 6:22, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > I assume this is because LibRaw is available in RHEL but only for x86_64 > > > and ppc64le? > > > > The same as Pidgin and

Re: unable to branch to epel8

On 16. 08. 19 11:13, Dave Love wrote: Robert-André Mauchin writes: The PDC is the Product Definition Center: Thanks. Your package has already a EPEL8 branch in the PDC: https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/rest_api/v1/component-branches/? global_component=procenv If the branch has not been

[EPEL-devel] Re: how to use epel8-playground?

Alright, the --skip-nvr-check makes it work. I don't need --target, although I have a package.cfg with it. It still gives a lot of error messages but then proceeds to build: Target epel8-playground is unknown. Skip. Could not find the release/dist from branch name epel8-playground

[EPEL-devel] Re: how to use epel8-playground?

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 7:18 AM Dave Dykstra wrote: > > So that did get the epel8-playground branch created for me, in this > issue: > https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/15267 > > I was able to successfully pull the branch, populate it, and push it >

[EPEL-devel] Re: 2 weeks in testing for new packages?

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 21:12, Richard Shaw wrote: > > Does it make sense for packages to wait in testing for two weeks when they > are new packages? > Thanks for bringing this up. I was hoping to get this mentioned before FLOCK etc but we have been snowed under in Fedora Infrastructure. I would

[EPEL-devel] Re: What to do about missing gcc-objc from RHEL8?

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 12:17, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > What to do about missing gcc-objc from RHEL8? Are there alternative compilers > yet that we can access? Will we have to package gcc-objc for EPEL8 > separately? > gcc-objc will need someone to make a module or SCL for it. The GCC

Re: unable to branch to epel8

On Friday, 16 August 2019 11:13:56 CEST Dave Love wrote: > Robert-André Mauchin writes: > > > > The PDC is the Product Definition Center: > > > Thanks. > > > > Your package has already a EPEL8 branch in the PDC: > > https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/rest_api/v1/component-branches/? > >

Re: Let's revisit the FTBFS policy

> "GH" == Gerald Henriksen writes: GH> On the other hand, unbuildable packages could be viewed as a GH> security risk. I mentioned security explicitly in my message. Just not in the portion you quoted. GH> If you can't just fix the security issue and rebuild, but instead GH> have to also

Re: Projects in Copr @ discussion.f.o

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 13:31 Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Hi, > I want to soon enable embedded discussion on Copr projects pages. I created: > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/c/projects-in-copr > There is one downside thou - if you enabled > Preferences -> Emails -> Enable mailing list mode

Re: Let's revisit the FTBFS policy

On Fri, 2019-08-16 at 15:21 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:30:36AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > I think the process is actually great. I kinda prefer the direction of > > travel where we expect that packages are actively maintained and quite > > aggressively

[Bug 1742019] New: perl-CPANPLUS-0.9178 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742019 Bug ID: 1742019 Summary: perl-CPANPLUS-0.9178 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-CPANPLUS Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1742003] perl-Net-Whois-Raw-2.99022 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742003 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Skipping the scratch build because an SRPM could not be built: ['rpmbuild', '-D', '_sourcedir .', '-D', '_topdir .', '-bs', '/var/tmp/thn-ybi0g059/perl-Net-Whois-Raw.spec'] returned 1:

[Bug 1742003] New: perl-Net-Whois-Raw-2.99022 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742003 Bug ID: 1742003 Summary: perl-Net-Whois-Raw-2.99022 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Net-Whois-Raw Keywords: FutureFeature,

Re: Let's revisit the FTBFS policy

On 16. 08. 19 16:21, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I think if you make it easy to "throw out" packages then you must also make it easy to add them back later. People do a lot of work adding and maintaining packages and requiring a full re-review for a package that was retired a few days ago is too

Re: Let's revisit the FTBFS policy

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:30:36AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > I think the process is actually great. I kinda prefer the direction of > travel where we expect that packages are actively maintained and quite > aggressively throw them out if they aren't, to the direction where we > accumulate

[EPEL-devel] Re: how to use epel8-playground?

So that did get the epel8-playground branch created for me, in this issue: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/15267 I was able to successfully pull the branch, populate it, and push it https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/singularity/tree/epel8-playground I tried first

Re: [HEADS-UP]: Mercurial with Python3 on rawhide?

I think tortoisehg is not ported to python3 On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:39 PM Neal Becker wrote: > > I just tested hg-5.1.0 with the latest git version of hg-evolve on > python3 and at least some basic things seem to be working. One > problem: > hg > *** failed to import extension hggit: No

Fedora-Rawhide-20190816.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 10 of 45 required tests failed, 2 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests: FAILED:

Re: What other external trackers would you like added to Bugzilla?

Hi! I've e-mailed the list to bugzilla-ow...@redhat.com now. -- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha Time zone: Europe/London signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel

Re: Missing arches on EPEL 8 for LibRaw?

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:40 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 16.08.2019 6:22, Richard Shaw wrote: > > I assume this is because LibRaw is available in RHEL but only for x86_64 > > and ppc64le? > > The same as Pidgin and lots of other apps/libs. You need to add > "ExclusiveArch: x86_64

recode-3.7.1 in Fedora 32 will change a soname

I'm preparing an upgrade of "recode" pacakge from 3.6 to 3.7.1 version. Because it changes an ABI and a license (from (GPLv2+) to (GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and BSD and OFSFDL); the library itself from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv3+)), the upgrade will be performed in Rawhide only. Following packages will need to

Re: Announcing EPEL-8.0 Release

Dne 14. 08. 19 v 16:50 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a): > The EPEL Steering Committee is pleased to announce that the initial > EPEL-8 is ready for release. We would like to thank everyone in the > > ## Known Issues: Can someone please update: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL -- Miroslav

Re: vdr-epg-daemon does not compile on f32

On 16. 08. 19 13:34, Martin Gansser wrote: Hi, i run the following command as mentioned on [1] $ fedpkg clone vdr-epg-daemon; cd vdr-epg-daemon; git merge master $ git add vdr-epg-daemon-makefile.patch $ fedpkg diff; fedpkg commit -p -c; fedpkg build --target=f32-python but this fails like

vdr-epg-daemon does not compile on f32

Hi, i run the following command as mentioned on [1] $ fedpkg clone vdr-epg-daemon; cd vdr-epg-daemon; git merge master $ git add vdr-epg-daemon-makefile.patch $ fedpkg diff; fedpkg commit -p -c; fedpkg build --target=f32-python but this fails like you see here in the log-files [3] Can

Projects in Copr @ discussion.f.o

Hi, I want to soon enable embedded discussion on Copr projects pages. I created: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/c/projects-in-copr There is one downside thou - if you enabled Preferences -> Emails -> Enable mailing list mode (which BTW discouraged by Discourse devels) then you are likely

[Test-Announce] Fedora 31 Rawhide 20190816.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 31 Rawhide 20190816.n.0. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

Re: Why does anaconda-core runtime depend on python3-coverage?

The coverage dependency was removed (F31 and Rawhide): https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/pull/2086 The main reason for the removal was that this wasn't really used in the past and the recent Anaconda changes needs other solution to get the correct coverage. Jirka On Wed, 2019-08-14 at

Re: Let's revisit the FTBFS policy

On Thu, 2019-08-15 at 09:50 -0400, Gerald Henriksen wrote: > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:23:53 -0500, you wrote: > > > So in summary, I guess I mostly support allowing packages which can't be > > rebuilt to stay in the distribution as long as they actually work and > > aren't causing maintenance

Re: Orphaning cloud-init, python-boto

Igor Gnatenko writes: > python-boto is dead and deprecated. Why do you want to take it? While I don't run it from Fedora, Elasticluster is one current user (see ) for what it's worth. ___ devel

Re: unable to branch to epel8

Kevin Fenzi writes: >> Also, I don't get any notifications from pagure (as with various other >> -- most? -- services), despite turning on anything relevant-looking in >> the notifications app. I've asked several times about lack of >> notifications with no luck or suggestions how to debug it.

Re: unable to branch to epel8

Robert-André Mauchin writes: > The PDC is the Product Definition Center: Thanks. > Your package has already a EPEL8 branch in the PDC: > https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/rest_api/v1/component-branches/? > global_component=procenv > > If the branch has not been created in dist-git, you can create

[Bug 1741573] Upgrade perl-Data-ICal to 0.23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741573 Ralf Corsepius changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |RAWHIDE -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1741573] Upgrade perl-Data-ICal to 0.23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741573 Ralf Corsepius changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|---

Re: Missing arches on EPEL 8 for LibRaw?

On 16.08.2019 6:22, Richard Shaw wrote: > I assume this is because LibRaw is available in RHEL but only for x86_64 > and ppc64le? The same as Pidgin and lots of other apps/libs. You need to add "ExclusiveArch: x86_64 ppc64le" in order to build your package successfully. -- Sincerely, Vitaly

[EPEL-devel] Getting packages into EPEL-8

Dear EPEL developers, I would like to request a handful of packages for EPEL-8. Name of the packages and short description and a reason why the package is needed. Ansible: Ansible is required for software provisioning and configuration management. It's already available in EPEL-7 and it's

Re: orphaning packages recode, python-bibtex, pybliographer

On 2019-08-15, Zoltan Kota wrote: > I am orphaning the following packages: > > recode -- The upstream development of recode is not very active, and I > don't use it anymore. I use it occasionally. I will take it. -- Petr ___ devel mailing list --