On 5/21/24 09:33, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 27/04/2024 06:34, Tom Stellard wrote:
If anyone has any feedback on these ideas we'd like to hear it and are happy to
discuss
these more.
Can you fix the ${LLVM_LIBRARY_DIR} variable in LLVM's CMake config?
It broke after switching LLVM
Text Log:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-05-13/fesco.2024-05-13-19.01.log.txt
HTML Log:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-05-13/fesco.2024-05-13-19.01.log.html
Text Minutes:
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 19:00 UTC in #meeting:fedoraproject.org
on Matrix.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2024-05-13 19:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
On 5/13/24 07:16, Simon Farnsworth via devel wrote:
On Saturday 27 April 2024 05:34:29 BST Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
* Build compat packages (e.g. llvm18) as early as possible. When we package
a new major release of llvm, we create a compat package so that packages
that aren't compatible
On 4/27/24 05:57, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 5:53 AM Tom Stellard wrote:
On 4/26/24 21:58, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 9:35 PM Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
After each Fedora release we do a retrospective with the LLVM package
maintainers
and talk about how we can
On 4/26/24 21:58, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 9:35 PM Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
After each Fedora release we do a retrospective with the LLVM package
maintainers
and talk about how we can improve the LLVM packages[1] in Fedora. We've come up
with some ideas for Fedora 41
Hi,
After each Fedora release we do a retrospective with the LLVM package
maintainers
and talk about how we can improve the LLVM packages[1] in Fedora. We've come up
with some ideas for Fedora 41 that we'd like to share to raise awareness and
get feedback. Right now these are just ideas, and
Text Log:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-04-15/fesco.2024-04-15-19.01.log.txt
HTML Log:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/meeting_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-04-15/fesco.2024-04-15-19.01.log.html
Text Minutes:
On 4/15/24 02:55, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Anyone got any idea about this build failure?
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=116395331
[+] All set and ready to build.
clang: warning: -Wl,-z,relro: 'linker' input unused
[-Wunused-command-line-argument]
clang: warning:
* NOTE: Meeting time moved 30 minutes earlier.
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 19:00 UTC in #meeting:fedoraproject.org
on Matrix.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d
On 3/24/24 02:25, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I just upgraded my workstation to F40 and it surprised how many packages were
reported by `remove-retired-packages`.
There was lots of orphaned packages - there is nothing to do about them. But
there was lot of packages that were removed intentionally.
=
# #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco
=
Meeting started by @tstellar:fedora.im at 2024-01-15 19:30:47
Meeting summary
---
* TOPIC: #3137 Change: Build Fedora Cloud Edition Images Using Kiwi in Koji
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Monday at 19:30UTC in #meeting:fedoraproject.org
on Matrix.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2024-01-15 19:30 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
ity feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
== Summary ==
Update all llvm sub-projects in Fedora Linux to version 18.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
All llvm sub-proje
On 11/30/23 04:23, Jan Horak wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to make the sandboxing using the wasi available for the Firefox and
for that I need the wasi-sdk [1] in the build root.
Currently there's wasi-libc [2] available which is fine and it almost contains
all the headers and libraries needed by the
=
#fedora-meeting-2: FESCO (2023-11-02)
=
Meeting started by tstellar at 17:00:45 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-11-02/fesco.2023-11-02-17.00.log.html
.
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Thursday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on
irc.libera.chat.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2023-11-02 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to
Hi,
I've run into a problem with the cmake package, and I'm trying to figure out how
to solve it. This issue is that the cmake license files are included in both
the cmake and cmake-doc packages. This creates a conflict when up trying to
update cmake while an older version of cmake-doc is
=
#fedora-meeting-2: FESCO (2023-10-26)
=
Meeting started by tstellar at 17:00:37 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-10-26/fesco.2023-10-26-17.00.log.html
.
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Thursday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on
irc.libera.chat.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2023-10-26 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to
Hi,
I'm orphaning the following llvm, clang, and lld compat packages:
llvm12, llvm13
clang11, clang13
lld13
-Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code
Hi,
What does this message mean:
"python-lit warning: valid as old and new and no changelong entry, please check"
-Tom
On 9/1/23 01:33, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Two weeks ago we had:
* 23030 spec files in Fedora
* 29469license tags in all spec files
* 16716 tags have not been converted to
On 7/27/23 11:03, Tom Stellard wrote:
=
#fedora-meeting-2: FESCO (2023-07-27)
=
Meeting started by tstellar at 17:00:28 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-07-27
=
#fedora-meeting-2: FESCO (2023-07-27)
=
Meeting started by tstellar at 17:00:28 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2023-07-27/fesco.2023-07-27-17.00.log.html
.
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Thursday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on
irc.libera.chat.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2023-07-27 17:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to
On 7/6/23 10:14, Alessandro Astone wrote:
Is there any interest in providing the full older clang binary instead of just
compat libraries?
In my case, I'm working on an LLVM pass currently targeting LLVM15, and i can
use the llvm15 rpm to build it. But then I don't have a way to compile a C
On 7/3/23 19:37, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 2023-07-03 17:08, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 7/3/23 11:31, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
Hello team,
I attempt to build openshadinglanguage with llvm15 as upstream has yet to
support LLVM 16. Can someone have a pointed how to set a cmake parameter
On 7/3/23 11:31, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
Hello team,
I attempt to build openshadinglanguage with llvm15 as upstream has yet to
support LLVM 16. Can someone have a pointed how to set a cmake parameter for
llvm15 and its bitecode validation?
See the spec file on:
On 6/30/23 07:45, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho wrote:
Kevin Kofler via devel writes:
Carlos O'Donell wrote:
And assembling those sysroots is not straight forward.
The easiest way is to unpack a live image. If you are targeting an Arch-
based or similar distro, you will probably get
On 6/29/23 10:42, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 10:14:31AM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 6/29/23 09:52, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Hi Tom!
Thanx a lot of for input. Although I did my bes with the tagging, it
will be learning on the go.
I had adapted
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes
its inside the package exactly the same?
-Tom
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 21:16, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 6/29/23 11:06, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Nope, xy stands for 1.8.0, 11, 17 and latest. It is enumerated several
time in the proposal. Still the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildJdkOncePack
different packages.
java-xy-openjdk-portable
and java-xy-openjdk. Where java-xy-openjdk is the one that gets shipped in
Fedora and
java-xy-openjdk-portable lives only in the side-tags.
-Tom
Tahnx!
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 at 19:14, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 6/29/23 09:52, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Hi Tom
, but is
moreover necessary for proper srpm rebuil.
TYVM!
J.
On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 at 21:31, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 6/26/23 09:21, Aoife Moloney wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildJdkOncePackEverywhere#including_portable_srpms_in_release_(improving_of_step_6)
This document represents
On 6/26/23 09:21, Aoife Moloney wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BuildJdkOncePackEverywhere#including_portable_srpms_in_release_(improving_of_step_6)
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
On 6/27/23 04:06, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 27/06/2023 03:21, Tom Stellard wrote:
For this update, we're going to let package maintainers be responsible for
rebuilding their own packages if they are unable to use the compat libraries
for some reason. We can try to send an announcement
On 6/27/23 04:00, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 27/06/2023 03:19, Tom Stellard wrote:
We're trying to be more consistent with gcc and also upstream clang.
gcc installs some of these same libraries and some equivalent ones
into /usr/lib as well (/usr/lib/gcc/$TRIPLE/$MAJOR_VERSON).
What
On 6/26/23 22:44, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 26/06/2023 18:12, Aoife Moloney wrote:
* The Clang Resource Directory will be moved from /usr/lib64/clang/17/
to /usr/lib/clang/17/ this is the location of clang's internal headers
and runtime libraries like libomp and compiler-rt.
Why?
On 6/26/23 12:50, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 26/06/2023 18:12, Aoife Moloney wrote:
Update all llvm sub-projects in Fedora Linux to version 17.
Please include iwyu and pocl packages to the side-tag rebuild too.
I will update pocl to version 4.0 soon in Rawhide.
For this update,
. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
== Summary ==
Update all llvm sub-projects in Fedora Linux to version 17.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
All llvm sub-projects in Fedora
On 6/1/23 00:33, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 09:05:23AM +0200, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
Hi,
I've updated libnfs from version 4.0.0 to version 5.0.2 in rawhide,
which implies a soname bump.
The build was done in f39-build-side-68410 sidetag.
The following packages need to
On 5/24/23 13:00, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 12:36:58PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 5/24/23 12:31, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 7:23 PM Tom Stellard wrote:
What's the process for selecting a new Program Manager?
From the words that have been shared
On 5/24/23 12:31, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 7:23 PM Tom Stellard wrote:
What's the process for selecting a new Program Manager?
From the words that have been shared at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/fpgm/
the position itself has been eliminated
On 5/24/23 12:19, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 2:55 PM Peter Boy wrote:
Am 24.05.2023 um 20:30 schrieb Chris Murphy :
I'm pretty sure we no longer have a program manager?
What’s that about?
Red Hat recently announced a round of layoffs[1] and the Fedora
Program Manager
Hi,
According to the schedule[1], the voting period was supposed to begin
on Friday, but elections.fedoraproject.org does not list any open elections
yet. Does anyone have an ETA for when voting will start?
Thanks,
Tom
[1]
Hi,
I'm orphaning the pocl package. I'm not interested in maintaining it
any more, and it's been FTBFS for the last 2 releases.
-Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On 3/8/23 00:29, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 08:13:57AM +0100, Ondrej Nosek wrote:
Hi all,
a new version rpkg-1.66 together with fedpkg-1.44 are released containing
both features and bugfixes.
Currently, only Fedora 37 (and Rawhide) packages are present in stable
On 2/10/23 00:07, Florian Weimer wrote:
I want to add documentation for this change, and found this proposal
self-contradictory.
== Summary ==
Create a corresponding macro for each compiler flag in the
redhat-rpm-config macro file and create "extra flag" macros to make it
easier for packages
On 1/31/23 14:00, Ben Cotton wrote:
As a result of concerns about how the re-vote on the frame pointers
Change, it makes sense to clarify the requirements for FESCo
re-considering rejected proposals. FESCo #action bcotton'ed in the 10
January meeting[1] to develop a proposal.
I have drafted a
On 1/17/23 09:48, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 1/17/23 10:15 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
It sounds like the option is not relevant for Windows. See
https://reviews.llvm.org/D116484
Thanks, Tom. Do you think modifying the wine configure to not use -Wl,WX is the
best option?
Yes, I think
On 1/17/23 07:57, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 1/17/23 06:17, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 1/16/23 11:30 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
-WX means treat warnings as errors. It's possible the configure
check is failing for other reasons. Is that the first check run
with -target aarch64-windows? Do you
On 1/17/23 06:17, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 1/16/23 11:30 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
-WX means treat warnings as errors. It's possible the configure
check is failing for other reasons. Is that the first check run
with -target aarch64-windows? Do you have the full config.log?
Yes. I do
On 1/16/23 20:49, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Hi,
Wine 8.0 is checking for support for the '-Wl,-WX' flag in LLVM and it is
showing as not supported in Rawhide (LLVM 15).
LLVM is used to cross-compile ARM 64-bit binaries of Wine.
Wine 7.22 configure check:
checking whether clang supports
On 1/9/23 12:27, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Am Montag, 9. Jänner 2023 21:02:48 CET schrieb Tom Stellard:
I think a good solution would be to move the proposal submission deadlines
a month earlier in the schedule. There's only 3 weeks between the
"Changes Requiring Mass Rebuild"
On 1/9/23 08:47, Matthew Miller wrote:
It might be useful to improve both the documented policies. The Changes
policy has nothing about reconsidering Changes in the current cycle that I
can see. (Or, actually, for that matter, for resubmitting in future cycles
either, unless i'm missing
On 1/9/23 11:18, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 2:11 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 11:47:54AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 06:06:47PM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
PS: The impression I get is that everything was deliberately
On 10/31/22 20:35, Orion Poplawski wrote:
While poking at building openmpi with clang, I started wondering about flang
and some things:
* Should %set_build_flags set FC? I think it should since it sets FCFLAGS.
* Is flang-new even worth bothering with? See the following configure check:
On 8/18/22 15:32, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 5:23 PM Tom Stellard wrote:
I'm working on the 14.0.5 update for F36 right now. The 14.0.6 release
is going to have to wait until after 15.0.0 lands in F37 and rawhide,
because I don't think it's worth doing the 14.0.6 update
On 8/18/22 08:05, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:43 PM Tom Stellard wrote:
We've been training up more people on LLVM packaging so we should be able
to cover the stable release of Fedora better in the future. I'm sorry
that the stable releases have been falling behind
On 7/18/22 06:33, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 3:26 PM Peter Robinson wrote:
Hi,
Today I encountered another LLVM-specific bug that affects at least
one Rust package and causes non-working code to be produced, which
prompted this question:
Why are stable releases not
On 7/6/22 08:42, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 04:20:50 PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
You build locally and profile using your locally built packages.
Problem is that in order to get good profiling results today, you need to
rebuild all dependencies with frame pointers
On 7/6/22 08:20, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 at 15:57, Jeff Law wrote:
On 7/6/2022 8:20 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
wrote:
If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
to make a very special case
On 6/24/22 01:32, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Tom Stellard:
On 6/7/22 02:18, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Ben Cotton:
This change will add new macros which will make it easier for packages
to add and remove their own compiler flags. This strategy is already
used to some extent with feature macros
Links to all issues to be discussed can be found at:
https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda
= Discussed and Voted in the Ticket =
#2802 Change: Return Cloud Base to Edition Status
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2802
APPROVED (+7,0,-0)
#2801 Change proposal: Enhance Persian Font Support
On 6/7/22 02:18, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Ben Cotton:
This change will add new macros which will make it easier for packages
to add and remove their own compiler flags. This strategy is already
used to some extent with feature macros like %{_lto_cflags},
%{_hardening_cflags}, etc, but these
On 6/6/22 00:58, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 6/3/22 13:43, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
BTW isn't the `_flag_` prefix too generic? And also, the initial
underscore implies that this is internal macro which should ideally not
be used. So should it be
Committee.
== Summary ==
Create a corresponding macro for each compiler flag in the
redhat-rpm-config macro file and create "extra flag" macros to make it
easier for packages to add and remove compiler flags.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed D
On 6/3/22 03:43, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 11:25 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
BTW isn't the `_flag_` prefix too generic? And also, the initial
underscore implies that this is internal macro which should ideally not
be used. So should it be rather removed or not?
I agree that
Hi,
I'm planning to update all of the LLVM packages in f36/rawhide to 14.0.3.
This release is API/ABI compatible with 14.0.0, so most packages that
depend on llvm won't need to be rebuilt. However, some packages hard-code
the resource directory for clang which has the version in its path, so
On 4/13/22 17:48, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 12:48 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
Hi all,
Looks like there's a little bit of a mess around LLVM 14 / GCC /
annobin updates brewing in f36-updates-testing.
Right now, there's *two* updates in "testing" state that contain
builds of
On 3/31/22 04:56, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 3/30/22 11:04 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
$ x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc -c test.c -v
.. snip ..
#include <...> search starts here:
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/11.2.1/include
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/11.2.1/include-fixed
Thi
On 3/30/22 18:59, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 3/30/22 8:33 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
Looking at the builds with gcc, there is an extra option passed to gcc:
-I./libs/zlib which is not passed to clang. So maybe this is an issue
with the build system?
You may have looked at an older build
On 3/30/22 18:59, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 3/30/22 8:33 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
Looking at the builds with gcc, there is an extra option passed to gcc:
-I./libs/zlib which is not passed to clang. So maybe this is an issue
with the build system?
You may have looked at an older build
On 3/30/22 18:33, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 3/30/22 17:01, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 3/30/22 11:36 AM, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
ar is failing so the fault is in binutils at the first look.
By the way:
- First of all, should /usr/lib64/wine/aarch64-windows/libdbghelp.a (or any
other static
On 3/30/22 17:01, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 3/30/22 11:36 AM, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
ar is failing so the fault is in binutils at the first look.
By the way:
- First of all, should /usr/lib64/wine/aarch64-windows/libdbghelp.a (or any
other static archive) be packed
(i.e. are static
On 3/30/22 09:36, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
Michael Cronenworth wrote on 2022/03/31 1:25:
On 3/30/22 8:51 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 3/30/22 8:42 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
That sounds like a bug in the package, because our LLVM build has all
targets enabled on Fedora:
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2022-02-01)
===
Meeting started by tstellar at 18:02:09 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-02-01/fesco.2022-02-01-18.02.log.html
.
Meeting
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Tuesday at 18:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
irc.libera.chat.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2022-02-01 18:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to be
On 1/21/22 00:27, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Tom Stellard:
If you maintain a golang package and you are seeing it fail with the error:
`flag provided but not defined: -Wl,-z,relro`
We can likely drop -Wl,-z,relro completely because it's the binutils
(both for BFD ld and gold).
I like having
Hi,
If you maintain a golang package and you are seeing it fail with the error:
`flag provided but not defined: -Wl,-z,relro`
This failure was caused by
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/pull-request/166
It looks like it is affecting almost every golang package at the
On 1/1/22 12:54, Sean McBride wrote:
On 30 Nov 2021, at 1:07, Tom Stellard via cfe-dev wrote:
Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries.
It's been over a month since 13.0.1-rc1, and, as has been the case for many
previous releases, there are no macOS binaries. And chance we'll see
On 12/20/21 12:39, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Ben Cotton:
This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and
%__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include
%set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables
automatically before the %build and %check
On 12/13/21 08:56, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GHC_parallel_version_installs
== Summary ==
Introduce ghcX.Y packages to Fedora which can be parallel installed,
in addition to the main ghc package.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:Petersen|Jens Petersen]]
* Email:
On 12/22/21 01:56, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 21. 12. 21 v 21:56 Tom Stellard napsal(a):
On 12/21/21 01:42, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Hi Tom,
Since you are digging into this and AFAIK you are involved with toolchains,
this reminds me this dreaded issue:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id
at the beginning of the
%build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will
ensure that the compiler flag environment variables are set for every
RPM build.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
The %set_build_flags macro exports common
On 12/20/21 14:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 20. 12. 21 21:39, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Ben Cotton:
This change will be implemented by updating the %__spec_build_pre and
%__speck_check_pre macros in redhat-rpm-config to include
%set_build_flags. This will set these environment variables
On 12/20/21 10:17, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 20. 12. 21 18:41, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck
== Summary ==
Call %set_build_flags macro automatically at the beginning of the
%build and %check phases of RPM builds in Fedora Linux. This will
ensure
On 12/16/21 09:07, Jeremy Newton wrote:
Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD.
To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my interest
and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to keep it that
way.
There has been a recent
On 12/2/21 11:36, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FsVerityRPM
== Summary ==
Enable the use of fsverity for installed RPM files validation.
== Owners ==
* Name: [[User:Dcavalca|Davide Cavalca]], [[User:Borisb|Boris
Burkov]], [[User:Filbranden|Filipe Brandenburger]],
On 12/2/21 06:45, Nemanja Ivanovic wrote:
Hi Tom,
would it be OK to directly send you git hashes for patches we would like back
ported until the bugzilla transition completes?
Yes, that's fine.
-Tom
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 1:08 AM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev mailto:cfe-...@lists.llvm.org
On 11/30/21 10:30, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 10:07:52PM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
I've tagged 13.0.1-rc1. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries.
There is still time to submit fixes for the final 13.0.1. I'll give more
details about timelines and how to do
Hi,
I've tagged 13.0.1-rc1. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries.
There is still time to submit fixes for the final 13.0.1. I'll give more
details about timelines and how to do this once the bugzilla migration is
complete. Currently, bugzilla is read-only, so we can't submit any
On 11/15/21 05:06, Florian Weimer wrote:
In the future, we might want to switch GCC not to generate both object
code and LTO representation during the build process. For most
packages, dual generation is not necessary because no relocatable object
files for static linking are included in the
On 9/30/21 8:03 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
I'm going to start packaging LLVM 13.0.0-final for rawhide and f35. The
13.0.0-final release has a different ABI than 13.0.0-rc1, so I will be
rebuilding the following packages as part of the update:
Hi,
Now that the f35 freeze is over, I'm going
On 10/25/21 2:02 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 10/25/21 2:00 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21 2021 at 05:15:37 PM -0700, Tom Stellard
wrote:
To do this, you need to add -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,--build-id=sha1 to the linker
flags.
Good news: ld.lld does not run out of memory.
Bad news
On 10/25/21 2:00 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21 2021 at 05:15:37 PM -0700, Tom Stellard
wrote:
To do this, you need to add -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,--build-id=sha1 to the linker
flags.
Good news: ld.lld does not run out of memory.
Bad news: because it crashes. There is a low-quality
On 10/21/21 4:55 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22 2021 at 12:38:20 AM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote:
Is there a reason for using gold? Maybe the default bfd linker would
manage to use less memory?
I will try with ld.bfd to see if that does any better. I don't remember for
sure why
Hi,
The Zuul CI for pull requests does everything that the Fedora CI does
(scratch builds and tmt/standard tests) and more. Is there any reason
to keep Fedora CI on pull requests?
- Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
On 10/14/21 4:23 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 10/12/21 7:23 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 10/1/21 12:57 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:43 AM Richard W.M. Jones mailto:rjo...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 08:03:07PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 10/12/21 7:23 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 10/1/21 12:57 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:43 AM Richard W.M. Jones mailto:rjo...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 08:03:07PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm going to start
On 10/1/21 12:57 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 9:43 AM Richard W.M. Jones mailto:rjo...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 08:03:07PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm going to start packaging LLVM 13.0.0-final for
1 - 100 of 299 matches
Mail list logo
