https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080130
--- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen ---
Needed for the calligraphy tool
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080130
Bug ID: 2080130
Summary: Review Request: ghc-enummapset - IntMap and IntSet
with Enum keys/elements
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component:
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Package Review has canceled Package
Review 's request for Bruno Cornec
's needinfo:
Bug 1900145: Review Request: perl-ProjectBuilder - perl modules from the
project-builder.org project used by MondoRescue
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2075170
--- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa ---
> I updated to 8.8.0, switched to using the %forge macros and created a shell
> script to handle the bundling needs.
Please don't use the forge macros, they're completely unmaintained and only
exist
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2075170
--- Comment #3 from Stephen Gallagher ---
Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/sgallagh/npm/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/04345157-npm/npm.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080029
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080029
Bug ID: 2080029
Summary: Review Request: rEFInd - User friendly EFI boot
manager
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2074401
--- Comment #2 from Julien Rische ---
I fixed the error in the date and removed the font files from the git
repository in the %prep section. I also used desktop-file-install to install
the .desktop file.
I doubt the Engine code is meant to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073377
--- Comment #6 from Paul Howarth ---
SRPM URL:
http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Parse-Distname/perl-Parse-Distname-0.05-2.fc37.src.rpm
Spec URL is unchanged.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2072972
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #18 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #14)
> (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #13)
> > > This is why it should be a separate project/source upstream to systemd
> >
> > Let's try to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073377
--- Comment #5 from Michal Josef Spacek ---
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #4)
> Ah, I see what you mean. I did actually have "%doc Changes README t/", which
> is unusual for me. I must have based my spec file on another package that
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #17 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #15)
> > What about 'Provides:systemd-boot-signed(%{efi_arch)) = %version-%release' ?
>
> Added:
> +Provides: systemd-boot-signed-%{efi_arch} =
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #16 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #11)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #8)
> > There's a couple of things you probably want to do here:
> >
> > * The systemd-boot-unsigned and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #15 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
> What about 'Provides:systemd-boot-signed(%{efi_arch)) = %version-%release' ?
Added:
+Provides: systemd-boot-signed-%{efi_arch} = %version-%release
and in the systemd pr:
+Provides:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #14 from Peter Robinson ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #13)
> > This is why it should be a separate project/source upstream to systemd
>
> Let's try to keep the scope of this ticket to the review.
> The
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #13 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
> This is why it should be a separate project/source upstream to systemd
Let's try to keep the scope of this ticket to the review.
The separate code thingy has been discussed (and refuted)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2054708
--- Comment #31 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libarrow
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #12 from Peter Robinson ---
> The motivation for splitting this package out is that it'll be built
> (presumably much) less
> often than the systemd package. So the release numbers will get out of sync.
> And in fact systemd-boot
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073377
--- Comment #4 from Paul Howarth ---
(In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #1)
> > > "%doc Changes README t/"
> > > No contain t/ in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073377
--- Comment #3 from Michal Josef Spacek ---
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #2)
> (In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #1)
> > @p...@city-fan.org
> >
> > "BuildRequires: coreutils"
> > It is not needed, sure?
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #11 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #8)
> There's a couple of things you probably want to do here:
>
> * The systemd-boot-unsigned and systemd-boot packages should have their efi
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073377
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(p...@city-fan.org |
|)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073377
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(p...@city-fan.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #10 from Neal Gompa ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #9)
> > %postun
> > if [ $1 -ge 1 ] && bootctl is-installed &>/dev/null; then
> > echo "Updating systemd-boot…"
> > bootctl update || :
> > fi
>
> Since you're an
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa ---
> %postun
> if [ $1 -ge 1 ] && bootctl is-installed &>/dev/null; then
> echo "Updating systemd-boot…"
> bootctl update || :
> fi
Since you're an upstream developer, I suggest you see if you can add
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079251
--- Comment #2 from Lumír Balhar ---
Also, the version in the changelog should contain the release number.
The documentation should be built in %build, not in %check.
It'd be better to exclude specific tests instead of removing the whole
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa ---
There's a couple of things you probably want to do here:
* The systemd-boot-unsigned and systemd-boot packages should have their efi
architectures as suffixes, similar to shim and grub
* Since this package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
Neal Gompa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079251
--- Comment #1 from Lumír Balhar ---
Could you please add a comment describing why you need the libpq.sgml file?
I see that you are building manual pages but the result is not installed to the
correct location and therefore it's not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
OK, that makes sense. Adjusted in place:
$ rpm -qpP
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/systemd-boot-251\~rc1-2.fc37.x86_64.rpm
bundled(systemd-udev) = 251~rc1-3.fc37
systemd-boot
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055596
--- Comment #10 from Yunmei Li ---
I did some update about the bundled external packages.
Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/yunmei/Milvus/centos-stream-8-x86_64/04341981-milvus/milvus.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #5 from Miro Hrončok ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #4)
> (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #2)
> > Questions/notes:
> >
> > 1) should this buildrequire the exact same version of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #4 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #2)
> Questions/notes:
>
> 1) should this buildrequire the exact same version of %{source_rpm_name}?
I wanted to avoid that because it'd mean that
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
--- Comment #3 from Miro Hrončok ---
Other than that, the spec looks reasonable. Not sure how to verify the bootctl
scriptlet works thou.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mhron...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2053959
Benson Muite changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||benson_mu...@emailplus.org
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2053959
--- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ---
Ooops ;)
Spec URL: https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/yaksa.spec
SRPM URL: https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/yaksa-0.2-1.fc37.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2053959
Artur Frenszek-Iwicki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fed...@svgames.pl
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
Bug ID: 2079784
Summary: Review Request: systemd-boot - UEFI boot manager
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073377
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||2079764
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079251
Ondřej Sloup changed:
What|Removed |Added
Comment|0 |updated
--- Comment #0 has been
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073196
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-59f403da04 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073196
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-a94c6550d6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049772
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-3b1634fa0a has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068693
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-771d14e771 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2075626
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-43bd74ffd7 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2057302
--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-6ff29d37f8 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2038612
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-43bd74ffd7 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2038652
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-43bd74ffd7 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073196
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-2f7e10f344 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2038653
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-43bd74ffd7 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049772
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Status|ON_QA
54 matches
Mail list logo
