Fedora-Modular 27-20171202.n.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Docker_base docker x86_64 Server dvd arm Failed openQA tests: 20/94 (x86_64), 5/19 (i386) ID: 178156 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178156 ID: 178162 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178162 ID: 178176 Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178176 ID: 178180 Test: x86_64 universal support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178180 ID: 178182 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178182 ID: 178183 Test: x86_64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178183 ID: 178185 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178185 ID: 178190 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178190 ID: 178227 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178227 ID: 178228 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178228 ID: 178229 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178229 ID: 178230 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178230 ID: 178232 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178232 ID: 178233 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178233 ID: 178234 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178234 ID: 178235 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178235 ID: 178236 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178236 ID: 178237 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178237 ID: 178238 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_encrypted_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178238 ID: 178242 Test: x86_64 universal install_european_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178242 ID: 178243 Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178243 ID: 178251 Test: i386 universal upgrade_2_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178251 ID: 178252 Test: i386 universal upgrade_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178252 ID: 178258 Test: i386 universal install_blivet_ext3 URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178258 ID: 178265 Test: i386 universal install_repository_http_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178265 Passed openQA tests: 66/94 (x86_64), 14/19 (i386) Skipped openQA tests: 4 of 113 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Modular 27 compose report: 20171202.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-Modular-27-20171201.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Modular-27-20171202.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 0 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0.00 B Size of dropped packages:0.00 B Size of upgraded packages: 0.00 B Size of downgraded packages: 0.00 B Size change of upgraded packages: 0.00 B Size change of downgraded packages: 0.00 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Container_Base docker armhfp Path: Server/armhfp/images/Fedora-Modular-Container-Base-27_Modular-20171201.n.1.armhfp.tar.xz = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = = DOWNGRADED PACKAGES = ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Rawhide-20171201.n.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Server dvd i386 Workstation live i386 Server boot i386 Kde live i386 Failed openQA tests: 86/128 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20171130.n.0): ID: 178048 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178048 ID: 178049 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_no_user URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178049 ID: 178051 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178051 ID: 178080 Test: x86_64 Atomic-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178080 Old failures (same test failed in Rawhide-20171130.n.0): ID: 178024 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178024 ID: 178025 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178025 ID: 178027 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178027 ID: 178028 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178028 ID: 178030 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_updates_nfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178030 ID: 178034 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfs_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178034 ID: 178035 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfs_variation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178035 ID: 178046 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178046 ID: 178050 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178050 ID: 178061 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178061 ID: 178062 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178062 ID: 178065 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178065 ID: 178067 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178067 ID: 178069 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178069 ID: 178078 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178078 ID: 178082 Test: x86_64 universal install_package_set_minimal URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178082 ID: 178083 Test: x86_64 universal install_anaconda_text URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178083 ID: 178085 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_variation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178085 ID: 178086 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178086 ID: 178087 Test: x86_64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178087 ID: 178088 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178088 ID: 178089 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178089 ID: 178090 Test: x86_64 universal install_sata URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178090 ID: 178091 Test: x86_64 universal install_sata@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178091 ID: 178092 Test: x86_64 universal install_kickstart_user_creation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178092 ID: 178093 Test: x86_64 universal install_scsi_updates_img URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178093 ID: 178094 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178094 ID: 178095 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178095 ID: 178096 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_encrypted URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178096 ID: 178097 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_free_space URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178097 ID: 178098 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi_empty URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178098 ID: 178099 Test: x86_64 universal install_software_raid URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178099 ID: 178100 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_partial URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178100 ID: 178101 Test: x86_64 universal install_btrfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178101 ID: 178102 Test: x86_64 universal install_ext3 URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178102 ID: 178103 Test: x86_64 universal install_xfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/178103 ID: 178104 Test: x86_64 universal install_lvmthin URL: https:
[Test-Announce] Fedora 28 Rawhide 20171201.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 28 Rawhide 20171201.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/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Notable package version changes: lorax - 20171128.n.0: lorax-28.1-1.fc28.src, 20171201.n.0: lorax-28.2-1.fc28.src Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at: https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/28 You can see all results, find testing instructions and image download locations, and enter results on the Summary page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_28_Rawhide_20171201.n.0_Summary The individual test result pages are: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_28_Rawhide_20171201.n.0_Installation https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_28_Rawhide_20171201.n.0_Base https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_28_Rawhide_20171201.n.0_Server https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_28_Rawhide_20171201.n.0_Cloud https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_28_Rawhide_20171201.n.0_Desktop https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_28_Rawhide_20171201.n.0_Security_Lab Thank you for testing! -- Mail generated by relvalconsumer: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/relvalconsumer ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2017-12-04 blocker review meeting
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the blocker review meeting for Monday, as there would only be a couple of F28 bugs to consider and it's not worth having a meeting for that. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: ICU 60.1 coming to rawhide/F28
Pete Walter wrote: > qt5-qtwebengine-5.9.3-1.fc28.src.rpm This fails to build because of the #error here: http://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtwebengine-chromium.git/tree/chromium/components/url_formatter/url_formatter.cc?h=56-based#n481 In 5.10, this has moved to another file: http://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtwebengine-chromium.git/tree/chromium/components/url_formatter/idn_spoof_checker.cc?h=61-based#n334 I think I should remove the offending support for "aspirational scripts" entirely, as per: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/afca0a393f23f0b7ef18d8c3d05e166c3012606d%5E%21/ I'm giving that a try. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to replace ssl with ssh2 in kqoauth
Rex Dieter wrote: > I can/will step up (for qt v4 which won't be going away any time soon). Can't we patch Qt 4 to build with OpenSSL 1.1 instead? At least Debian has a patch (which seems to be over a year old): https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-kde/qt/qt4-x11.git/tree/debian/patches/openssl_1.1.patch There is also a recent followup: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=828522#211 I think it would be worth the time to just get everything to build with the latest OpenSSL, patches are already floating around. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Which Fedora/EPEL is targeted by packaging guidelines?
Vít Ondruch wrote: > This is big and old-school hammer. If you did "git cherry-pick" instead, > you could get most of the changes you did in master without the > branches. Also, merging means that you get into older (or EPEL) branches > stuff like changelogs from mass rebuild, which should not be there IMO. Cherry-picking and diverging changelogs mean one keeps having to manually fix conflicts. With the one specfile with conditionals, I only have to do a fast-forward merge and build, which is a lot more convenient. But keep in mind that I don't do EPEL, so my conditionals are few and far between, and I will remove conditionals for EOL Fedora releases. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: debug facilities
On 01/12/17 22:33, Samuel Sieb wrote: If you do "rpm -qi soundfont-utils" you will find a line like this: Source RPM : gt-0.4-23.fc26.src.rpm That means that this package is a sub-package of gt. That's where you'll find it in bugzilla and the package database. That's also probably where the sources are, but I'm not sure about that. Try installing debuginfo for gt and see what happens. It's a mixture, as you can see in koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=946244 The debuginfo is per binary rpm but the debugsource is just one package for the whole source rpm so is gt-debugsource. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: debug facilities
On 12/01/2017 12:51 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: I know that we started splitting the source packages off---but unfortunately there doesn't seem to be soundfont-utils-debugsource anywhere. In fact, the sounfount-utils package is a little bit of a mystery: I couldn't find it on the Fedora package list, and it doesn't show up in Bugzilla so I can't enter a bug against it. The URL in the package points to http://alsa.opensrc.org/GusSoundfont, but there don't seem to be any sources for the utils there, and the source URL seems to point to package gt (which is a lightweight version of Timidity, so it's not totally unrelated but I didn't see midi-disasm there) If you do "rpm -qi soundfont-utils" you will find a line like this: Source RPM : gt-0.4-23.fc26.src.rpm That means that this package is a sub-package of gt. That's where you'll find it in bugzilla and the package database. That's also probably where the sources are, but I'm not sure about that. Try installing debuginfo for gt and see what happens. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: debug facilities
On 12/01/2017 04:39 PM, John Reiser wrote: I ran into a problem with midi-disasm from soundfount-utils. I tried to debug it but installing soundfont-utils-debuginfo only brings in the symbol tables, not sources. Perhaps the problem is particular to that rpm, or similar ones? Is soundfont-utils one of several rpms that belong to the same installable package? For instance, when I run "dnf debuginfo-install coreutils" [on Fedora 25] then it installs the sources in /usr/src/debug/coreutils-8.25 and I can look at src/date.c for the source to /bin/date. This is the old way of doing things, which worked; debuginfo packages contained both debug symbols and source. This had the disadvantage of large debuginfo packages: Octave is 342MB, qt is 119MB, glibc is 90MB. Debug symbols are essential for abrt-style automatic stack dump telemetry, so it was proposed to split -debuginfo into small debug symbol package and separate -debugsource package; this hasn't been done to all packages though (I am not sure how much manual work the packager has to do to accomplish that). My problem is that I can't find out where is the source of my package! it apparently was split off but I don't know where it went. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Self Introduction: Ryan Breaker
Hello everyone, my name is Ryan and I’m looking to join the Packager group to revive and update the netatalk package, as well as be available to assist with anything else I find myself interested in helping with. I’m a huge fan of Fedora and it’s long been my favorite Linux distribution so I’m excited to be able to give back in some way. The package I’m looking to revive and update already exists on Pagure at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/netatalk and it’s just a few minor releases behind from its previous commit before being marked as dead so once able I will do just that. Feel free to let me know if there’s anything else I need to do to get the access I need; I already forked it but don’t appear to be able to pull or push to it yet. Thanks, Ryan Breaker ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: debug facilities
I ran into a problem with midi-disasm from soundfount-utils. I tried to debug it but installing soundfont-utils-debuginfo only brings in the symbol tables, not sources. Perhaps the problem is particular to that rpm, or similar ones? Is soundfont-utils one of several rpms that belong to the same installable package? For instance, when I run "dnf debuginfo-install coreutils" [on Fedora 25] then it installs the sources in /usr/src/debug/coreutils-8.25 and I can look at src/date.c for the source to /bin/date. -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
debug facilities
I ran into a problem with midi-disasm from soundfount-utils. I tried to debug it but installing soundfont-utils-debuginfo only brings in the symbol tables, not sources. I know that we started splitting the source packages off---but unfortunately there doesn't seem to be soundfont-utils-debugsource anywhere. In fact, the sounfount-utils package is a little bit of a mystery: I couldn't find it on the Fedora package list, and it doesn't show up in Bugzilla so I can't enter a bug against it. The URL in the package points to http://alsa.opensrc.org/GusSoundfont, but there don't seem to be any sources for the utils there, and the source URL seems to point to package gt (which is a lightweight version of Timidity, so it's not totally unrelated but I didn't see midi-disasm there) What is the recommend workflow if one wants to start using GDB to solve a problem? It used to be sufficient to just load the debuginfo packages (in fact, that's what GDB is still recommending)., but this doesn't bring the sources now so debugging is not working that well. I see that there are 96000+ packages now in F27+RPMfusion, with 34000 debuginfo packages but only 1 debugsource packages. What is the plan--are we committed to eventually have a -debuginfo and -debugsource for every package (barring metapackages and such)? Also, why there's no soundfount-utils in bugzilla or while searching the Fedora package database? How would I find out who is the packager? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Basic package split question
If I have version 1 of package foo, containing items bar, xxx, yyy, zzz, i.e. foo-1-barxxxyyyzzz and, for version 2, bar is split off to its own sub-package, foo-bar, so that the desired packaging becomes: foo-2 foo-bar-2- -xxx baryyyzzz with foo-bar permanently requiring foo going forward. How does one structure theObsoletes/Requires such that foo-2 pulls in foo-bar-2 only once, during the upgradefrom 1 to 2? What is the best practice for this? TIA Philip ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Call for participation: FOSDEM 2018
Hello everyone, FOSDEM[0], the biggest free and non-commercial event organized by and for the community in Europe, is just 2 months away. The conference will be held in Brussels, Belgium, on February 3 & 4. As every year, EMEA Ambassadors organize the booth at FOSDEM, where many developers, contributors and students visit it to discuss with us or get some swag. This is an open call aiming especially at Fedora developers and technical contributors, to participate in our booth at FOSDEM. One of your main tasks would be to assist people and represent Fedora from a technical point of view. We would like you to talk to developers about using Fedora as a platform as well as a desktop. There is also some budget in place and we can provide travel and lodging funding to some developers and technical contributors in order to attend and assist at the booth. Sponsored contributors are expected to stay most of the time at the booth during the two days of the conference. If you would like to request funding, add your name on the wiki page[1] and open a funding request at the EMEA funding request tracker[2] (explaining why you are asking for funding and how you are going to contribute to the booth), so we can discuss all the requests in the upcoming EMEA Ambassador meetings. Have a nice weekend, Zach [0] https://fosdem.org/2018/ [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FOSDEM_2018 [2] https://pagure.io/ambassadors-emea/funding_requests/new_issue ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora-Modular 27-20171201.n.1 compose check report
Missing expected images: Docker_base docker x86_64 Server dvd arm Failed openQA tests: 21/94 (x86_64), 4/19 (i386) New failures (same test did not fail in 27-20171201.n.0): ID: 177939 Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_xfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177939 ID: 177943 Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_btrfs@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177943 ID: 177959 Test: x86_64 universal install_kickstart_hdd URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177959 Old failures (same test failed in 27-20171201.n.0): ID: 177889 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177889 ID: 177895 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177895 ID: 177909 Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177909 ID: 177913 Test: x86_64 universal support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177913 ID: 177915 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177915 ID: 177916 Test: x86_64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177916 ID: 177960 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177960 ID: 177961 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177961 ID: 177962 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177962 ID: 177963 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177963 ID: 177965 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177965 ID: 177966 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177966 ID: 177967 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177967 ID: 177968 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177968 ID: 177969 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177969 ID: 177970 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177970 ID: 177971 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_encrypted_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177971 ID: 177975 Test: x86_64 universal install_european_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177975 ID: 177976 Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177976 ID: 177984 Test: i386 universal upgrade_2_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177984 ID: 177985 Test: i386 universal upgrade_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177985 ID: 177998 Test: i386 universal install_repository_http_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177998 Passed openQA tests: 65/94 (x86_64), 15/19 (i386) Skipped openQA tests: 2 of 113 Installed system changes in test i386 universal install_package_set_minimal: System load changed from 0.03 to 0.16 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177780#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/177999#downloads -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Self Introduction: Jaroslav Prokop
__ > From: Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski > On Friday 01.12.2017 at 09:31 >Hi, Jarek. >On Thursday, 30 November 2017 at 18:25, Jaroslav Prokop wrote: >> my name is Jaroslav, Jarek for short, I am 16 years old student, >> I live and study in Brno, Czech Republic. I am beginner in the >> world of programming, right now I am working on becoming rpm >> packager. >Welcome to Fedora! Have you joined the Fedora IRC channel(s) already? Yes, you can find me at #fedora-devel under "jprokop" ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Modular bikeshed compose report: changes
___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
REMINDER: Autumn Elections 2017: Nomination & Campaign period is in progress
Currently we have Nomination & Campaign period [1] in progress and we still accept nominations to "steering bodies" of the following teams: * FESCo (Engineering) (5 seats) [2] * Fedora Council (2 seats) [3] * Mindshare (2 seats) [4] This period is open until 2017-Dec-04 at 23:59:59 UTC. Nominees can already prepare answers for questions in the Election Questionnaire [5]. These answers (aka interview) are going to be published in Community Blog [6] on the first day of the Voting period (2017-Dec-05). The full schedule of the Autumn Elections 2017 is available on the Elections wiki page [1] and on the detailed schedule for F27 [7]. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/SteeringCommittee/Nominations [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Council/Nominations [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mindshare/Nominations [5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections/Questionnaire [6] http://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/ [7] https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-27/f-27-elections.html Regards, Jan -- Jan Kuřík Platform & Fedora Program Manager Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: ICU 60.1 coming to rawhide/F28
Here's a quick update: icu 60.1 is now built and the rebuilds are all done and releng just tagged all the builds over from the f28-icu side tag to f28. A few of the rebuilds failed. I'd appreciate if the maintainers of the packages could take a look and help fix them up. Here's the full list of packages that failed to rebuild against icu 60.1: fontmatrix-0.9.99-32.r1218.fc27.src.rpm gnucash-2.6.18-2.fc28.src.rpm mozjs38-38.8.0-7.fc28.src.rpm mozjs45-45.9.0-5.fc28.src.rpm nodejs-mapnik-3.6.2-5.fc27.1.src.rpm nodejs-node-stringprep-0.7.3-16.fc28.src.rpm openttd-1.7.1-3.fc27.src.rpm qt5-qtwebengine-5.9.3-1.fc28.src.rpm soletta-1-1.fc26.src.rpm v8-314-3.14.5.10-7.fc27.src.rpm Cheers, Pete ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2017-12-01)
=== #fedora-meeting: FESCO (2017-12-01) === Meeting started by nirik at 16:00:04 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2017-12-01/fesco.2017-12-01-16.00.log.html . Meeting summary --- * init process (nirik, 16:00:04) * #1792 bodhi enablement and Beta freeze need to be the same day (nirik, 16:03:37) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1794 (nirik, 16:03:37) * AGREED: fesco agrees to change the bodhi activation date to be the same day as beta freeze moving forward. (+7,0,2) (nirik, 16:06:57) * #1790 Proposal for 3 week freeze (nirik, 16:07:10) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1790 (nirik, 16:07:10) * ACTION: nirik to file taskotron ticket to remove or reduce in importance the upgrade path check (nirik, 16:29:33) * AGREED: Add 1 week to beta freeze, and review after Fedora 28 release to see if it was worth while (+5, 2, 2) (nirik, 16:32:23) * #1761 Update of "Fedora Release Live Cycle" and "Changes/ Policy" (nirik, 16:32:38) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1761 (nirik, 16:32:38) * AGREED: with addition of 3 weeks for beta freeze and bodhi activation point moving to beta freeze the new release life cycle and changes policy are approved. (+6,0,3) (nirik, 16:40:15) * #1767 F28 Self Contained Changes (nirik, 16:40:20) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1767 (nirik, 16:40:20) * AGREED: both f28 self contained changes are approved. (+7,0,2) (nirik, 16:42:17) * #1795 F28 System Wide Change: time-1.8 (nirik, 16:42:22) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1795 (nirik, 16:42:22) * AGREED: Change is approved (7,0,2) (nirik, 16:44:56) * #1796 Mandatory Release notes for Changes (nirik, 16:45:15) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1796 (nirik, 16:45:15) * AGREED: Mandatory release notes are approved (+7,0,2) (nirik, 16:48:16) * #1798 F28 System Wide Change: Improved Laptop Battery Life (nirik, 16:48:28) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1798 (nirik, 16:48:28) * AGREED: Change is approved (+7,0,2) (nirik, 16:51:02) * #1663 How strongly should we recommend systemd sandboxing features? (nirik, 16:51:18) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1663 (nirik, 16:51:18) * AGREED: draft policy approved and FPC is asked to review and comment and fold into guidelines. (8,0,1) (jsmith was +1 in ticket and tyll was +1 before leaving) (nirik, 17:10:35) * next weeks chair (nirik, 17:11:40) * jsmith to chair next week (nirik, 17:12:02) * Open Floor (nirik, 17:12:11) * Election nominations are ongoing. Please nominate yourself or others. :) (nirik, 17:12:39) * next week Fedora Infrastructure is doing a datacenter move. see announcements for more info and https://www.fedorastatus.org/q4maint.html for whats what day. (nirik, 17:13:25) Meeting ended at 17:15:18 UTC. Action Items * nirik to file taskotron ticket to remove or reduce in importance the upgrade path check Action Items, by person --- * nirik * nirik to file taskotron ticket to remove or reduce in importance the upgrade path check * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --- * nirik (108) * bowlofeggs (39) * dgilmore (37) * jforbes (31) * kalev (27) * maxamillion (21) * zodbot (20) * tyll (17) * zbyszek (7) * jsmith_work (3) * smooge (1) * sgallagh (0) * jsmith (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- 16:00:04 #startmeeting FESCO (2017-12-01) 16:00:04 Meeting started Fri Dec 1 16:00:04 2017 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:04 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:04 The meeting name has been set to 'fesco_(2017-12-01)' 16:00:04 #meetingname fesco 16:00:04 The meeting name has been set to 'fesco' 16:00:04 #chair maxamillion dgilmore nirik jforbes jsmith kalev sgallagh bowlofeggs tyll 16:00:04 Current chairs: bowlofeggs dgilmore jforbes jsmith kalev maxamillion nirik sgallagh tyll 16:00:04 #topic init process 16:00:22 .hello till 16:00:23 tyll: till 'Till Maas' 16:00:45 who all is around for a fesco meeting? due to continued DST confusion I'll wait a while for quorom. 16:00:55 .hello kalev 16:01:00 kalev: kalev 'Kalev Lember' 16:01:04 FYY: Today I only have time for ca. 55 minutes 16:01:12 .hello jforbes 16:01:13 jforbes: jforbes 'Justin M. Forbes' 16:01:22 Well, mostly here, in 2 meetings ATM 16:01:38 tis the season or something. ;) 16:01:47 .hello2 16:01:48 bowlofeggs: bowlofeggs 'Randy Barlow' 16:02:22 .hello2 16:02:23 maxamillion: maxamillion 'Adam Miller' 16:02:26 ok, thats quorum... I guess we can go ahead and get started. 16:03:37 #topic #1792 bodhi enablement and Beta freeze need to be the same day 16:03:37 .fesco 1792
Fedora Modular 27 compose report: 20171201.n.1 changes
OLD: Fedora-Modular-27-20171201.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Modular-27-20171201.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 0 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0.00 B Size of dropped packages:0.00 B Size of upgraded packages: 0.00 B Size of downgraded packages: 0.00 B Size change of upgraded packages: 0.00 B Size change of downgraded packages: 0.00 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = = DOWNGRADED PACKAGES = ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: remote X connections
On 12/01/2017 04:44 PM, Christian Groessler wrote: > On 11/30/17 13:57, Michal Schmidt wrote: > >> Looks like gdm is missing BuildRequires: pkgconfig(xorg-server) >> Please report a bug for gdm in Bugzilla. > > > Can I cite your email on this bug report. What exactly will this > "BuildRequires" change accomplish? No need to file the bugreport. Ray Strode already fixed it. The added BuildRequires ensures the correct package is installed in the buildroot to make the pkg-config test in gdm's configure.ac work. Michal ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: remote X connections
On 11/30/17 13:57, Michal Schmidt wrote: Looks like gdm is missing BuildRequires: pkgconfig(xorg-server) Please report a bug for gdm in Bugzilla. Can I cite your email on this bug report. What exactly will this "BuildRequires" change accomplish? regards, chris ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: remote X connections
On 11/30/17 13:58, Jan Kratochvil wrote: On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:39:16 +0100, Christian Groessler wrote: This is handled by conditional compilation in gdm (depending on a HAVE_XSERVER_THAT_DEFAULTS_TO_LOCAL_ONLY define). gdm ignores DisallowTCP=false on F22 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1226084 FYI I had a problem with it around those versions F-22..F-24 but it does work for me for several releases now incl. F-27. Hmm, for me it doesn't work. I had FC24 before (where it worked, but I don't remember if I had local tweaks. I found the gdm-3.18.2-2.fc23.src.rpm on my machine, maybe I did some changes to it in order to get it to work. Really don't remember. But after upgrading from FC-24 to FC-26 it stopped working. Then I upgraded to FC-27, still not working. regards, chris ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2017-12-01)
On 11/30/2017 11:15 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 02:05:52PM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the >> FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on >> irc.freenode.net. >> >> To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto >> >> or run: >> date -d '2017-12-01 16:00 UTC' >> >> Links to all issues below can be found at: >> https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda >> >> = Followups = >> >> #topic #1663 How strongly should we recommend systemd sandboxing features? >> .fesco 1663 >> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1663 > > Hi, > > would it be possible to move this down a bit in the agenda? > I have an overlapping meeting 15:30-16:30 UTC... Sure... can move it out to the end. ;) kevin signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to replace ssl with ssh2 in kqoauth
Tomas Mraz wrote: > On Fri, 2017-12-01 at 06:40 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: >> Tomas Mraz wrote: >> >> > Compat-openssl10-devel will be removed at the latest by Fedora 29 >> > and >> > anything that requires it will be no longer buildable. >> >> That's the first I've seen or heard of any such hard deadline... has >> that >> been mentioned before? > > I was not completely precise with that statement above - this is my > current intention. > > The other option is that someone will step up and take over the > maintenance of compat-openssl10 at that point. I can/will step up (for qt v4 which won't be going away any time soon). -- Rex ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to replace ssl with ssh2 in kqoauth
On Fri, 2017-12-01 at 06:40 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Tomas Mraz wrote: > > > Compat-openssl10-devel will be removed at the latest by Fedora 29 > > and > > anything that requires it will be no longer buildable. > > That's the first I've seen or heard of any such hard deadline... has > that > been mentioned before? I was not completely precise with that statement above - this is my current intention. The other option is that someone will step up and take over the maintenance of compat-openssl10 at that point. I'd be willing to maintain the package after that time only if compat-openssl10-devel is removed - that means having compat-openssl10 only purely as third party application backwards compatibility library. -- Tomáš Mráz No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back. Turkish proverb [You'll know whether the road is wrong if you carefully listen to your conscience.] ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to replace ssl with ssh2 in kqoauth
Tomas Mraz wrote: > Compat-openssl10-devel will be removed at the latest by Fedora 29 and > anything that requires it will be no longer buildable. That's the first I've seen or heard of any such hard deadline... has that been mentioned before? -- Rex ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Which Fedora/EPEL is targeted by packaging guidelines?
On Friday, 01 December 2017 at 11:39, Vít Ondruch wrote: [...] > What I really want to answer is the question in $SUBJECT, since the > scope of guidelines is not specified anywhere. It seems that FPC itself > does not know what releases they target and my guidelines update [1] is > stuck in review just because of this. It is my understanding that the unwritten rule is that the guidelines are targeted at rawhide and we (FPC) try to maintain notes documenting which releases need exceptions or don't support some things. > The packaging style is very related of course. If the philosophy of > Fedora/EPEL was "every change goes into every branch" then the > guidelines should probably cover all the branches and discuss all the > differences. But the update policy [2] says the opposite: "we should > avoid major updates of packages within a stable release. Updates should > aim to fix bugs, and not introduce features, particularly when those > features would materially affect the user or developer experience". So > saying that majority of people supports all the branches is against the > policy IMO. Now you're stretching it in my opinion. "Supporting" stable releases doesn't mean releasing every update made in rawhide to stable branches as well. Fixing bugs is still "supporting" and I don't see why it would be against the policy. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Unretiring Estonia ID cards utilities
Good day, I am unretiring packages for Estonia ID cards Review request: qdigidoc - Estonian digital signature application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519749 Review request: qesteidutil - Estonian ID card utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519323 Review request: libdigidocpp - Library offers creating, signing and verification of digitally signed documents, according to XAdES and XML-DSIG standards https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519747 Review request: esteidcerts - Estonian ID card root, intermediate and OCSP certificates https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1518957 While testing them I made also a Copr repo https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/germano/este-id-card-tools/ More infos about Estonia electronic identity: https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-identity/id-card/ https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-identity/e-residency signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Which Fedora/EPEL is targeted by packaging guidelines?
Dne 30.11.2017 v 17:32 Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a): > On 30 November 2017 at 03:49, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Reading logs from yesterdays FPC meeting [1], I think we should discuss >> what is actually purpose of packaging guidelines and which version of >> Fedora/EPEL/RHEL they actually targets. >> >> >> Apparently, there are two camps of packagers in Fedora/EPEL. Those who want: >> >> 1) single version of .spec file to cover the whole Red Hat ecosystem. >> >> 2) clean .spec file following the latest and greatest packaging practices. >> >> >> I personally belong to the group (2) and that is for several reasons: >> >> a) I use Rawhide on daily basis and I develop only for Rawhide. If I do >> changes in older Fedoras, then it is typically just bug fixes and >> honestly, that does not happen often (I am POC of ~200 packages and I >> submitted just 40 updates during last year [2]). And in fact, this is >> official philosophy of updates [3], not just mine. >> >> b) I spent time developing features which should simplify packaging (for >> example in F27+, the RPM %setup macro can expand the .gem packages) and >> I want to use these technologies to simplify my life and life of others. >> >> c) As a proven packager and person who typically does rebuild of Ruby >> packages, I really hate the branched .spec files where nobody knows what >> was the purpose of the branches, most of the branches are for obsolete >> and unsupported releases etc. It is quite hard to apply any improvements >> into such packages. Moreover it is not realistic to test them. If they >> were maintained, it would be different story, but the reality is different. >> >> >> Don't get me wrong, I understand that there are packagers who has just >> handful of packages and it is better for them to maintain just single >> .spec file with all the branches and I don't mind them as long as the >> packages are really actively maintained. But this approach just don't >> scale and should be exception and not recommended practice. >> >> >> To sum this up, my take on packaging guidelines is that *the guidelines >> should document the most recent practices available in Rawhide and this >> should be documented*. Covering all the exceptions necessary for older >> Fedoras (not even mentioning RHEL/EPEL) makes the guidelines unreadable >> and what is worse, they slow down entire development of Fedora. >> > Honestly, I think the RHEL/EPEL part of your conversation is a Red > Herring (aka not the real point). What I really want to answer is the question in $SUBJECT, since the scope of guidelines is not specified anywhere. It seems that FPC itself does not know what releases they target and my guidelines update [1] is stuck in review just because of this. The packaging style is very related of course. If the philosophy of Fedora/EPEL was "every change goes into every branch" then the guidelines should probably cover all the branches and discuss all the differences. But the update policy [2] says the opposite: "we should avoid major updates of packages within a stable release. Updates should aim to fix bugs, and not introduce features, particularly when those features would materially affect the user or developer experience". So saying that majority of people supports all the branches is against the policy IMO. Also, if the guidelines covered all the branches, the probably Rust guidelines would not be approved yet ... V. [1] https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/710 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Philosophy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Self Introduction: Jaroslav Prokop
Welcome to Fedora! On 11/30/2017 07:25 PM, Jaroslav Prokop wrote: Hi everyone, my name is Jaroslav, Jarek for short, I am 16 years old student, I live and study in Brno, Czech Republic. I am beginner in the world of programming, right now I am working on becoming rpm packager. For now I will be packagingruby software and I am building my first Fedora packages [1] [2]. I am not experienced much and still pretty young, but I am working my way to knowledge, but I am glad I can give my part to this awesome open source project. If you´re interested to know more about me, we could do some Q&A. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517000 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1516328 -- GPG: https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/EhUSQh4Y2MLh8HGj~DADvw Regards, Jaroslav Prokop ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Self Introduction: Jaroslav Prokop
Hi, Jarek. On Thursday, 30 November 2017 at 18:25, Jaroslav Prokop wrote: > my name is Jaroslav, Jarek for short, I am 16 years old student, > I live and study in Brno, Czech Republic. I am beginner in the > world of programming, right now I am working on becoming rpm > packager. Welcome to Fedora! Have you joined the Fedora IRC channel(s) already? Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
