Fedora-Cloud-33-20211114.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-2022.0): ID: 1064396 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064396 ID: 1064405 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064405 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- 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 Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
License corrected and simplified for luminance-hdr
Previously, the License field was “GPLv2+ and GPLv2 and GPLv3+ and LGPLv2+ and BSD and MIT and Boost”. This is corrected and simplified as follows: The GPLv2-only sources were removed downstream some time ago, and the functionality they provide patched out, since their license is incompatible with that of the GPLv3+ sources. The “GPLv2” term should have been removed from the License field at that time. The license compatibility problem was reported upstream, but upstream is currently inactive and has not responded. The GPLv3+, LGPLv2+, BSD, MIT, and Boost files are all C or C++ sources that are combined into the application executables, resulting in an effective license of GPLv3+ for those executables. All other files that are installed as part of the binary RPMs are GPLv2+, except the AppData XML file, which is CC0. There is significant precedent in Fedora for leaving CC0 out of the License field when it only applies to an AppData file. (Search the devel and legal lists if curious). Therefore, the License for the base package is now “GPLv2+ and GPLv3+”, with a suitable explanation in a spec file comment. The License for the luminance-hdr-data subpackage is simply “GPLv2+”. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: libnsl.so.2.0.1 updated to libnsl.so.3.0.0 without coordination, broke rawhide
On Sat, 2021-11-13 at 10:28 -0800, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > On Sat, 2021-11-13 at 11:57 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > > This has been discussed many many times. The packaging guidelines > > have > > been updated to say globs "SHOULD NOT" be used [1], and I think > > there > > is a > > broad agreement that this is a good thing. Unfortunately many > > packages > > still use this pattern. > > > > I think we need a hero (or a small team of heroes) to > > 1. download the all-specs.tar.xz file and grep for the any spec > > files > > that have globs > > We should probably have a link to that someplace very visible (e.g. > in > the packaging guidelines)? > > I just realized I forgot to bookmark it, and I can't remember where > to > get it from now. > aha, https://src.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/rpm-specs-latest.tar.xz Best regards, -- Michel Alexandre Salim profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: libnsl.so.2.0.1 updated to libnsl.so.3.0.0 without coordination, broke rawhide
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 10:28:03AM -0800, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > On Sat, 2021-11-13 at 11:57 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > > This has been discussed many many times. The packaging guidelines > > have > > been updated to say globs "SHOULD NOT" be used [1], and I think there > > is a > > broad agreement that this is a good thing. Unfortunately many > > packages > > still use this pattern. > > > > I think we need a hero (or a small team of heroes) to > > 1. download the all-specs.tar.xz file and grep for the any spec files > > that have globs > > We should probably have a link to that someplace very visible (e.g. in > the packaging guidelines)? https://src.fedoraproject.org/repo/ Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: libnsl.so.2.0.1 updated to libnsl.so.3.0.0 without coordination, broke rawhide
On Sat, 2021-11-13 at 11:57 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > This has been discussed many many times. The packaging guidelines > have > been updated to say globs "SHOULD NOT" be used [1], and I think there > is a > broad agreement that this is a good thing. Unfortunately many > packages > still use this pattern. > > I think we need a hero (or a small team of heroes) to > 1. download the all-specs.tar.xz file and grep for the any spec files > that have globs We should probably have a link to that someplace very visible (e.g. in the packaging guidelines)? I just realized I forgot to bookmark it, and I can't remember where to get it from now. Cheers, -- Michel Alexandre Salim profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Module build status question
On 11/12/21 13:47, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 3:27 PM Orion Poplawski wrote: Can someone who understands the MBS tell me what's up with this build? https://mbs.fedoraproject.org/module-build-service/2/module-builds/13374 Every once in a while, for reasons we don't fully understand, one of the builders crashes, leaving the build in that state. You *should* be able to cancel it and submit it again and it will work. If not, file an Infra ticket. Restarting it didn't seem to help, so I've filed: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/10333 Thanks. -- Orion Poplawski he/him/his - surely the least important thing about me Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Intro and ownership of orphaned package.
On 11/12/21 23:55, Jan K wrote: My name is Jan Kuparinen I work as a DevOps engineer. In the past I have made rpm packages of a private project, so I have some idea of packaging progress. I have also made some contributions to various Fedora projects. I took a look at the orphaned package list for packages needing maintenance and found that https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/truth is in retired state, but is needed by quite a few other packages. There have been several commits in the last few weeks to the repo, so is this actually maintained? If indeed this package is in need of a maintainer, I think I can help with that. Jan, It would be great if you could take ownership of that package, although I'm a little surprised that the un-retirement process didn't make me the owner automatically - but I probably missed a step in the process. I'm barely keeping up with the packages I do have though, so I'm happy to hand off truth. As for future direction, it would be good to see if "auto" could now be updated (and then truth, perhaps back and forth). Thanks, Orion -- Orion Poplawski he/him/his - surely the least important thing about me Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Action required: Account system IRC pointer reset
On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 11:51:43AM -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > It went to annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org, but I guess I should have > also sent it to devel-announce? mattdm has suggested that we need > something like a 'contributor-announce' for things like this. Yeah it's on my guilt-list of things that are pretty much just waiting on me. :) -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Rawhide-20211113.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 1 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 7/206 (x86_64), 6/141 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-2022.n.0): ID: 1063918 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063918 ID: 1063959 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063959 ID: 1063961 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063961 ID: 1063992 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063992 ID: 1064045 Test: x86_64 universal install_xfs@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064045 ID: 1064047 Test: x86_64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064047 ID: 1064090 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_uefi@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064090 ID: 1064115 Test: aarch64 universal install_cyrillic_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064115 ID: 1064137 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064137 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-2022.n.0): ID: 1063898 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063898 ID: 1063909 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063909 ID: 1063917 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063917 ID: 1064024 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gedit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064024 Soft failed openQA tests: 4/141 (aarch64), 5/206 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-2022.n.0): ID: 1064022 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz evince@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064022 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-2022.n.0): ID: 1063897 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063897 ID: 1063927 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063927 ID: 1063928 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gedit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063928 ID: 1063935 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063935 ID: 1063984 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063984 ID: 1064030 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064030 ID: 1064074 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064074 ID: 1064142 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064142 Passed openQA tests: 194/206 (x86_64), 131/141 (aarch64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Rawhide-2022.n.0): ID: 1063896 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063896 ID: 1064010 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064010 ID: 1064014 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1064014 Installed system changes in test x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default: System load changed from 0.09 to 0.25 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1062931#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063815#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload: 1 packages(s) removed since previous compose: xemacs-filesystem System load changed from 1.73 to 1.21 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063018#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063902#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi: 1 packages(s) removed since previous compose: xemacs-filesystem Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063023#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063907#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi: System load changed from 0.92 to 1.56 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063037#downloads Current test data: https://op
Re: libnsl.so.2.0.1 updated to libnsl.so.3.0.0 without coordination, broke rawhide
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 12:49:40PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 2:55 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > Since this update: > > > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libnsl2/c/d2e2fab5e3ab07228a34f35ab8ec1954581153d0?branch=rawhide > > > > Nothing in rawhide builds, because Python and hence dnf is not installable: > > > > > > Is it possible to automate a scan across (at least) the "core"(*) > packages and identify those spec files that use one of the (from the > packaging guidelines) SHOULD NOT unversioned soname globs and then > have explicit major sonames added(**)? Of course such a change will > not prevent explicit bumps, but should, at a minimum, raise the bar > just a bit for accidental bumps (which is what I presume this was > when the new upstream source was submitted as an update). This has been discussed many many times. The packaging guidelines have been updated to say globs "SHOULD NOT" be used [1], and I think there is a broad agreement that this is a good thing. Unfortunately many packages still use this pattern. I think we need a hero (or a small team of heroes) to 1. download the all-specs.tar.xz file and grep for the any spec files that have globs 2. figure out a list and propose a mass change [2] 3. apply all the changes everywhere That last step will require provenpackager privs. I could help a bit, esp. with the last step, if somebody wants to do this. [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_listing_shared_library_files [2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Mass_package_changes/ Zbyszek > (*) Is there such a list of "core" libraries? > If not, that might need to be another > item on the work queue. > > (**) I am presuming that most of the > unversioned soname globs in most > spec files predate the SHOULD NOT > recommendations, and cleaning that > up would be a good thing moving > forward. Ah, right, I didn't read the footnote before writing the text above ;) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora rawhide compose report: 20211113.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-2022.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-2023.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 2 Added packages: 3 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 92 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 444.25 KiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 7.01 GiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 16.77 MiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Cloud_Base qcow2 s390x Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-2022.n.0.s390x.qcow2 Image: Cloud_Base raw-xz s390x Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-2022.n.0.s390x.raw.xz = ADDED PACKAGES = Package: perl-Syntax-Keyword-Match-0.08-1.fc36 Summary: Match/case syntax for Perl RPMs:perl-Syntax-Keyword-Match perl-Syntax-Keyword-Match-tests Size:177.16 KiB Package: perl-Syntax-Operator-Divides-0.01-2.fc36 Summary: Infix operator for division test RPMs:perl-Syntax-Operator-Divides perl-Syntax-Operator-Divides-tests Size:129.42 KiB Package: perl-Syntax-Operator-Equ-0.02-2.fc36 Summary: Equality operators that distinguish undef RPMs:perl-Syntax-Operator-Equ perl-Syntax-Operator-Equ-tests Size:137.67 KiB = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: GMT-6.1.1-9.fc36 Old package: GMT-6.1.1-8.fc36 Summary: Generic Mapping Tools RPMs: GMT GMT-common GMT-devel GMT-doc Size: 65.44 MiB Size change: -122 B Changelog: * Thu Nov 11 2021 Sandro Mani - 6.1.1-9 - Rebuild (gdal) Package: IP2Location-8.4.1-1.fc36 Old package: IP2Location-8.4.0-3.fc36 Summary: Tools for mapping IP address to geolocation information RPMs: IP2Location IP2Location-data-sample IP2Location-devel IP2Location-libs Size: 5.73 MiB Size change: 2.34 KiB Changelog: * Fri Nov 12 2021 Peter Bieringer - 8.4.1-1 - update to 8.4.1 Package: OpenSceneGraph-3.4.1-33.fc36 Old package: OpenSceneGraph-3.4.1-32.fc36 Summary: High performance real-time graphics toolkit RPMs: OpenSceneGraph OpenSceneGraph-Collada OpenSceneGraph-OpenEXR OpenSceneGraph-devel OpenSceneGraph-examples OpenSceneGraph-examples-SDL OpenSceneGraph-examples-fltk OpenSceneGraph-examples-gtk OpenSceneGraph-examples-qt OpenSceneGraph-gdal OpenSceneGraph-gstreamer OpenSceneGraph-libs OpenSceneGraph-qt OpenSceneGraph-qt-devel OpenThreads OpenThreads-devel Size: 57.05 MiB Size change: 49.53 KiB Changelog: * Thu Nov 11 2021 Sandro Mani - 3.4.1-33 - Rebuild (gdal) Package: PDAL-2.3.0-4.fc36 Old package: PDAL-2.3.0-3.fc35 Summary: Point Data Abstraction Library RPMs: PDAL PDAL-devel PDAL-doc PDAL-libs Size: 57.96 MiB Size change: 52.31 KiB Changelog: * Thu Nov 11 2021 Sandro Mani - 2.3.0-4 - Rebuild (gdal) Package: R-rgdal-1.5.23-6.fc36 Old package: R-rgdal-1.5.23-5.fc35 Summary: Bindings for the 'Geospatial' Data Abstraction Library RPMs: R-rgdal Size: 21.27 MiB Size change: 8.17 KiB Changelog: * Thu Nov 11 2021 Sandro Mani - 1.5.23-6 - Rebuild (gdal) Package: ansible-core-2.12.0-1.fc36 Old package: ansible-core-2.11.6-1.fc36 Summary: A radically simple IT automation system RPMs: ansible-core ansible-core-doc Size: 3.84 MiB Size change: 148.03 KiB Changelog: * Mon Nov 08 2021 Kevin Fenzi - 2.12.0-1 - Update to 2.12.0. Fixes rhbz#2022533 Package: anthy-9100h-44.fc36 Old package: anthy-9100h-43.fc35 Summary: Japanese character set input library RPMs: anthy anthy-devel Size: 34.17 MiB Size change: -59.61 KiB Changelog: * Tue Nov 09 2021 Jerry James - 9100h-44 - Drop XEmacs support in F36 and later Package: arm-image-installer-3.5-1.fc36 Old package: arm-image-installer-3.4-2.fc35 Summary: Writes binary image files to any specified block device RPMs: arm-image-installer Size: 53.77 KiB Size change: 298 B Changelog: * Fri Nov 12 2021 Paul Whalen - 3.5-1 - Update to 3.5 Package: awscli-1.22.5-1.fc36 Old package: awscli-1.22.4-1.fc36 Summary: Universal Command Line Environment for AWS RPMs: awscli Size: 2.13 MiB Size change: 64 B Changelog: * Fri Nov 12 2021 Gwyn Ciesla - 1.22.5-1 - 1.22.5 Package: azure-cli-2.30.0-3.fc36 Old package: azure-cli-2.30.0-2.fc36 Summary: Microsoft Azure Command-Line Tools RPMs: azure-cli python3-azure-cli-core python3-azure-cli-telemetry python3-azure-cli-testsdk Size: 3.79 MiB Size change: 480 B Changelog: * Fri Nov 12 2021 Major Hayden 2.30.0-3 - Update bash completion handling Package: bandit-1.7.1-2.fc36 Old package: bandit-1.7.0-4.fc35 Summary: A framework for performing security analysis of Python source code RPMs: bandit Size: 197.19 KiB Size change: -1.73 KiB Changelog: * Fri Nov 12
Re: Mono fonts blurry since F34
W dniu 13.11.2021 o 11:10, Julian Sikorski pisze: Hi, I originally posted this into bugzilla [1] and onto mono bug tracker [2], but we were unable to solve the problem. Given that F33 is going EOL soon and I will have to choose between losing my test case or running without updates, I decided to post here. In brief, since upgrading to F34, mono fonts look blurry (see attached). I was now able to reproduce it with my own app [3] which can be compiled with xbuild MonoFontsTest.sln /p:TargetFrameworkVersion="v4.7.1" It appears as if hinting is no longer working in the F34 and F35. I tried disabling harfbuzz as this landed in F34 but it did not help. Any ideas what is going on? Were there any fontconfig or other changes in F34? Thank you for your help in advance. Best regards, Julian [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954171 [2] https://github.com/mono/mono/issues/21063 [3] https://github.com/belegdol/MonoFontsTest I tried rebuilding F33 fontconfig on F35 and downgrading, it did not help unfortunately. Best regards, Julian ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Test-Announce] Fedora 36 Rawhide 20211113.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 36 Rawhide 2023.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: pungi - 20211103.n.0: pungi-4.3.1-1.fc36.src, 2023.n.0: pungi-4.3.2-1.fc36.src Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/testcase_stats/36 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_36_Rawhide_2023.n.0_Summary The individual test result pages are: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_2023.n.0_Installation https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_2023.n.0_Base https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_2023.n.0_Server https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_2023.n.0_Cloud https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_2023.n.0_Desktop https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_2023.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Mono fonts blurry since F34
Hi, I originally posted this into bugzilla [1] and onto mono bug tracker [2], but we were unable to solve the problem. Given that F33 is going EOL soon and I will have to choose between losing my test case or running without updates, I decided to post here. In brief, since upgrading to F34, mono fonts look blurry (see attached). I was now able to reproduce it with my own app [3] which can be compiled with xbuild MonoFontsTest.sln /p:TargetFrameworkVersion="v4.7.1" It appears as if hinting is no longer working in the F34 and F35. I tried disabling harfbuzz as this landed in F34 but it did not help. Any ideas what is going on? Were there any fontconfig or other changes in F34? Thank you for your help in advance. Best regards, Julian [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954171 [2] https://github.com/mono/mono/issues/21063 [3] https://github.com/belegdol/MonoFontsTest___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: libnsl.so.2.0.1 updated to libnsl.so.3.0.0 without coordination, broke rawhide
Am Freitag, dem 12.11.2021 um 21:33 +0100 schrieb Björn 'besser82' Esser: > Am Donnerstag, dem 11.11.2021 um 15:54 +0100 schrieb Miro Hrončok: > > Hello, > > > > Since this update: > > > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libnsl2/c/d2e2fab5e3ab07228a34f35ab8ec1954581153d0?branch=rawhide > > > > Nothing in rawhide builds, because Python and hence dnf is not > > installable: > > > > Error: > > Problem 1: package python3-dnf-4.10.0-1.fc36.noarch requires > > python3-libdnf, > > but none of the providers can be installed > > - package python3-dnf-4.10.0-1.fc36.noarch requires python3-libdnf > > > = > > 0.65.0, but none of the providers can be installed > > - package dnf-4.10.0-1.fc36.noarch requires python3-dnf = 4.10.0- > > 1.fc36, but > > none of the providers can be installed > > - package python3-libdnf-0.65.0-1.fc36.ppc64le requires > > libpython3.10.so.1.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be > > installed > > - conflicting requests > > - nothing provides libnsl.so.2()(64bit) needed by > > python3-libs-3.10.0-3.fc36.ppc64le > > - nothing provides libnsl.so.2(LIBNSL_1.0)(64bit) needed by > > python3-libs-3.10.0-3.fc36.ppc64le > > Problem 2: package python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-1.fc36.noarch > > requires > > python3-hawkey >= 0.46.1, but none of the providers can be installed > > - package dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-1.fc36.noarch requires > > python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.24-1.fc36, but none of the providers > > can be > > installed > > - package python3-hawkey-0.65.0-1.fc36.ppc64le requires > > libpython3.10.so.1.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be > > installed > > - conflicting requests > > - nothing provides libnsl.so.2()(64bit) needed by > > python3-libs-3.10.0-3.fc36.ppc64le > > - nothing provides libnsl.so.2(LIBNSL_1.0)(64bit) needed by > > python3-libs-3.10.0-3.fc36.ppc64le > > (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) > > > > > > Additionally, the following packages (and everything that depends on > > them) will > > fail to install: > > > > $ repoquery -q --repo=rawhide --whatrequires 'libnsl.so.2()(64bit)' > > autofs-1:5.1.8-1.fc36.x86_64 > > exim-0:4.95-1.fc36.x86_64 > > exim-mon-0:4.95-1.fc36.x86_64 > > libnsl2-devel-0:1.3.0-4.fc35.x86_64 > > nss_nis-0:3.1-9.fc35.x86_64 > > pam-0:1.5.2-6.fc36.x86_64 > > postfix-2:3.6.2-6.fc36.x86_64 > > python2.7-0:2.7.18-15.fc36.x86_64 > > python3-debug-0:3.10.0-2.fc36.x86_64 > > python3-libs-0:3.10.0-2.fc36.x86_64 > > python3.11-0:3.11.0~a1-1.fc36.x86_64 > > python3.6-0:3.6.15-2.fc36.x86_64 > > python3.7-0:3.7.12-2.fc36.x86_64 > > python3.8-0:3.8.12-2.fc36.x86_64 > > python3.9-0:3.9.8-1.fc36.x86_64 > > rwall-0:0.17-60.fc35.x86_64 > > rwall-server-0:0.17-60.fc35.x86_64 > > sendmail-0:8.17.1-2.fc36.x86_64 > > slapi-nis-0:0.56.7-2.fc35.x86_64 > > tcp_wrappers-0:7.6-98.fc35.x86_64 > > tcp_wrappers-libs-0:7.6-98.fc35.x86_64 > > yp-tools-0:4.2.3-10.fc35.x86_64 > > ypbind-3:2.7.2-5.fc35.x86_64 > > ypserv-0:4.2-1.fc36.x86_64 > > > > I've requested the package to be untagged: > > > > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10380 > > > > This change needs to be coordinated. > > > I can take care to coordinate the rebuilds in a side-tag, if you don't > mind. > > Thanks, > Björn All required rebuilds have finished successfully and the side-tag is merged with Rawhide. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-bc52d69ab2 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Cloud-35-20211113.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-2021.0): ID: 1063801 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063801 ID: 1063810 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1063810 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- 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 Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Intro and ownership of orphaned package.
On 13/11/2021 07:55, Jan K wrote: If indeed this package is in need of a maintainer, I think I can help with that. You can easily adopt it. Just press the "Take" button. -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
