[EPEL-devel] Re: Handling packages with missing dependencies provided by HA-RS repos?

[Carl George]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 5:50 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 09:18:08PM -0500, Carl George wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:54 PM Carl George  wrote:
> > >
> > > Typically EPEL inherits policy from Fedora, diverging when necessary.
> > > Here is the corresponding section of Fedora policy.
> > >
> > > "All package dependencies (build-time or runtime, regular, weak or
> > > otherwise) MUST ALWAYS be satisfiable within the official Fedora
> > > repositories."
> > >
> > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_package_dependencies
> > >
> > > We don't consider HA or RS part of the base RHEL distribution
> > > (referred to in policy as the "Target Base").  However, I don't think
>
> Well, for 8 and 9... for 7 we do. ;)
>
> > > we should strictly forbid any dependency on HA or RS packages, because
> > > that would require unnecessary duplication of HA/RS packages in EPEL
> > > (which is allowed, but shouldn't be required IMO).  I suggest a
> > > compromise that we can make the policy:
> > >
> > > "All EPEL package dependencies (build-time or runtime) MUST ALWAYS be
> > > satisfiable within the Target Base or EPEL itself.  Weak package
> > > dependencies are allowed on packages from additional RHEL channels
> > > that are not part of the Target Base, such as the HighAvailability
> > > channel."
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carl George
> >
> > We discussed this a bit further at today's EPEL Steering Committee.
> > One alternative that was suggested was to just add the HA and RS repos
> > to the target base list.  The initial impact of that would be that
> > several packages already in EPEL8 would become policy violations and
> > would have to be retired.
>
> Yeah, I guess thats pretty anoying in 8 since we didn't start with them.
> ;(
>
> So, if we did allow weak deps to packages in other non our Base repos,
> wouldn't that not actually work for the case that started this thread?
>
> ie, say I have a foo-plugin package and foo is in a different non epel
> base rhel channel and I add a Reccomends for it in epel. People who have
> the channel enabled would be fine but if someone else installed
> foo-plugin it would just... not work.

What I suggested as policy would be to allow weak dependencies on
non-base channels, not to incorrectly identify all hard dependencies
as weak if they're in these channels.  If an EPEL package has a hard
dependency, that dependency should be in the target base or EPEL
itself.  If the dependency actually is weak (optional), it would be
useful to allow those to be provided by non-target-base channels.

The plugin example is a bit of a grey area.  If the software is
designed as such that no one uses the plugin directly, but rather the
plugin extends the functionality of the main software which is used
directly, then I think users can figure out they need to install both
the main software and the plugin, regardless of the dependency
relationship.  This will vary case by case, and we could allowed these
by Steering Committee exception only.

>
> Also could we tell if deps changed? Say I have foo-plugin in epel
> Reccommending foo, and RHEL drops foo. None of our 'will it install' or
> broken deps type checks will know that it is now not working. ;(

As far as I know RHEL doesn't really drop packages, they stay on the
CDN for the life of distro.  Even if they do get dropped, this seems
like an edge case we shouldn't really need to worry too much about.
If it happens and it results in an EPEL package not working, we'll
know it should have been a Requires and not a Recommends all along,
which will lead to either the maintainer adding the necessary
dependency to EPEL, or retiring the package with the missing
dependency.

>
> If we don't add HA and RS to the base epel repos, I guess we could just
> allow people to build those things they need in epel, but then of course
> they get to maintain them. ;(

This is already allowed, which is why we have EPEL packages that would
need to be retired if HA/RS are added to the target base.

>
> Perhaps instead of a strict rule we could just ask everything that has
> this issue to get an exception?

As stated above I'd be fine with an exception workflow if a maintainer
feels it's justified to intentionally mislabel a hard dependency as
weak, but the general case of truly weak (optional) dependencies from
non-target-base channels shouldn't need exceptions IMO.

>
> Not an easy case.
>
> kevin
> ___
> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> 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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> 

fcitx5-qt was missing from a QT5 update

[Qiyu Yan]

Hi Jan Grulich, 

Seems that fcitx5-qt was missing from from a recent qt5 update [1]. I
have noticed that and rebuilt it in your side-tag [2]. I think we
should add that build into your bodhi update to avoid any conflict in
stable repo, but I don't have the permission to do so, could you (or
any provenpackager) do that for me.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Qiyu Yan

[1]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-26f40bcde1
[2]: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84626449
-- 
Qiyu Yan
GPG keyid: 0x4FC914F065F2DF12
About: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Yanqiyu






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-Rawhide-20220324.n.1 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Minimal raw-xz armhfp

Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed

Failed openQA tests: 5/216 (x86_64), 19/161 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0):

ID: 1194260 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso anaconda_help
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194260
ID: 1194317 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194317
ID: 1194333 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso support_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194333
ID: 1194362 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_updates_nfs@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194362
ID: 1194363 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194363
ID: 1194436 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194436
ID: 1194441 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_terminal@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194441
ID: 1194451 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade release_identification@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194451
ID: 1194562 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194562
ID: 1194570 Test: aarch64 universal install_multi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194570
ID: 1194578 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194578

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0):

ID: 1194336 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
server_role_deploy_domain_controller@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194336
ID: 1194339 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194339
ID: 1194350 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_hd_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194350
ID: 1194351 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso mediakit_repoclosure@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194351
ID: 1194371 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194371
ID: 1194387 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194387
ID: 1194428 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_fprint
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194428
ID: 1194438 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_printing@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194438
ID: 1194442 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194442
ID: 1194473 Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194473
ID: 1194508 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194508
ID: 1194546 Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194546
ID: 1194567 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194567

Soft failed openQA tests: 8/216 (x86_64), 4/161 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0):

ID: 1194301 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194301

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0):

ID: 1194269 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194269
ID: 1194273 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194273
ID: 1194284 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194284
ID: 1194294 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194294
ID: 1194311 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194311
ID: 1194401 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194401
ID: 1194402 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194402
ID: 1194406 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194406
ID: 1194414 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194414
ID: 1194420 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194420
ID: 1194449 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194449

Passed openQA tests: 138/161 (aarch64), 203/216 (x86_64)

New

Re: Problem compiling tellico in F37 (linker stage)

[Mamoru TASAKA]

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote on 2022/03/24 17:52:

On 23/03/2022 20:10, José Abílio Matos wrote:

This fails in x86* and arm64 and succeeds in ppc64le and x390x:



I have the same issue with ghostwriter package (Koschei scratch build):
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8462258

Previous build on F37 was successful:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84152850


This uses binutils 2.37-24.fc36





At least for both tellico and ghostwriter cases, I tried mockbuild and
just downgrading binutils / binutils-gold to 2.37-24.fc36.x86_64 makes linkage
succeed, so for now I filed against binutils:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068343

(Currently rawhide uses binutils-2.38-6.fc37)

I have not tried luminance-hdr case yet.

Regards,
Mamoru
___
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: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2022-03-25 at 02:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > In point of fact, no. Nobody can. It needs either more positive karma
> > or two more days in testing, under the policy. As I said, the automated
> > test failure is irrelevant to this.
> 
> Actually, this is not a critical path package (or the minimum timeout would 
> be 2 weeks, not 1), so the stable threshold could be lowered to 1, then the 
> update can be pushed.

Oh, I was just assuming it was. Yes, if it's not critpath, it can be
submitted by the maintainer or a proven packager once it has 1 karma.
(You don't actually need to edit the threshold, you can just use the
bodhi CLI).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

___
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: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> In point of fact, no. Nobody can. It needs either more positive karma
> or two more days in testing, under the policy. As I said, the automated
> test failure is irrelevant to this.

Actually, this is not a critical path package (or the minimum timeout would 
be 2 weeks, not 1), so the stable threshold could be lowered to 1, then the 
update can be pushed.

In fact, I think I could even technically do that (both lower the threshold 
and queue the package for stable) as a provenpackager, but I do not want to 
overrule the maintainer.

That said, I am still not convinced that it is a good idea that critical 
security updates (and other urgent updates, such as, e.g., regression fixes) 
cannot be pushed directly to stable without any karma requirement at all as 
was the case a (sadly) long time ago. (I have been trying without success to 
get this decision overturned ever since.)

Kevin Kofler
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Modules for EPEL9

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:09:33PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:38 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:56:15AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > It was talked about December 2021, and pushed off to the new year.
> > > https://pagure.io/epel/issue/135
> > > It's the new year, and you are the first this year to ask for it.  So, 
> > > time
> > > to get it back in the discussions.
> > > Could you please put what modules you want to build in that ticket, so we
> > > can help prioritize it.
> >
> > Personally, I'd be happy just not doing modules at all for epel9 given
> > the limitations we have (cannot build any module that requires rhel
> > modules). I'd prefer we have folks just use compatiblity packages
> > instead.
> >
> 
> What's stopping us from being able to depend on RHEL modules? Koji now
> supports enabling module streams on a per tag basis, so it *should* be
> possible now.

As far as I know, MBS has no way of handling this case. 

It only knows about modules it itself has built, it doesn't have a way
to tag in an externally built RHEL module to be used as a BuildRequires
for another module. 

https://pagure.io/fm-orchestrator/issue/1653

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220324.n.1 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.1

= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images:  1
Added packages:  5
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   52
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  1.11 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   1.25 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   5.57 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: 
Silverblue/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20220324.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: ghc-double-conversion-2.0.2.0-2.fc37
Summary: Fast conversion between double precision floating point and text
RPMs:ghc-double-conversion ghc-double-conversion-devel 
ghc-double-conversion-doc ghc-double-conversion-prof
Size:388.21 KiB

Package: m1n1-1.0.2-1.fc37
Summary: Bootloader and experimentation playground for Apple Silicon
RPMs:m1n1 m1n1-tools
Size:651.47 KiB

Package: python-py27hash-1.0.2-1.fc37
Summary: Python 2.7 hashing and iteration in Python 3+
RPMs:python3-py27hash
Size:21.81 KiB

Package: python-pytest-env-0.6.2^20170617gitafb13a0-1.fc37
Summary: Plugin for pytest that allows you to add environment variables
RPMs:python3-pytest-env
Size:12.51 KiB

Package: rust-fontconfig-parser-0.5.0-1.fc37
Summary: Fontconfig file parser in pure Rust
RPMs:rust-fontconfig-parser+default-devel 
rust-fontconfig-parser+serde-devel rust-fontconfig-parser+serialize-devel 
rust-fontconfig-parser-devel
Size:66.77 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  atk-2.38.0-1.fc37
Old package:  atk-2.36.0-5.fc36
Summary:  Interfaces for accessibility support
RPMs: atk atk-devel
Size: 2.18 MiB
Size change:  13.25 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Mar 24 2022 David King  - 2.38.0-1
  - Update to 2.38.0


Package:  busybox-1:1.35.0-4.fc37
Old package:  busybox-1:1.35.0-2.fc36
Summary:  Statically linked binary providing simplified versions of system 
commands
RPMs: busybox busybox-petitboot busybox-shared
Added RPMs:   busybox-shared
Size: 4.89 MiB
Size change:  -280.18 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Mar 03 2022 Tom Callaway  - 1:1.35.0-3
  - rework spec to support musl
  - disable uClibc (it does not work, patches welcome)
  - use glibc on epel (where musl does not exist yet)
  - add shared subpackage

  * Tue Mar 22 2022 Tom Callaway  - 1:1.35.0-4
  - do not even try to do i686 builds
  - more disabled features for s390x
  - use glibc instead of musl for ppc64le


Package:  camorama-0.21.2-2.fc37
Old package:  camorama-0.21.1-1.fc37
Summary:  Gnome webcam viewer
RPMs: camorama
Size: 1.35 MiB
Size change:  20.05 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Mar 24 2022 Mauro Carvalho Chehab  - 0.21.2
  - Bump to Version 0.21.2: better handle controls and sliders

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 Mauro Carvalho Chehab  - 0.21.2-1
  - Fix a crash when device is changed while control window is open


Package:  crun-1.4.4-1.fc37
Old package:  crun-1.4.3-1.fc37
Summary:  OCI runtime written in C
RPMs: crun
Size: 747.46 KiB
Size change:  335 B
Changelog:
  * Thu Mar 10 2022 Lokesh Mandvekar  1.4.3-2
  - specify BR: python3 and not python

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 Lokesh Mandvekar  1.4.4-1
  - bump to v1.4.4


Package:  distgen-1.11-1.fc37
Old package:  distgen-1.10-1.fc36
Summary:  Templating system/generator for distributions
RPMs: distgen
Size: 64.40 KiB
Size change:  127 B
Changelog:
  * Thu Mar 24 2022 Zuzana Miklankova  - 1.11-1
  - new upstream release, 
https://github.com/devexp-db/distgen/releases/tag/v1.11


Package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-7792.fc37
Old package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-7782.fc37
Summary:  Dummy Test Package called Gloster
RPMs: dummy-test-package-gloster
Size: 471.48 KiB
Size change:  660 B
Changelog:
  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7783
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7784
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7785
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7786
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7787
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7788
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7789
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7790
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7791
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7792
  - rebuilt


Package:  edk2-20220221gitb24306f15daa-2.fc37
Old package:  edk2-20211126gitbb1bba3d7767-1.fc36
Summary:  UEFI firmware for 64-bit virtual machines
RPMs: edk2-aarch64 edk2-arm edk2-ovmf edk2-ovmf-ia32 edk2-qosb 
edk2-tools edk2-tools-doc edk2-tools-python
Size: 18.60 MiB
Size change:  -165.87 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Jan 20 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
20211126gitbb1bba3d7767-2
  - Rebuilt for https

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

[Sam Varshavchik]

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes:


There are two separate steps here: "daemon-reload" and "restart
testsystemd.service".  Systemd is complaining about "daemon-reload"
missing. It isn't internally cognizant of the fact that
testsystemd.service should be restarted, that is managed by the rpm
scriptlets and "needs-restart" markers. Internally, it just looks at
the file timestamps and knows that it has old config.
RemainAfterExit=true means that the service is pinned even though it
exited, so systemd remembers the old config of the service from before
the upgrade and hence the complaint. The warning goes away after
"daemon-reload".


The point is: WHY is there no daemon-reload?

The timestamps are going to get updated, as a result of theupgrade, whether  
the service is oneshot, or whatever. It doesn't matter.


This is the only thing that the systemd %postinst script inserts into the  
rpm:


if [ $1 -eq 1 ] && [ -x "/usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper" ]; then
   # Initial installation
   /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper install-system-units  
testsystemd.service || :

fi

And this is the postinstall script:

if [ $1 -ge 1 ] && [ -x "/usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper" ]; then
   # Package upgrade, not uninstall
   /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper mark-restart-system-units  
testsystemd.service || :

fi

Looking at that, and at what's in /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.systemd, I  
see absolutely nothing that will execute a daemon-reload after an rpm update.


To me, it's seem rather obvious that an rpm update should trigger, in some  
form or fashion, a daemon reload. Either that, or systemctl should stop  
complaining about a daemon reload.


Note that this is separate from the fact that there's no restart, either.  
There are two issues here: no reload, and no restart.



That the service is "oneshot" matters for the "restart" part. What
systemd actually does, is queue a "try-restart" job for the marked units.
Since this service is not running, that should become noop.
There seems to be a bug in the implementation though: try-restart always
restarts the unit → https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/22850.


Are you saying that if it wasn't a oneshot service, it would get restarted?

That's weird. Because I have a Type=forking service right here that doesn't  
get restarted either.


My oneshot example was merely the most convenient reproducer that I could  
whip up on a moment's notice.


As far as I can tell, it doesn't matter what the service type is, forking or  
not, it does not get restarted. It merely gets marked, and I must manually  
run systemctl reload-or-restart --marked in order to actually restart it. I  
see nothing in the scriptlets that will do it for me.




pgpkZ7IKIHhJ0.pgp
Description: PGP 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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Modules for EPEL9

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:38 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:56:15AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > It was talked about December 2021, and pushed off to the new year.
> > https://pagure.io/epel/issue/135
> > It's the new year, and you are the first this year to ask for it.  So, time
> > to get it back in the discussions.
> > Could you please put what modules you want to build in that ticket, so we
> > can help prioritize it.
>
> Personally, I'd be happy just not doing modules at all for epel9 given
> the limitations we have (cannot build any module that requires rhel
> modules). I'd prefer we have folks just use compatiblity packages
> instead.
>

What's stopping us from being able to depend on RHEL modules? Koji now
supports enabling module streams on a per tag basis, so it *should* be
possible now.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: Handling packages with missing dependencies provided by HA-RS repos?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 09:18:08PM -0500, Carl George wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:54 PM Carl George  wrote:
> >
> > Typically EPEL inherits policy from Fedora, diverging when necessary.
> > Here is the corresponding section of Fedora policy.
> >
> > "All package dependencies (build-time or runtime, regular, weak or
> > otherwise) MUST ALWAYS be satisfiable within the official Fedora
> > repositories."
> >
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_package_dependencies
> >
> > We don't consider HA or RS part of the base RHEL distribution
> > (referred to in policy as the "Target Base").  However, I don't think

Well, for 8 and 9... for 7 we do. ;) 

> > we should strictly forbid any dependency on HA or RS packages, because
> > that would require unnecessary duplication of HA/RS packages in EPEL
> > (which is allowed, but shouldn't be required IMO).  I suggest a
> > compromise that we can make the policy:
> >
> > "All EPEL package dependencies (build-time or runtime) MUST ALWAYS be
> > satisfiable within the Target Base or EPEL itself.  Weak package
> > dependencies are allowed on packages from additional RHEL channels
> > that are not part of the Target Base, such as the HighAvailability
> > channel."
> >
> > --
> > Carl George
> 
> We discussed this a bit further at today's EPEL Steering Committee.
> One alternative that was suggested was to just add the HA and RS repos
> to the target base list.  The initial impact of that would be that
> several packages already in EPEL8 would become policy violations and
> would have to be retired.

Yeah, I guess thats pretty anoying in 8 since we didn't start with them.
;( 

So, if we did allow weak deps to packages in other non our Base repos,
wouldn't that not actually work for the case that started this thread?

ie, say I have a foo-plugin package and foo is in a different non epel
base rhel channel and I add a Reccomends for it in epel. People who have
the channel enabled would be fine but if someone else installed
foo-plugin it would just... not work. 

Also could we tell if deps changed? Say I have foo-plugin in epel
Reccommending foo, and RHEL drops foo. None of our 'will it install' or
broken deps type checks will know that it is now not working. ;( 

If we don't add HA and RS to the base epel repos, I guess we could just
allow people to build those things they need in epel, but then of course
they get to maintain them. ;( 

Perhaps instead of a strict rule we could just ask everything that has
this issue to get an exception? 

Not an easy case. 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: Modules for EPEL9

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:56:15AM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> It was talked about December 2021, and pushed off to the new year.
> https://pagure.io/epel/issue/135
> It's the new year, and you are the first this year to ask for it.  So, time
> to get it back in the discussions.
> Could you please put what modules you want to build in that ticket, so we
> can help prioritize it.

Personally, I'd be happy just not doing modules at all for epel9 given
the limitations we have (cannot build any module that requires rhel
modules). I'd prefer we have folks just use compatiblity packages
instead.

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

[David Duncan]

> On Mar 24, 2022, at 2:44 PM, Richard Shaw  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 3:35 PM Dusty Mabe  wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/24/22 15:46, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan  > > wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw  > > wrote:
> > >
> > > I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was 
> > enough just to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap 
> > when it should be using zswap?
> > >
> > 
> > Are you sure that it is a function of the Virtualbox image? If you 
> > think it still is, can you file an issue for cloud-sig?
> > 
> > 
> > Did the screenshot come through? I'm not sure I understand the question. 
> > VirtualBox seems to default to 8GB VDI image for Linux. I thought it was a 
> > bit low but figured it was worth trying. I upped the VDI image to 20GB and 
> > the install completed.
> > 
> > After install I did confirm that no swap partition/file was created. 
> > Perhaps this is an artifact left over in the installer prior to the move to 
> > zswap and should be removed?
> > 
> 
> I think David was assuming you were using the Vagrant Virtualbox image 
> provided by the Cloud working group.
> 
> It looks like you are doing an Anaconda install, so not using the Vagrant 
> image.
> 
> Ok, yes, I was doing a typical Workstation ISO install.

Sorry about that Richard. Sorry about that. 
___
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: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

[Richard Shaw]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 3:35 PM Dusty Mabe  wrote:

>
>
> On 3/24/22 15:46, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan  davd...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw  > wrote:
> > >
> > > I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was
> enough just to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap
> when it should be using zswap?
> > >
> >
> > Are you sure that it is a function of the Virtualbox image? If you
> think it still is, can you file an issue for cloud-sig?
> >
> >
> > Did the screenshot come through? I'm not sure I understand the question.
> VirtualBox seems to default to 8GB VDI image for Linux. I thought it was a
> bit low but figured it was worth trying. I upped the VDI image to 20GB and
> the install completed.
> >
> > After install I did confirm that no swap partition/file was created.
> Perhaps this is an artifact left over in the installer prior to the move to
> zswap and should be removed?
> >
>
> I think David was assuming you were using the Vagrant Virtualbox image
> provided by the Cloud working group.
>
> It looks like you are doing an Anaconda install, so not using the Vagrant
> image.
>

Ok, yes, I was doing a typical Workstation ISO install.

Thanks,
Richard
___
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: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

[Dusty Mabe]

On 3/24/22 15:46, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan  > wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw  > wrote:
> >
> > I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was enough 
> just to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap when it 
> should be using zswap?
> >
> 
> Are you sure that it is a function of the Virtualbox image? If you think 
> it still is, can you file an issue for cloud-sig?
> 
> 
> Did the screenshot come through? I'm not sure I understand the question. 
> VirtualBox seems to default to 8GB VDI image for Linux. I thought it was a 
> bit low but figured it was worth trying. I upped the VDI image to 20GB and 
> the install completed.
> 
> After install I did confirm that no swap partition/file was created. Perhaps 
> this is an artifact left over in the installer prior to the move to zswap and 
> should be removed?
> 

I think David was assuming you were using the Vagrant Virtualbox image provided 
by the Cloud working group.

It looks like you are doing an Anaconda install, so not using the Vagrant image.

Dusty
___
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: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 09:27:31AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
...snip...

> 
> Package  (co)maintainers   Status 
> Change
> 
> atomic-reactorcverna, infra-sig,   0 weeks ago
>   maxamillion, orphan, twaugh,
>   vrutkovs

I'm going to take atomic-reactor and update it. 

We need this in infra currently for container builds. Hopefully we will
no longer need it after a while, but right now we do. ;( 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

[Fabio Valentini]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 8:57 PM Bruno Wolff III  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:58:17 -0700,
>   Adam Williamson  wrote:
> >On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:52 +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> >>
> >> > If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry.
> >> It's actually quite simple: There are dozens if not hundreds of unpushed
> >> updates pending due to the release freeze, which will be released at the
> >> very moment the freeze will be lifted.
> >
> >This is a statement of a well-known fact, which you have stated before.
> >It doesn't seem to have any purpose.
>
> I will note, that I recognized this issue and am delaying doing some updates
> for f34 and f35 until after the f36 beta freeze is lifted. These aren't urgent
> updates so it is not a big deal. If it is desired not to have a lot of
> downgrades for beta or final it might be useful to publicise to packagers
> that for low priority updates it is preferred that they delay updates during
> beta and/or final freezes.

I don't really understand what you're saying here. Unless your update
is blocked by something else that is not "stable" yet *and* you don't
(or cannot) use a buildroot override, there is *zero* reason not to
submit updates during a freeze. They will be pushed to "testing" as
usual, they will just not be pushed to "stable" until ~a day after the
F36 beta (or final) is GO.

Fabio
___
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: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 14:28 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 1:36 PM Ben Cotton  wrote:
> 
> > The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC4 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live
> > on Tuesday, 29 March 2022.
> > 
> 
> Fedora 36 obviously :)
> 
> Anyway, I just tried to install it in VirtualBox and got the following odd
> problem:
> 
> [image: image.png]
> 
> I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was enough just
> to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap when it
> should be using zswap?

Looking at it very quickly, it looks a lot like that particular
calculation just doesn't take into account whether there's actually
going to *be* a swap partition or not. It looks like it wasn't updated
for the "don't create swap by default" change; the code was written
before that, so it could safely just assume the automatic partitioning
would create one.

In more technical detail, the codepath is here:

https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/master/pyanaconda/ui/gui/spokes/storage.py#L622

note how we call `auto_swap = suggest_swap_size()` and include it in
the calculation, just...unconditionally? `suggest_swap_size()` is just
a number cruncher, it doesn't know or care whether a swap partition is
actually going to be included either. So in this "needed space
calculation" code we're just always leaving room for a swap partition,
even if the default or specified partition layout wouldn't include one.
At least, that's how it looks to me.

I don't think this is new in F36, though, it's probably been this way
all along.

It should definitely be filed as a bug on anaconda. I guess I'll do
that.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

___
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: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:58:17 -0700,
 Adam Williamson  wrote:

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:52 +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote:


> If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry.
It's actually quite simple: There are dozens if not hundreds of unpushed
updates pending due to the release freeze, which will be released at the
very moment the freeze will be lifted.


This is a statement of a well-known fact, which you have stated before.
It doesn't seem to have any purpose.


I will note, that I recognized this issue and am delaying doing some updates 
for f34 and f35 until after the f36 beta freeze is lifted. These aren't urgent 
updates so it is not a big deal. If it is desired not to have a lot of 
downgrades for beta or final it might be useful to publicise to packagers 
that for low priority updates it is preferred that they delay updates during 
beta and/or final freezes.

___
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: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

[Richard Shaw]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw  wrote:
> >
> > I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was enough
> just to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap when
> it should be using zswap?
> >
>
> Are you sure that it is a function of the Virtualbox image? If you think
> it still is, can you file an issue for cloud-sig?
>

Did the screenshot come through? I'm not sure I understand the question.
VirtualBox seems to default to 8GB VDI image for Linux. I thought it was a
bit low but figured it was worth trying. I upped the VDI image to 20GB and
the install completed.

After install I did confirm that no swap partition/file was created.
Perhaps this is an artifact left over in the installer prior to the move to
zswap and should be removed?

Thanks,
Richard
___
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: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 20:23 +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> Am 24.03.22 um 18:53 schrieb Adam Williamson:
> > 
> > It's been stuck for five days, not a week. After a week it will be
> > 
> 
> It's a crit update with security implications and needs that push to 
> stable, when the basis tests have been finished ( 6 days ago btw ) . I 
> know it had one automated test failed, but thats AFAICS just the 
> filesize check from jenkins.
> 
> Can someone now pls push it?

In point of fact, no. Nobody can. It needs either more positive karma
or two more days in testing, under the policy. As I said, the automated
test failure is irrelevant to this.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

___
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: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 8:00 AM  wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> You are kindly invited to the meeting:
>ELN SIG on 2022-03-25 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
>At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat
>
> The meeting will be about:

* ELN Extras
* 32-bit x86 support
___
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: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

[David Duncan]

Hi, 

> On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw  wrote:
> 
> I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was enough just 
> to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap when it 
> should be using zswap?
> 

Are you sure that it is a function of the Virtualbox image? If you think it 
still is, can you file an issue for cloud-sig? 
___
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: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

[Marius Schwarz]

Am 24.03.22 um 18:53 schrieb Adam Williamson:


It's been stuck for five days, not a week. After a week it will be



It's a crit update with security implications and needs that push to 
stable, when the basis tests have been finished ( 6 days ago btw ) . I 
know it had one automated test failed, but thats AFAICS just the 
filesize check from jenkins.


Can someone now pls push it?

Best regards,
Marius Schwarz




___
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-36-20220324.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 7/229 (x86_64), 10/161 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220323.n.0):

ID: 1193652 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gnome_text_editor
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193652
ID: 1193670 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193670
ID: 1193732 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso support_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193732
ID: 1193765 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_nfs_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193765
ID: 1193835 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193835
ID: 1193959 Test: aarch64 universal install_scsi_updates_img@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193959
ID: 1193980 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_printing@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193980

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-36-20220323.n.0):

ID: 1193659 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193659
ID: 1193687 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193687
ID: 1193762 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193762
ID: 1193819 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193819
ID: 1193841 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193841
ID: 1193872 Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193872
ID: 1193907 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193907
ID: 1193945 Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193945
ID: 1193966 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193966
ID: 1193981 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193981

Soft failed openQA tests: 8/229 (x86_64), 4/161 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-36-20220323.n.0):

ID: 1193655 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193655
ID: 1193680 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193680
ID: 1193697 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso eog
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193697
ID: 1193702 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193702
ID: 1193704 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193704
ID: 1193705 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gnome_text_editor
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193705
ID: 1193711 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193711
ID: 1193805 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193805
ID: 1193813 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193813
ID: 1193848 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193848
ID: 1193995 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193995
ID: 1193996 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193996

Passed openQA tests: 147/161 (aarch64), 214/229 (x86_64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-36-20220323.n.0):

ID: 1193720 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193720
ID: 1193754 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
server_freeipa_replication_master@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193754
ID: 1193770 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193770
ID: 1193772 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
server_freeipa_replication_replica@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193772
ID: 1193773 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
server_freeipa_replication_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193773
ID: 1193883 Test: x86_64 universal install_with_swap
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193883

Installed system changes in test x86_64 Everything-boot-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.25 to 0.13
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1191579#downloads
Current test data: 

Fedora-IoT-36-20220324.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220320.0):

ID: 1194014 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194014

Passed openQA tests: 14/15 (aarch64), 15/15 (x86_64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220320.0):

ID: 1194017 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194017
ID: 1194018 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194018

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.02 to 0.13
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1185665#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193999#downloads

Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.28 to 0.13
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1185681#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194015#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
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 Linux 36 Beta is GO

[Ben Cotton]

The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC4 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live
on Tuesday, 29 March 2022.

For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[2] or log[3].

Thank you to everyone who has and still is working on this release!
The Final Freeze begins on
Tuesday 5 April.

[1] https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/36_Beta-1.4/
[2] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-24/f36-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2022-03-24-17.00.html
[3] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-24/f36-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2022-03-24-17.00.log.html

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

[Ben Cotton]

The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC4 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live
on Tuesday, 29 March 2022.

For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[2] or log[3].

Thank you to everyone who has and still is working on this release!
The Final Freeze begins on
Tuesday 5 April.

[1] https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/36_Beta-1.4/
[2] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-24/f36-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2022-03-24-17.00.html
[3] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-24/f36-beta-go_no_go-meeting.2022-03-24-17.00.log.html

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
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

[Bug 2065866] perl-Devel-PPPort-3.68 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-14daeeb5c5 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-14daeeb5c5`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-14daeeb5c5

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2063504] perl-App-Cme-1.038 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063504

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-eda5c85147 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-eda5c85147`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eda5c85147

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063504
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065018] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-e3ff310483 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-e3ff310483`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-e3ff310483

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065327] perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.62 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065327



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065327
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2063243] perl-Data-MessagePack-1.02 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063243

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-89e04dbc76 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-89e04dbc76`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-89e04dbc76

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063243
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2064808] Update perl to 5.34.1

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2064642] F37FailsToInstall: perl-PAR-Packer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064642



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064642
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2064753] perl-PDL-2.077 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064753

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||2068241





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068241
[Bug 2068241] Review Request: perl-OpenGL-GLUT - Perl bindings to GLUT/FreeGLUT
GUI toolkit
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064753
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:52 +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
> 
> > If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry.
> It's actually quite simple: There are dozens if not hundreds of unpushed 
> updates pending due to the release freeze, which will be released at the 
> very moment the freeze will be lifted.

This is a statement of a well-known fact, which you have stated before.
It doesn't seem to have any purpose.

> 
> The consequences are:
> - You guys are testing outdated stuff

This is, on the whole, not true, because the updates-testing repository
is enabled by default. Most people using F36 are not testing outdated
stuff, they are testing current stuff.

> - After fedora goes gold, all these packages will be updated.

This is, again, an apparently purposeless statement of fact. In
particular, as Fabio explained, it is irrelevant to this thread,
because he runs his check with updates-testing enabled.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

___
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: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:46 +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> hi all,
> 
> the critpath update for httpd-2.4.53.fc34 is stuck in updates-testing. 
> bodhi reports a pending test for this package.
> 
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-21264ec6db
> 
> I can confirm, that i rolled out this update on my web->cluster<- and 
> pages do still work. httpd test suite passed (php, ssl, static ). Pls 
> push it to stable.

It's been stuck for five days, not a week. After a week it will be
pushed automatically, because that's what the maintainer set. Nothing
to do with automated testing is holding it up; its gating status is
passed. It just hasn't been pushed yet because it didn't get enough
karma to be auto-pushed.

It seems just not a lot of people run N-2 with updates-testing enabled,
unfortunately. We always get much more karma for N-1 than for N-2.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net

___
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: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

[Ralf Corsépius]

Am 24.03.22 um 18:07 schrieb Fabio Valentini:

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 5:58 PM Ralf Corsépius  wrote:

(...)


Oh noes, the list isn't really getting shorter ...


It's Fedora's old release management flaw ;)

As usual at these times of the release cycle, Fedora 36 is in deep
freeze, i.e. package updates are not getting pushed, which causes
gradually causing them to pile up and "testers" wasting time on testing
outdated stuff.

That said, I am waiting for some packages to getting pushed for almost 4
weeks and me gradually getting angry at everybody being involved!


Did you send this just for TROLZ or did you want to contribute
something productive?
This is absolutely no troll, but a serious complaint about a long 
withstanding issue from FESCO, release-eng or whoever might be involved 
has ever addressed.




If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry.
It's actually quite simple: There are dozens if not hundreds of unpushed 
updates pending due to the release freeze, which will be released at the 
very moment the freeze will be lifted.


The consequences are:
- You guys are testing outdated stuff
- After fedora goes gold, all these packages will be updated.

Ralf
___
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

CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

[Marius Schwarz]

hi all,

the critpath update for httpd-2.4.53.fc34 is stuck in updates-testing. 
bodhi reports a pending test for this package.


https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-21264ec6db

I can confirm, that i rolled out this update on my web->cluster<- and 
pages do still work. httpd test suite passed (php, ssl, static ). Pls 
push it to stable.



best regards,
Marius Schwarz

___
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 36 compose report: 20220324.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-36-20220323.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220324.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images:  3
Added packages:  0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   6
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   175.00 MiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   -35.37 KiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Container_Minimal_Base docker armhfp
Path: 
Container/armhfp/images/Fedora-Container-Minimal-Base-36-20220323.n.0.armhfp.tar.xz
Image: Cloud_Base raw-xz s390x
Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-36-20220323.n.0.s390x.raw.xz
Image: Cloud_Base qcow2 s390x
Path: Cloud/s390x/images/Fedora-Cloud-Base-36-20220323.n.0.s390x.qcow2

= ADDED PACKAGES =

= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  gnome-initial-setup-42.0-2.fc36
Old package:  gnome-initial-setup-42~rc-1.fc36
Summary:  Bootstrapping your OS
RPMs: gnome-initial-setup
Size: 5.75 MiB
Size change:  1.93 KiB
Changelog:
  * Fri Mar 18 2022 David King  - 42.0-1
  - Update to 42.0

  * Mon Mar 21 2022 Adam Williamson  - 42.0-2
  - Revert dark theme support to fix user keyring password (#2066424)


Package:  hunspell-1.7.0-19.fc36
Old package:  hunspell-1.7.0-17.fc36
Summary:  A spell checker and morphological analyzer library
RPMs: hunspell hunspell-devel hunspell-filesystem
Size: 2.25 MiB
Size change:  5.38 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Mar 07 2022 Caol??n McNamara  - 1.7.0-18
  - Resolves: rhbz#2060751 - ???hunspell -D??? lists dictionaries twice

  * Wed Mar 16 2022 Jens Petersen  - 1.7.0-19
  - rework the new hunspell dictionary directory (#2064189)
  - drop the myspell/ compatibility symlink
  - keep myspell/ as directory and also the new hunspell/ dir
  - because of this drop the duplicate directory patch for #2060751
  - filesystem scriptlets are no more


Package:  kwin-5.24.3-3.fc36
Old package:  kwin-5.24.3-2.fc36
Summary:  KDE Window manager
RPMs: kwin kwin-common kwin-devel kwin-doc kwin-libs kwin-wayland 
kwin-x11
Size: 33.23 MiB
Size change:  6.33 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Mar 21 2022 Adam Williamson  - 5.24.3-3
  - Backport MR #2163 (edited to cover vbox) to fix VM cursor offset (#2063969)


Package:  mutter-42~rc-5.fc36
Old package:  mutter-42~rc-4.fc36
Summary:  Window and compositing manager based on Clutter
RPMs: mutter mutter-devel mutter-tests
Size: 17.37 MiB
Size change:  1.26 KiB
Changelog:
  * Mon Mar 14 2022 Adam Williamson  - 42~rc-5
  - Backport MR #2299 to avoid a commonly-encountered crash (#2063381)


Package:  openssl-1:3.0.2-1.fc36
Old package:  openssl-1:3.0.0-1.fc36
Summary:  Utilities from the general purpose cryptography library with TLS 
implementation
RPMs: openssl openssl-devel openssl-libs openssl-perl
Size: 35.48 MiB
Size change:  61.95 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Jan 20 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1:3.0.0-2
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild

  * Fri Mar 18 2022 Dmitry Belyavskiy  - 1:3.0.2-1
  - Rebase to upstream version 3.0.2


Package:  systemd-250.3-8.fc36
Old package:  systemd-250.3-4.fc36
Summary:  System and Service Manager
RPMs: systemd systemd-container systemd-devel systemd-journal-remote 
systemd-libs systemd-networkd systemd-oomd-defaults systemd-pam 
systemd-resolved systemd-rpm-macros systemd-standalone-sysusers 
systemd-standalone-tmpfiles systemd-tests systemd-udev
Size: 80.92 MiB
Size change:  -112.22 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Feb 23 2022 Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek  - 250.3-5
  - Move part of %post scriptlet for resolved to %posttrans (#2018913)
  - Specify owner of utmp/wtmp/btmp/lastlog as root in the rpm listing

  * Thu Feb 24 2022 Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek  - 250.3-6
  - Avoid trying to create the symlink if there's a dangling symlink already in
place (#2058388)

  * Mon Mar 14 2022 Michael Catanzaro  - 250.3-7
  - Disable default DNS over TLS (#1889901)

  * Thu Mar 17 2022 Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek  - 250.3-7
  - Move libcryptsetup plugins to -udev (#2064804)

  * Fri Mar 18 2022 Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek  - 250.3-8
  - Fix the wrong file assignment done in previous version



= DOWNGRADED PACKAGES =___
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: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

[Fabio Valentini]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 5:58 PM Ralf Corsépius  wrote:

(...)

> > Oh noes, the list isn't really getting shorter ...
>
> It's Fedora's old release management flaw ;)
>
> As usual at these times of the release cycle, Fedora 36 is in deep
> freeze, i.e. package updates are not getting pushed, which causes
> gradually causing them to pile up and "testers" wasting time on testing
> outdated stuff.
>
> That said, I am waiting for some packages to getting pushed for almost 4
> weeks and me gradually getting angry at everybody being involved!

Did you send this just for TROLZ or did you want to contribute
something productive?
If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry.

I ran the checks against F35 and F36 *with updates-testing enabled*
(so the beta freeze does not affect it at all).

And then I even manually filtered out all false positives:
- updates being pushed to "testing" or stuck in "pending" at different
points in time
- updates reaching my local mirror at different points in time

So all entries in the list I posted are *actual, real problems caused
by human error*.

Fabio
___
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

[Bug 1939439] perl-MouseX-App-Cmd-0.30-20.fc35 FTBFS: Failed test 'Internal hashes match' at t/build_emulates_new.t line 18.

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939439

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-f865a50115 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f865a50115


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939439
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1964649] F35FailsToInstall: perl-MouseX-App-Cmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-f865a50115 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f865a50115


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

[Ralf Corsépius]

Am 24.03.22 um 17:51 schrieb Fabio Valentini:

On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 2:32 PM Fabio Valentini  wrote:


Hi all,

Yes, it's that time of the year again. Looks like it's not *that* bad
this time round, but the fact that this keeps happening probably means
some of our processes are broken ... (or, since some usernames are
attached to multiple entries in the list below, maybe it's just a lack
of understanding).


Oh noes, the list isn't really getting shorter ...


It's Fedora's old release management flaw ;)

As usual at these times of the release cycle, Fedora 36 is in deep 
freeze, i.e. package updates are not getting pushed, which causes 
gradually causing them to pile up and "testers" wasting time on testing 
outdated stuff.


That said, I am waiting for some packages to getting pushed for almost 4 
weeks and me gradually getting angry at everybody being involved!


Ralf
___
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: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

[Fabio Valentini]

On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 2:32 PM Fabio Valentini  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Yes, it's that time of the year again. Looks like it's not *that* bad
> this time round, but the fact that this keeps happening probably means
> some of our processes are broken ... (or, since some usernames are
> attached to multiple entries in the list below, maybe it's just a lack
> of understanding).

Oh noes, the list isn't really getting shorter ...
Some things have been fixed (thanks for that!), but there's a few new
problems, too:

- annobin-0:10.58-1.fc35 > annobin-0:10.57-3.fc36
Version 10.58 was built for F35 and F37, but not F36. *sigh*, annobin ... *sigh*

- gnome-tweaks-0:40.10-1.fc35 > gnome-tweaks-0:40.0-5.fc36
Update to 42~beta was unpushed from F36 for ~reasons~.

- thunderbird-0:91.7.0-1.fc35 > thunderbird-0:91.4.0-1.fc36
Version 91.7.0 was built for F36 a week ago, but was not submitted to bodhi.

- wireplumber-0:0.4.9-1.fc35 > wireplumber-0:0.4.8-3.fc36
Version 0.4.9 was submitted to F35 and F37, but the build failed for F36.

Fabio
___
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: Retire unused nose plugins?

[Miro Hrončok]

On 21. 04. 20 15:58, Matthias Runge wrote:

On 21/04/2020 12:55, Miro Hrončok wrote:

Hello.

Given https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateNose would you be
OK if I retire python-nose_fixes, python-nose-xcover and
python-nose-testconfig in rawhide?

Nothing in Fedora depends on them:

$ repoquery --repo=rawhide{,-source} --whatrequires python3-nose_fixes
$ repoquery --repo=rawhide{,-source} --whatrequires python3-nose-xcover
$ repoquery --repo=rawhide{,-source} --whatrequires python3-nose-testconfig

Thanks,

yes, sure!



There seem to be 2 more that can be dropped:

$ repoquery --repo=rawhide{,-source} --whatrequires python3-nose_fixes
$ repoquery --repo=rawhide{,-source} --whatrequires python3-nose-cover3

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2064054] perl-HTML-Parser-3.77 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-HTML-Parser-3.77-1.fc3 |perl-HTML-Parser-3.77-1.fc3
   |4   |4
   ||perl-HTML-Parser-3.77-1.fc3
   ||5



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-9cc10cb703 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: fedpkg request-branch doesn't work as expected

[Petr Pisar]

V Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:24:35AM -0600, Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
> When I do:
> 
> [orion@vmrawhide-rufous zabbix (rawhide *+)]$ fedpkg request-branch
> --no-auto-module --sl rawhide:2027-06-01 -- 6.0
> 
> It generates a request for a branch named "rawhide".  I'm following:
[...]
> Is this a bug in fedpkg or an issue with the docs?
> 
It is bug in the the very old documentation. An update is on the way
.

-- Petr


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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

[Bug 2066942] perl-Class-Accessor-Lite: please provide epel9 package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066942

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-960b555aeb has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-960b555aeb

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066942
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   6  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-1edabe7090   
openssl3-3.0.1-18.el8.1
   5  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-883139a5ce   
openvpn-2.4.12-1.el8
   2  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-85bd5fc48f   
rsh-0.17-94.el8
   2  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-c5da356c8d   
unrealircd-6.0.2-1.el8
   1  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b042a4581a   
java-latest-openjdk-17.0.2.0.8-1.rolling.el8


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing

cswrap-2.2.0-1.el8
distgen-1.11-1.el8
libdispatch-5.6.0-2.el8
python-keyring-21.5.0-2.el8

Details about builds:



 cswrap-2.2.0-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-18d47c7bcd)
 Generic compiler wrapper

Update Information:

- update to latest upstream release

ChangeLog:

* Wed Mar 23 2022 Kamil Dudka  2.2.0-1
- update to latest upstream




 distgen-1.11-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-7ccdb3826d)
 Templating system/generator for distributions

Update Information:

Update to 1.11

ChangeLog:

* Thu Mar 24 2022 Zuzana Miklankova  - 1.11-1
- new upstream release, https://github.com/devexp-db/distgen/releases/tag/v1.11




 libdispatch-5.6.0-2.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-cad1feebed)
 Apple's Grand Central Dispatch library

Update Information:

Added patch to allow for building on EPEL-8

ChangeLog:

* Wed Mar 23 2022 Ron Olson  5.6.0-2
- Added patch to allow for building on EPEL-8
* Tue Mar 22 2022 Ron Olson  5.6.0-1
- Updated to 5.6.0-RELEASE
* Tue Dec 14 2021 Ron Olson  5.5.2-1
- Updated to 5.5.2-RELEASE
* Fri Oct 29 2021 Ron Olson  5.5.1-1
- Updated to 5.5.1-RELEASE




 python-keyring-21.5.0-2.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2022-91548edc87)
 Store and access your passwords safely

Update Information:

Fix dependency on python-importlib-metadata for rhbz#1941234 in EPEL8 branch

ChangeLog:

* Tue Mar 22 2022 Benjamin A. Beasley  - 21.5.0-2
- Allow importlib-metadata 0.23 (fix RHBZ#1941234)
* Mon Nov  9 2020 Joel Capitao  - 21.5.0-1
- Update to 21.5.0 (rhbz#1873845)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1941234 - Dependency on python-importlib-metadata >= 1 at EPEL 8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941234


___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1964649] F35FailsToInstall: perl-MouseX-App-Cmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649

Miro Hrončok  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |NEW
 Resolution|WONTFIX |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #5 from Miro Hrončok  ---
But not on Fedora 35. That's not possible. Reopening, or else the automation
opens a new bugzilla.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 08:06:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-03-22 at 11:55 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On the first part: yes, there's a long, slow sunset, but I think
> > realistically we're going to see business-side attention drop significantly,
> > and we'll have correspondingly worse and worse service. Right now, there are
> > basically only two people keeping it all going, which is heroic. I don't
> > think it's too much pulling-back-the-corporate-curtain to guess that if one
> > or both get tired of that and decide to go start a yak farm, Red Hat won't
> > prioritize hiring backfill dedicated in the same way.
> 
> There is one thing I worry about here - and maybe we need to take this
> up internally within Red Hat, but whatever - I strongly believe that
> *at a minimum*, going to
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=NNN should show you the
> report, comments, and attachments for bug NNN. *Forever*. RH Bugzilla
> is effectively a huge, 20-year long knowledge base at this point.
> Probably hundreds of thousands of places on the internet link to RH
> bugs. Taking that offline would be effectively an act of vandalism.

It would be an act of massive self-harm to Red Hat too, not merely
community projects using it.

As a RHEL package maintainer, I frequently consult old bugs, from
links we have embedded in patches / changelogs / mailing lists /
commits. It is not unknown for me to look at bugs *10-15* years old
to understand the history of why something was done the way it is.

IOW, even if RHEL changes to use Jira for all future bug tracking
tomorrow, the need to reference bugzilla tickets could remain for
literally decades to come. Jira has been mirroring some bugzilla
content for a while, but that's by no means a complete archive
of relevant history, and still leaves the problem if figuring out
the matching link.

> It may not need to keep actually working as a dynamic web app if we do
> retire BZ - we could reduce it to a server that just serves up static
> snapshots of the content - but I'd really hate to see the content lost.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com  -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
___
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

[Bug 2065018] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-d7d78608d2 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-d7d78608d2`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d7d78608d2

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

[Demi Marie Obenour]

On 3/22/22 11:55, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 07:17:16AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> If you mean try having a conversation with the community before
>> something goes into effect... that's what this thread is.  Depending
>> on how you count, at least a year in advance if not 3.
> 
> I was going to reply last week, but last week kind of turned out to be One
> Of Those Weeks. Here's what I'm thinking: we should plan to migrate to
> something else in the next three years. There are two reasons for this, and
> only one of them is that Red Hat is moving away. The second is that Bugzilla
> isn't a great tool for what we need anyway.
> 
> On the first part: yes, there's a long, slow sunset, but I think
> realistically we're going to see business-side attention drop significantly,
> and we'll have correspondingly worse and worse service. Right now, there are
> basically only two people keeping it all going, which is heroic. I don't
> think it's too much pulling-back-the-corporate-curtain to guess that if one
> or both get tired of that and decide to go start a yak farm, Red Hat won't
> prioritize hiring backfill dedicated in the same way. We could ask CPE to
> keep it going, but... there's so much more I'd like to ask CPE. (And non-CPE
> volunteers? There's so much that's more interesting!)
> 
> So to the second part: Bugzilla isn't what we really need anyway.
> 
> I'm not saying Bugzilla has been terrible — it's served us well, in fact.
> And I have personal fondness for it that, which I do not for, say, the wiki.
> :) Buzilla is it's deeply integrated in a lot of our processes, and we've
> got a lot of automations and so on. It's important. But... there's a lot
> that could be better. I think specifically:
> 
> 1. It doesn't serve as a single place to track everything. We've got stuff
>scattered around Bugzilla; issue trackers in Pagure GitLab, and GitHub;
>pull requests in all of those places; and more. Not to mention upstreams
>(and inconsistent approaches to tracking upstream issues). I'm not
>arguing that we need ALL things in one place, but it's important that
>Bugzilla isn't that now anyway.
> 
> 2. Bugzilla a terrible experience for end users. Usually it's the _Wrong
>Place_. When a user has a problem, that may or may not be caused by a
>software defect. This is a whole topic of its own, but in short, it's
>really better for most users to report problems at Ask Fedora, and then
>possibly after triage a bug should be filed and tracked somewhere.
> 
>Many of our users _are_ advanced and recognize real defects and file good
>reports, but this leads to even more frustration, because our response is
>inconsistent. Maybe that report should actually be upstream. Maybe it's
>in a dependency package that's really only loosely maintained. For
>whatever reason, a lot of perfectly good reports end up closed EOL, which
>is never a good outcome.
> 
> 3. We're inconsistent with PRs vs issues, which is confusing and makes more
>duplication. I have seen cases where a packager complained that someone
>filed a PR that they never noticed, saying "this should be a bug so I'll
>see it", while others close bugs with "please send a PR". We could make
>stronger statements about policies, but as long as these two things exist
>in separate places, that tension will keep coming back.
> 
> Plus plenty of minor things: Our workflow still is shoehorned around a bunch
> of RH-centric stuff (lots of fields, flags, and statuses that we don't
> really use or want). It's not great for the review workflow, or for some of
> the other things we've twisted it to. A component-centric approach makes it
> hard to track larger issues. The SCM workflow is ... not good.
> 
> And I'm sure there's more. But I'm not really here to _complain_ about
> Bugzilla. It's just actually not filling our needs. I therefore think that
> Jira / issues.redhat.com wouldn't either — although it's got a ton of
> features on top, it's fundamentally the same kind of thing.
> 
> We need define exactly what we do need, and figure out how to get _that_, in
> a sustainable way going forward. And fortunately, we DO have a few years, so
> for once we could do this _before_ it's a crisis.
> 
> I think we should create a project to figure this out. In fact, I think it
> should be a Fedora Objective. But, it also shouldn't be a completely
> blue-sky initiative — we should avoid trying to develop a new gigantic piece
> of software that we own. (See past results on that, *sigh*.)
> 
> We do have some pieces already in place that should be part of the
> foundation (or at least other metaphorical bricks in the construction):
> 
> 1. Ask Fedora is the place for users to report and discuss problems. This is
>our first-line of support, and it's where we can do triage. Then,
>software defects may or may not be tracked relating to those
>conversations.
> 
> 2. Package-specific 

Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 08:06:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> There is one thing I worry about here - and maybe we need to take this
> up internally within Red Hat, but whatever - I strongly believe that
> *at a minimum*, going to
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=NNN should show you the
> report, comments, and attachments for bug NNN. *Forever*. RH Bugzilla
> is effectively a huge, 20-year long knowledge base at this point.
> Probably hundreds of thousands of places on the internet link to RH
> bugs. Taking that offline would be effectively an act of vandalism.
> 
> It may not need to keep actually working as a dynamic web app if we do
> retire BZ - we could reduce it to a server that just serves up static
> snapshots of the content - but I'd really hate to see the content lost.

Yeah, agreed. There's a lot of useful history!

For what it's worth, Wayback Machine links like
https://web.archive.org/web/20120719062752/https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998
seem to generally work. I wonder if we could officially "donate" it all to
them.

-- 
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 Linux 36 Beta Go/No-Go meeting today

[Ben Cotton]

I have returned from PTO, so you're getting this reminder ~2 hours
prior to the meeting instead of the usual "the day before." But in any
case, the Fedora Linux 36 Beta Go/No-Go[1] meeting
is scheduled for Thursday 24 March at 1700 UTC in #fedora-meeting. At
this time, we will determine the status of the F36 Beta for the 29
March target date #2[2]. For more information about the Go/No-Go
meeting, see the wiki[3].

[1] https://calendar.fedoraproject.org/meeting/10209/
[2] https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-36/f-36-key-tasks.html
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Go_No_Go_Meeting

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065018] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cd2b682eb8 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-cd2b682eb8`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cd2b682eb8

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Minimal raw-xz armhfp

Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
3 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** 
below

Failed openQA tests: 9/231 (x86_64), 14/161 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220323.n.1):

ID: 1192954 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192954
ID: 1192958 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192958
ID: 1192965 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_no_user **GATING**
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192965
ID: 1193017 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
server_role_deploy_domain_controller@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193017
ID: 1193020 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193020
ID: 1193031 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_hd_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193031
ID: 1193052 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193052
ID: 1193119 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_printing@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193119
ID: 1193120 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade evince@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193120
ID: 1193126 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_update_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193126

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220323.n.1):

ID: 1192953 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192953
ID: 1192975 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192975
ID: 1192983 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192983
ID: 1193032 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso mediakit_repoclosure@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193032
ID: 1193037 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193037
ID: 1193048 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193048
ID: 1193068 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193068
ID: 1193109 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_fprint
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193109
ID: 1193123 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193123
ID: 1193154 Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193154
ID: 1193189 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193189
ID: 1193227 Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193227
ID: 1193248 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193248

Soft failed openQA tests: 12/231 (x86_64), 10/161 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220323.n.1):

ID: 1192935 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192935
ID: 1192939 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192939
ID: 1192950 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192950
ID: 1192992 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192992
ID: 1193044 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193044
ID: 1193082 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193082
ID: 1193083 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193083
ID: 1193087 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193087
ID: 1193092 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade upgrade_desktop_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193092
ID: 1193095 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193095
ID: 1193101 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193101
ID: 1193114 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade upgrade_desktop_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193114
ID: 1193117 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade 

[Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta Go/No-Go meeting today

[Ben Cotton]

I have returned from PTO, so you're getting this reminder ~2 hours
prior to the meeting instead of the usual "the day before." But in any
case, the Fedora Linux 36 Beta Go/No-Go[1] meeting
is scheduled for Thursday 24 March at 1700 UTC in #fedora-meeting. At
this time, we will determine the status of the F36 Beta for the 29
March target date #2[2]. For more information about the Go/No-Go
meeting, see the wiki[3].

[1] https://calendar.fedoraproject.org/meeting/10209/
[2] https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-36/f-36-key-tasks.html
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Go_No_Go_Meeting

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
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

[Bug 1964649] F35FailsToInstall: perl-MouseX-App-Cmd

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jples...@redhat.com
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2022-03-24 14:56:01



--- Comment #4 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
The package was retired.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964649
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] Re: Modules for EPEL9

[Troy Dawson]

It was talked about December 2021, and pushed off to the new year.
https://pagure.io/epel/issue/135
It's the new year, and you are the first this year to ask for it.  So, time
to get it back in the discussions.
Could you please put what modules you want to build in that ticket, so we
can help prioritize it.

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 5:24 PM Orion Poplawski  wrote:

> Is there a timeline for supporting building modules for EPEL9?  At the
> moment I get:
>
> Could not execute module_build: The build failed with:
> None of the base module (platform or bootstrap) streams in the
> buildrequires section could be found
>
> --
> Orion Poplawski
> he/him/his  - surely the least important thing about me
> IT Systems Manager 720-772-5637
> NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
> 3380 Mitchell Lane   or...@nwra.com
> Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/
> ___
> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> 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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2066641] perl-ORLite-1.98-27.fc37 FTBFS: Failed test '->table_info ok' with sqlite ≥ 3.38.0

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066641

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Fixed In Version||perl-ORLite-1.98-28.fc37
 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mmasl...@redhat.com |
Last Closed||2022-03-24 14:52:56




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066641
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2064054] perl-HTML-Parser-3.77 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-HTML-Parser-3.77-1.fc3
   ||4
Last Closed||2022-03-24 14:52:20



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-897a7321e9 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 on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

[Miro Hrončok]

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life

Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the affected
packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the affected package or
retire your depending package to avoid broken dependencies, otherwise your
package will fail to install and/or build when the affected package gets 
retired.

Request package ownership via the *Take* button in he left column on
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/

Full report available at:
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2022-03-22.txt
grep it for your FAS username and follow the dependency chain.

For human readable dependency chains,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/
For all orphaned packages,
see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/orphan

Package  (co)maintainers   Status Change

atomic-reactorcverna, infra-sig,   0 weeks ago
  maxamillion, orphan, twaugh,
  vrutkovs
augeas-vala   orphan   3 weeks ago
beanstalk-client  orphan   2 weeks ago
gela-asis orphan, reznik   0 weeks ago
gimp-fourier-plugin   orphan   3 weeks ago
gocl  orphan   3 weeks ago
golang-github-mdlayher-wifi   go-sig, orphan   1 weeks ago
javahelp2 orphan   6 weeks ago
lua-ldap  orphan   2 weeks ago
matreshka orphan, reznik, rombobeorn   0 weeks ago
mingw-llvmorphan   0 weeks ago
python-aiohttp-cors   orphan, python-sig   2 weeks ago
python-aiohttp-negotiate  orphan   2 weeks ago
python-blessings  orphan   2 weeks ago
python-fastimport orphan   2 weeks ago
python-hkdf   orphan   3 weeks ago
python-lrparsing  orphan   2 weeks ago
python-magic-wormhole orphan   3 weeks ago
python-magic-wormhole-mailbox-orphan   3 weeks ago
  server
python-magic-wormhole-transit-orphan   3 weeks ago
  relay
python-ofxparse   orphan   2 weeks ago
python-plyvel orphan   2 weeks ago
python-pystalkorphan   2 weeks ago
python-spake2 orphan   3 weeks ago
python-txtorcon   orphan   3 weeks ago
qcommandline  orphan   2 weeks ago
qt5-qtcanvas3dkde-sig, orphan  0 weeks ago
qt5-qtenginio kde-sig, lupinix, orphan 0 weeks ago
rpg-cli   orphan, rust-sig 5 weeks ago
rubygem-database_cleaner  orphan   4 weeks ago
rust-diffus   orphan, rust-sig 0 weeks ago
rust-diffus-deriveorphan, rust-sig 0 weeks ago
rust-newsblur_api orphan, rust-sig 0 weeks ago
rust-opml orphan, rust-sig 0 weeks ago
rust-xmltree  orphan, rust-sig 0 weeks ago
sems  orphan   0 weeks ago
w_scanorphan   5 weeks ago
yecht orphan   1 weeks ago

The following packages require above mentioned packages:
Report too long, see the full version at
https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2022-03-22.txt

See dependency chains of your packages at
https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/
See all orphaned packages at https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/orphan

Affected (co)maintainers (either directly or via packages' dependencies):
cverna: atomic-reactor
eclipseo: golang-github-mdlayher-wifi
go-sig: golang-github-mdlayher-wifi
ignatenkobrain: rust-xmltree, rust-diffus, rust-diffus-derive, 
rust-newsblur_api, rust-opml

infra-sig: atomic-reactor
kde-sig: qt5-qtcanvas3d, qt5-qtenginio
kwizart: 

Re: RPM build: unpackaged file .pyi

[Miro Hrončok]

On 24. 03. 22 13:19, Ben Beasley wrote:
This is a “stub file” for type checking. It looks like upstream is trying to 
follow https://peps.python.org/pep-0484 rather than the later 
https://peps.python.org/pep-0561/. However, the way they are installing the 
stub file with data_files in setup.py is resulting in it getting dumped in 
%_prefix.


I think that installing the .pyi file alongside the compiled extension, i.e.:

     %install

     %py3_install

     mv %{buildroot}%{_prefix}/apsw.pyi %{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch}

…should achieve the desired effect of making the stubs available to type 
checkers.

Most upstreams that provide type stubs do so via package_data, so they are 
installed inside the Python package without any particular effort on the RPM 
packager’s part. That’s probably why nothing has been written about them in the 
guidelines.


Better than *just* mv'ing the file in %install (which probably indeed fixes the 
problem), suggest the change to upstream please.


I.e. replace this:

https://github.com/rogerbinns/apsw/blob/3.38.1-r1/setup.py#L851

With something like this:

https://github.com/sqlalchemy/alembic/blob/rel_1_7_7/setup.cfg#L58
https://github.com/pytest-dev/py/blob/1.11.0/setup.py#L42


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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: RPM build: unpackaged file .pyi

[Ben Beasley]

This is a “stub file” for type checking. It looks like upstream is 
trying to follow https://peps.python.org/pep-0484 rather than the later 
https://peps.python.org/pep-0561/. However, the way they are installing 
the stub file with data_files in setup.py is resulting in it getting 
dumped in %_prefix.


I think that installing the .pyi file alongside the compiled extension, 
i.e.:


    %install

    %py3_install

    mv %{buildroot}%{_prefix}/apsw.pyi %{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch}

…should achieve the desired effect of making the stubs available to type 
checkers.


Most upstreams that provide type stubs do so via package_data, so they 
are installed inside the Python package without any particular effort on 
the RPM packager’s part. That’s probably why nothing has been written 
about them in the guidelines.


On 3/24/22 07:51, Denis Fateyev wrote:

Hello there,

After bumping upstream version in "python-apsw", I have noticed that a 
new Python .pyi file was created in the new version, so the package 
build process started to fail:

error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
/usr/apsw.pyi
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5755/84615755/build.log

I haven't found related details in 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/
Could you suggest, should I skip and remove .pyi files during RPM 
packaging?


Thanks!

--
wbr, Denis.

___
devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email todevel-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___
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: 20220324.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220323.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images:  0
Added packages:  1
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages:   30
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  133.57 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded packages:   1.72 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   -83.30 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =

= DROPPED IMAGES =

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: python-tweepy-4.7.0-2.fc37
Summary: Python interface to the Twitter API
RPMs:python3-tweepy python3-tweepy+async python3-tweepy+socks
Size:133.57 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =

= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  ImageMagick-1:6.9.12.43-1.fc37
Old package:  ImageMagick-1:6.9.12.40-1.fc37
Summary:  An X application for displaying and manipulating images
RPMs: ImageMagick ImageMagick-c++ ImageMagick-c++-devel 
ImageMagick-devel ImageMagick-djvu ImageMagick-doc ImageMagick-libs 
ImageMagick-perl
Size: 33.21 MiB
Size change:  -369.73 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Mar 15 2022 Luya Tshimbalanga  - 1:6.9.12.42-1
  - New upstream release 6.9.12.42

  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Luya Tshimbalanga  - 1:6.9.12.43-1
  - New upstream release 6.9.12.43


Package:  aardvark-dns-1.0.2-1.fc37
Old package:  aardvark-dns-1.0.1-2.fc37
Summary:  Authoritative DNS server for A/ container records
RPMs: aardvark-dns
Size: 4.33 MiB
Size change:  14.57 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Lokesh Mandvekar  1.0.2-1
  - bump to v1.0.2


Package:  ansible-lint-1:6.0.1-1.fc37
Old package:  ansible-lint-1:5.4.0-1.fc37
Summary:  Best practices checker for Ansible
RPMs: python3-ansible-lint
Size: 220.96 KiB
Size change:  20.00 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Parag Nemade  - 1:6.0.1-1
  - Update to 6.0.1 version (#2065857)
  - License changed from MIT to GPLv3


Package:  awscli-1.22.80-1.fc37
Old package:  awscli-1.22.79-1.fc37
Summary:  Universal Command Line Environment for AWS
RPMs: awscli
Size: 2.17 MiB
Size change:  -24 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Gwyn Ciesla  - 1.22.80-1
  - 1.22.80


Package:  bear-3.0.19-1.fc37
Old package:  bear-3.0.18-3.fc37
Summary:  Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling
RPMs: bear
Size: 2.40 MiB
Size change:  7.11 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Dan ??erm??k  3.0.19-1
  - New upstream release 3.0.19, fixes rhbz#2066148


Package:  cppcheck-2.7.3-2.fc37
Old package:  cppcheck-2.7.3-1.fc37
Summary:  Tool for static C/C++ code analysis
RPMs: cppcheck cppcheck-gui cppcheck-htmlreport
Size: 17.79 MiB
Size change:  12 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Wolfgang St??ggl  - 2.7.3-2
  - Update tinyxml2 patch, add upstream link and rebuild


Package:  dbus-c++-0.9.0-27.fc37
Old package:  dbus-c++-0.9.0-25.fc35
Summary:  Native C++ bindings for D-Bus
RPMs: dbus-c++ dbus-c++-devel dbus-c++-ecore dbus-c++-glib
Size: 924.38 KiB
Size change:  10.82 KiB
Changelog:
  * Thu Jan 20 2022 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
0.9.0-26
  - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild

  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Nils Philippsen  - 0.9.0-27
  - Fix FTBFS on Fedora >= 36 (#2045301)


Package:  denemo-2.6.0-2.fc37
Old package:  denemo-2.6.0-1.fc37
Summary:  Graphical music notation program
RPMs: denemo denemo-emmentaler-fonts denemo-feta-fonts 
denemo-fonts-common denemo-music-fonts
Size: 54.85 MiB
Size change:  69 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Gwyn Ciesla  - 2.6.0-2
  - Prepare for new libtool


Package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-7782.fc37
Old package:  dummy-test-package-gloster-0-7774.fc37
Summary:  Dummy Test Package called Gloster
RPMs: dummy-test-package-gloster
Size: 470.84 KiB
Size change:  -343 B
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7775
  - rebuilt

  * Wed Mar 23 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7776
  - rebuilt

  * Wed Mar 23 2022 packagerbot  - 0-
  - rebuilt

  * Wed Mar 23 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7778
  - rebuilt

  * Wed Mar 23 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7779
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7780
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7781
  - rebuilt

  * Thu Mar 24 2022 packagerbot  - 0-7782
  - rebuilt


Package:  dunst-1.8.1-2.fc37
Old package:  dunst-1.8.0-1.fc37
Summary:  Lightweight and customizable notification-daemon
RPMs: dunst
Size: 517.43 KiB
Size change:  916 B
Changelog:
  * Thu Mar 03 2022 Dan ??erm??k  - 1.8.1-1
  - New upstream release 1.8.1


Package:  gnome-initial-setup-42.0-3.fc37
Old package:  gnome-initial-setup-42.0-2.fc37
Summary:  Bootstrapping your OS
RPMs: gnome-initial-setup
Size: 4.62 MiB
Size change:  1.07 KiB
Changelog:
  * Wed Mar 23 2022 Adam Williamson  - 42.0-3
  - Backport proposed upstream fix for keyring is

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

[sgallagh]

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   ELN SIG on 2022-03-25 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern
   At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat

The meeting will be about:



Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10133/

___
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

RPM build: unpackaged file .pyi

[Denis Fateyev]

Hello there,

After bumping upstream version in "python-apsw", I have noticed that a new
Python .pyi file was created in the new version, so the package build
process started to fail:

error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
   /usr/apsw.pyi

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5755/84615755/build.log

I haven't found related details in
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/
Could you suggest, should I skip and remove .pyi files during RPM packaging?

Thanks!

-- 
wbr, Denis.
___
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

[Bug 2065866] perl-Devel-PPPort-3.68 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-14daeeb5c5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-14daeeb5c5


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065866] perl-Devel-PPPort-3.68 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Devel-PPPort-3.68-1.fc
   ||37




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065866] perl-Devel-PPPort-3.68 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mspa...@redhat.com, |
   |ppi...@redhat.com   |




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065866
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065018] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cd2b682eb8 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cd2b682eb8


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065018] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-e3ff310483 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-e3ff310483


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Cloud-34-20220324.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

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-34-20220323.0):

ID: 1192852 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192852
ID: 1192861 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192861

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

[Bug 2065018] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-d7d78608d2 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d7d78608d2


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2065018] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.52
   ||-1.fc37
 Status|NEW |MODIFIED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 CC|iarn...@gmail.com,  |
   |jples...@redhat.com |




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065018
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Has amcnabb left Fedora?

[Miro Hrončok]

Hello,
this is part of 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/


I write here to figure out if Andrew McNabb is still interested in maintaining 
their Fedora packages.


And, in case Andrew no longer uses this email address, if anybody knows how to 
contact them.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068014

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
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-35-20220324.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

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-35-20220323.0):

ID: 1192836 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192836
ID: 1192845 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1192845

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: Problem compiling tellico in F37 (linker stage)

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 23/03/2022 20:10, José Abílio Matos wrote:

This fails in x86* and arm64 and succeeds in ppc64le and x390x:



I have the same issue with ghostwriter package (Koschei scratch build):
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84622587

Previous build on F37 was successful:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84152850

--
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

Re: mingw-gcc-12.0.1 and mingw-binutils-2.38 coming to rawhide

[Sandro Mani]

On 14.03.22 23:50, Sandro Mani wrote:

Hi

As per [1] I'll be landing mingw-gcc-12.0.1 and mingw-binutils-2.38 
towards the end of the week. I've completed test-builds here [2].


Looks like there is an ABI incompatibility (std::__once_functor went 
away), I'll need to rebuild all dependent mingw packages:


eigen3
enchant2
GeographicLib
geos
giflib
gtkspell3
gtkspellmm30
jxrlib
leptonica
libgeotiff
libkml
librttopo
libspatialite
libwebp
mingw-adwaita-icon-theme
mingw-adwaita-qt
mingw-angleproject
mingw-antlr
mingw-atk
mingw-atkmm
mingw-biblesync
mingw-boost
mingw-brotli
mingw-bzip2
mingw-cairo
mingw-cairomm
mingw-c-ares
mingw-cfitsio
mingw-clucene
mingw-cmocka
mingw-colord
mingw-crt
mingw-curl
mingw-Cython
mingw-dbus
mingw-dbus-glib
mingw-djvulibre
mingw-dlfcn
mingw-drmingw
mingw-exiv2
mingw-expat
mingw-fcgi
mingw-fftw
mingw-flac
mingw-fltk
mingw-fontconfig
mingw-freeglut
mingw-freeimage
mingw-freetype
mingw-freexl
mingw-fribidi
mingw-ftplib
mingw-g2clib
mingw-GConf2
mingw-gdal
mingw-gdb
mingw-gdbm
mingw-gdk-pixbuf
mingw-gettext
mingw-glew
mingw-glib2
mingw-glibmm24
mingw-glib-networking
mingw-glslang
mingw-gmp
mingw-gnutls
mingw-goocanvas2
mingw-graphene
mingw-graphite2
mingw-gsl
mingw-gsm
mingw-gstreamer
mingw-gstreamer1
mingw-gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free
mingw-gstreamer1-plugins-base
mingw-gstreamer1-plugins-good
mingw-gtk2
mingw-gtk3
mingw-gtkmm24
mingw-gtkmm30
mingw-gtksourceview3
mingw-gtksourceviewmm3
mingw-gtk-vnc
mingw-hamlib
mingw-harfbuzz
mingw-hidapi
mingw-hunspell
mingw-icu
mingw-id3lib
mingw-imath
mingw-jansson
mingw-jasper
mingw-jimtcl
mingw-jsoncpp
mingw-json-glib
mingw-lcms
mingw-lcms2
mingw-libarchive
mingw-libcharset
mingw-libconfuse
mingw-libcroco
mingw-libepoxy
mingw-libffi
mingw-libftdi
mingw-libgamerzilla
mingw-libgcrypt
mingw-libglade2
mingw-libglademm24
mingw-libgnurx
mingw-libgpg-error
mingw-libgsf
mingw-libgta
mingw-libgusb
mingw-libid3tag
mingw-libIDL
mingw-libidn
mingw-libidn2
mingw-libimagequant
mingw-libjpeg-turbo
mingw-libltdl
mingw-libmicrohttpd
mingw-libmng
mingw-libogg
mingw-libosinfo
mingw-libpng
mingw-libpsl
mingw-LibRaw
mingw-librsvg2
mingw-libsigc++20
mingw-libsigc++30
mingw-libsqlite3x
mingw-libssh2
mingw-libtasn1
mingw-libtheora
mingw-libtiff
mingw-libunistring
mingw-libusbx
mingw-libvirt
mingw-libvorbis
mingw-libxml++
mingw-libxml2
mingw-libxslt
mingw-libzip
mingw-llvm
mingw-log4c
mingw-mediawriter
mingw-minizip
mingw-mpfr
mingw-nettle
mingw-numpy
mingw-openal-soft
mingw-opencv
mingw-openexr
mingw-openssl
mingw-opus
mingw-opusfile
mingw-orc
mingw-osinfo-db-tools
mingw-p11-kit
mingw-pango
mingw-pangomm
mingw-pcre
mingw-pcre2
mingw-pdcurses
mingw-physfs
mingw-pixman
mingw-plotmm
mingw-polyclipping
mingw-poppler
mingw-portablexdr
mingw-portaudio
mingw-postgresql
mingw-protobuf
mingw-python3
mingw-python-ephem
mingw-python-lxml
mingw-python-markupsafe
mingw-python-psycopg2
mingw-python-pyproj
mingw-python-pyyaml
mingw-python-qt5
mingw-python-shapely
mingw-qca
mingw-qextserialport
mingw-qscintilla
mingw-qt5-qtbase
mingw-qt5-qtdeclarative
mingw-qt5-qtquickcontrols
mingw-qt5-qtquickcontrols2
mingw-qt5-qttools
mingw-qt5-qtwebkit
mingw-qt6-qt3d
mingw-qt6-qtactiveqt
mingw-qt6-qtbase
mingw-qt6-qtcharts
mingw-qt6-qtdeclarative
mingw-qt6-qtimageformats
mingw-qt6-qtmultimedia
mingw-qt6-qtpositioning
mingw-qt6-qtsensors
mingw-qt6-qtshadertools
mingw-qt6-qtsvg
mingw-qt6-qttools
mingw-qt6-qtwebsockets
mingw-qtkeychain
mingw-qtspell
mingw-qwt
mingw-qwtpolar
mingw-readline
mingw-rest
mingw-sane-backends
mingw-sdl12-compat
mingw-SDL2
mingw-SDL2_image
mingw-SDL2_mixer
mingw-SDL2_ttf
mingw-SDL_image
mingw-SDL_mixer
mingw-SDL_ttf
mingw-sparsehash
mingw-spatialindex
mingw-speex
mingw-speexdsp
mingw-spice-gtk
mingw-spirv-headers
mingw-spirv-tools
mingw-sqlite
mingw-taglib
mingw-tcl
mingw-termcap
mingw-tk
mingw-twaindsm
mingw-usbredir
mingw-vulkan-loader
mingw-vulkan-tools
mingw-vulkan-validation-layers
mingw-wavpack
mingw-windows-default-manifest
mingw-wine-gecko
mingw-win-iconv
mingw-winpthreads
mingw-winstorecompat
mingw-wpcap
mingw-wxWidgets
mingw-wxWidgets3
mingw-xerces-c
mingw-xz
mingw-yaml-cpp
mingw-zfstream
mingw-zlib
mingw-zstd
openjpeg2
OpenSceneGraph
osgearth
podofo
proj
python-pillow
samba
shapelib
svg2svgt
tesseract
uriparser
wine
wine-mono


I'd fire these off over the weekend.

Sandro
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Handling packages with missing dependencies provided by HA-RS repos?

[Felix Schwarz]

Am 24.03.22 um 03:18 schrieb Carl George:

python-boto3-1.6.1-2.el8
python-boto3-1.15.15-1.el8

python-botocore-1.9.1-2.el8
python-botocore-1.18.15-1.el8

python-fasteners-0.14.1-14.el8
python-fasteners-0.14.1-20.el8

python-oauth2client-4.1.2-6.el8
python-oauth2client-4.1.3-9.el8

python-s3transfer-0.1.13-1.el8
python-s3transfer-0.3.4-1.el8


That might have implications for the "certbot" package - there is at least one 
plugin which requires that stack. *If* the RHEL packages have similar versions 
and provide Python 3 modules it might not be a problem (we had some bad 
experience with Red Hat's RPMs in EPEL 7/Python 2).


certbot + plugins provide a comprehensive test suite so as a test one could do a 
test build with the HA repos. If the test suites pass everything should be fine.


Unfortunately I'm pretty busy atm.

Felix
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 08:38:39AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022, 00:12 Sam Varshavchik  wrote:
> > [mrsam@jack tmp]$ systemctl status testsystemd | cat
> > Warning: The unit file, source configuration file or drop-ins of
> > testsystemd.service changed on disk. Run 'systemctl daemon-reload' to
> > reload
> > units.
> > ● testsystemd.service - testsystemd
> >  Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service;
> > enabled;
> > vendor preset: disabled)
> >  Active: active (exited) since Mon 2022-03-21 19:02:37 EDT; 4min 35s
> > ago
> > Process: 88834 ExecStart=/bin/true (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
> >Main PID: 88834 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
> >   Tasks: 0 (limit: 76902)
> >  Memory: 0B
> > CPU: 0
> >  CGroup: /system.slice/testsystemd.service
> >
> > Mar 21 19:02:37 jack systemd[1]: Starting testsystemd…
> > Mar 21 19:02:37 jack systemd[1]: Finished testsystemd.
> >
> > A loud complaint at the beginning that systemd wasn't reload. Same,
> > unchanged, syslog timestamp from the initial start.
> >
> > This is on up to date F35.
> >
> > Then, at this point:
> >
> > sudo systemctl daemon-reload
> > sudo systemctl reload-or-restart --marked
> >
> > [mrsam@jack tmp]$ systemctl status testsystemd
> > ● testsystemd.service - testsystemd
> >  Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service;
> > enabled;
> > vend>
> >  Active: active (exited) since Mon 2022-03-21 19:08:29 EDT; 26s ago
> > Process: 89032 ExecStart=/bin/true (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
> >Main PID: 89032 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
> > CPU: 1ms
> >
> > Mar 21 19:08:29 jack systemd[1]: Starting testsystemd…
> > Mar 21 19:08:29 jack systemd[1]: Finished testsystemd.
> >
> > Now, everything is normal, and new syslogs showing a restart.
> >
> > So, as far as I can tell: %systemd_postun_with_restart did not restart
> > anything.

> I wonder if this behaves the way it does because you're using a oneshot
> service as an example here? It exits as soon as it starts, so there is not
> even a running process to "restart" on package upgrade.

There are two separate steps here: "daemon-reload" and "restart
testsystemd.service".  Systemd is complaining about "daemon-reload"
missing. It isn't internally cognizant of the fact that
testsystemd.service should be restarted, that is managed by the rpm
scriptlets and "needs-restart" markers. Internally, it just looks at
the file timestamps and knows that it has old config.
RemainAfterExit=true means that the service is pinned even though it
exited, so systemd remembers the old config of the service from before
the upgrade and hence the complaint. The warning goes away after
"daemon-reload".

That the service is "oneshot" matters for the "restart" part. What
systemd actually does, is queue a "try-restart" job for the marked units.
Since this service is not running, that should become noop.
There seems to be a bug in the implementation though: try-restart always
restarts the unit → https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/22850.

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: Please use side tags for backwards-incompatible bumps of major packages, not buildroot overrides

[Petr Pisar]

V Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 05:40:28PM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
> So, now that we have side-tags to perform this kind of builds, does the
> buildroot override existence still make sense? Is there any use case
> that still requires BR overrides and cannot be done with side-tags?
> 
I use overrides pretty extensively when populating new EPEL. If you have
a deep dependency tree and the packages are scattered among many maintainers,
it's much faster to use an override than to block depending packages for
a week. Side tags also do not work there because every new package would reset
the testing period. And if I'm not mistaken non-proven packagers cannot edit
other's updates. And I don't count communication overhead. People would end up
mixing various side tags and crosstagging builds.

-- Petr


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 05:55:19PM +0100, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 07:12:23PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> > %install
> > mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/systemd/system
> > cat >$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service < > [Unit]
> > Description=testsystemd
> > 
> > [Install]
> > WantedBy=multi-user.target
> > 
> > [Service]
> > Type=oneshot
> > RemainAfterExit=true
> > ExecStart=/bin/true
> > ExecStop=/bin/true
> > EOF
> > 
> > %post
> > %systemd_post testsystemd.service
> > 
> > %preun
> > %systemd_preun testsystemd.service
> > 
> > %postun
> > %systemd_postun_with_restart testsystemd.service
> > 
> > %files
> > /lib/systemd/system/*
> 
> I couldn't reproduce it, but I also made some changes to use more macros. I
> added BuildRequires: systemd-rpm-macros. Perhaps that was at least the
> missing piece. Then I also used %{_unitdir} instead of /lib/systemd/system/
> (and %{buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, but that shouldn't matter).

I suspect that the path may be an issue. The transfiletrigger in
systemd is matched on /etc/systemd/system, /usr/lib/systemd/system,
and as far as I know, /usr/lib/systemd/system and /lib/systemd/system
are different paths as far as rpm is concerned. %{_unitdir} should be used
instead of /lib/systemd/system/.

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

[Bug 2066942] perl-Class-Accessor-Lite: please provide epel9 package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066942

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-960b555aeb has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-960b555aeb


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066942
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2063504] perl-App-Cme-1.038 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063504



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-eda5c85147 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eda5c85147


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063504
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2064753] perl-PDL-2.077 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064753

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|caillon+fedoraproject@gmail |
   |.com,   |
   |jakub.jedel...@gmail.com,   |
   |jples...@redhat.com,|
   |ka...@ucw.cz,   |
   |lkund...@v3.sk, |
   |rhug...@redhat.com, |
   |rstr...@redhat.com, |
   |sandm...@redhat.com,|
   |tjczep...@gmail.com |
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064753
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2063504] perl-App-Cme-1.038 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063504

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-App-Cme-1.038-1.fc37
 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063504
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

[Fabio Valentini]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022, 00:12 Sam Varshavchik  wrote:

> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 08:27:35AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> >> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 06:22:08PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>  The only thing that https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
>  guidelines/Scriptlets/ tells me to do is to put
> %systemd_postun_with_restart
>  in my %post. However:
> 
>  1) systemd complains that it wants a daemon-reload, in order to pick
> up an
>  updated .service file
> 
>  2) I still must manually run systemctl reload-or-restart --marked, in
> order
>  to actually restart an updated service
> 
>  It seems to be there's a missing step, in here. By comparison I
> prepared
>  comparable .deb packages for Ubuntu, using dh_installsystemd in the
> install
>  script. The end result:
> 
>  A) The initial .deb install enabled and started the service.
> 
>  B) Bumping the release, rebuilding, and installing the newer package
> results
>  in an automatic daemon-reload and restart, restarting the service.
> 
>  Overall .deb's systemd integration seems to go smoother (compared to
> the
>  rest of the .deb packaging process) than rpm's.
> 
>  Is there a specific reason why %systemd_postun_with_restart stops
> before
>  finishing the job? Am I missing something that I can install, to have
> this
>  happen auto-magically?
> >>>
> >>> I think daemon-reload changed to file triggers in systemd 228:
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/
> >>> 873e413323dfff4023604849c70944674ae5cd29
> >>>
> >>> However, the scriptlets documentation[1] states to use %systemd_post
> with
> >>> %post and %systemd_postun_with_restart with %postun. %Perhaps that
> you're
> >>> using %systemd_postun_with_restart in %post is the source of your
> problems?
> >>
> >> No, my invocation is in %postun. Furthermore, it wouldn't matter, since
> at
> >> %post time the new package and the new service unit should already be
> >> installed and restartable.
> >>
> >> And, as I wrote:
> >>
>  1) systemd complains that it wants a daemon-reload, in order to pick
> up an
>  updated .service file
> >>
> >> If ot was "changed to file triggers", well, it's not working since
> nothing
> >> is getting triggered. Furthermore, %systemd_postun_with_restart runs:
> >>
> >> /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper mark-restart-system-units
> >>
> >> which does:
> >>
> >> systemctl set-property "$unit" Markers=+needs-restart &
> >>
> >> That's all it does. Then, as I wrote:
> >>
>  2) I still must manually run systemctl reload-or-restart --marked, in
> order
>  to actually restart an updated service
> >>
> >> So, the shipped systemd scriptlets are still, very much, under an
> impression
> >> that explicit action needs to be taken to restart and/or reload
> >> updated .services. But, nothing gets reloaded. The .service files gets
> >> marked for a restart, but, from what I can tell, nothing ever gets
> restarted.
> >
> > Do you happen to have the spec file and/or the RPMs? How can we
> replicate
> > the findings?
>
> Take the following spec file, below, and just feed it to rpmbuild -ba.
>
> Then, rpm -ivh the binary rpm. Then:
>
> systemctl enable testsystemd
> systemctl start testsystemd
> systemctl status testsystemd
>
> You'll get something like this:
>
> [mrsam@jack tmp]$ systemctl status testsystemd
> ● testsystemd.service - testsystemd
>  Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service;
> enabled;
> vend>
>  Active: active (exited) since Mon 2022-03-21 19:02:37 EDT; 10s ago
> Process: 88834 ExecStart=/bin/true (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>Main PID: 88834 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
> CPU: 2ms
>
> Mar 21 19:02:37 jack systemd[1]: Starting testsystemd…
> Mar 21 19:02:37 jack systemd[1]: Finished testsystemd.
>
> Up to now, everything looks good.
>
> Now, take this spec file, bump the release, feed it to rpmbuild again.
>
> According to my best understanding of systemd's published documentation:
> installing an updated package should automatically restart the active
> service, shouldn't it?
>
> But after I fed the new version to rpm -UvhF, what I got was:
>
> [mrsam@jack tmp]$ systemctl status testsystemd | cat
> Warning: The unit file, source configuration file or drop-ins of
> testsystemd.service changed on disk. Run 'systemctl daemon-reload' to
> reload
> units.
> ● testsystemd.service - testsystemd
>  Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service;
> enabled;
> vendor preset: disabled)
>  Active: active (exited) since Mon 2022-03-21 19:02:37 EDT; 4min 35s
> ago
> Process: 88834 ExecStart=/bin/true (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>Main PID: 88834 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>   Tasks: 0 (limit: 76902)
>  Memory: 0B
> CPU: 0
>  CGroup: 

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

[Barry]




> On 24 Mar 2022, at 01:07, Sam Varshavchik  wrote:
> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes:
> 
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 07:12:23PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes:
 On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 08:27:35AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes:
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 06:22:08PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>> The only thing that https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
>>> guidelines/Scriptlets/ tells me to do is to put 
>>> %systemd_postun_with_restart in my %post. However:
>>> 1) systemd complains that it wants a daemon-reload, in order to pick up 
>>> an updated .service file
>>> 2) I still must manually run systemctl reload-or-restart --marked, in 
>>> order to actually restart an updated service
>>> It seems to be there's a missing step, in here. By comparison I 
>>> prepared comparable .deb packages for Ubuntu, using dh_installsystemd 
>>> in the install script. The end result:
>>> A) The initial .deb install enabled and started the service.
>>> B) Bumping the release, rebuilding, and installing the newer package 
>>> results in an automatic daemon-reload and restart, restarting the 
>>> service.
>>> Overall .deb's systemd integration seems to go smoother (compared to 
>>> the rest of the .deb packaging process) than rpm's.
>>> Is there a specific reason why %systemd_postun_with_restart stops 
>>> before finishing the job? Am I missing something that I can install, to 
>>> have this happen auto-magically?
>> I think daemon-reload changed to file triggers in systemd 228:
>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/873e413323dfff4023604849c70944674ae5cd29
>> However, the scriptlets documentation[1] states to use %systemd_post 
>> with %post and %systemd_postun_with_restart with %postun. %Perhaps that 
>> you're using %systemd_postun_with_restart in %post is the source of your 
>> problems?
> No, my invocation is in %postun. Furthermore, it wouldn't matter, since 
> at %post time the new package and the new service unit should already be 
> installed and restartable.
> And, as I wrote:
>>> 1) systemd complains that it wants a daemon-reload, in order to pick up 
>>> an updated .service file
> If ot was "changed to file triggers", well, it's not working since 
> nothing is getting triggered. Furthermore, %systemd_postun_with_restart 
> runs:
> /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper mark-restart-system-units
> which does:
> systemctl set-property "$unit" Markers=+needs-restart &
> That's all it does. Then, as I wrote:
>>> 2) I still must manually run systemctl reload-or-restart --marked, in 
>>> order to actually restart an updated service
> So, the shipped systemd scriptlets are still, very much, under an 
> impression that explicit action needs to be taken to restart and/or 
> reload updated .services. But, nothing gets reloaded. The .service files 
> gets marked for a restart, but, from what I can tell, nothing ever gets 
> restarted.
 Do you happen to have the spec file and/or the RPMs? How can we replicate 
 the findings?
>>> Take the following spec file, below, and just feed it to rpmbuild -ba.
>>> Then, rpm -ivh the binary rpm. Then:
>>> systemctl enable testsystemd
>>> systemctl start testsystemd
>>> systemctl status testsystemd
>>> You'll get something like this:
>>> [mrsam@jack tmp]$ systemctl status testsystemd
>>> ● testsystemd.service - testsystemd
>>>   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service; enabled; 
>>> vend>
>>>   Active: active (exited) since Mon 2022-03-21 19:02:37 EDT; 10s ago
>>>  Process: 88834 ExecStart=/bin/true (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>>> Main PID: 88834 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>>>  CPU: 2ms
>>> Mar 21 19:02:37 jack systemd[1]: Starting testsystemd…
>>> Mar 21 19:02:37 jack systemd[1]: Finished testsystemd.
>>> Up to now, everything looks good.
>>> Now, take this spec file, bump the release, feed it to rpmbuild again.
>>> According to my best understanding of systemd's published documentation: 
>>> installing an updated package should automatically restart the active 
>>> service, shouldn't it?
>>> But after I fed the new version to rpm -UvhF, what I got was:
>>> [mrsam@jack tmp]$ systemctl status testsystemd | cat
>>> Warning: The unit file, source configuration file or drop-ins of 
>>> testsystemd.service changed on disk. Run 'systemctl daemon-reload' to 
>>> reload units.
>>> ● testsystemd.service - testsystemd
>>>   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service; enabled; 
>>> vendor preset: disabled)
>>>   Active: active (exited) since Mon 2022-03-21 19:02:37 EDT; 4min 35s ago
>>>  Process: 88834 ExecStart=/bin/true (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>>> Main PID: 88834 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>>>Tasks: 0 (limit: 76902)
>>>   Memory: 0B
>>>   

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2022-03-24 17:00 UTC)

[James Antill]

 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2022-03-24 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.libera.chat.

 Local time information (via. uitime):

= Day: Thursday ==
2022-03-24 09:00 PDT  US/Pacific
2022-03-24 12:00 EDT  --> US/Eastern <--
2022-03-24 16:00 GMT  Europe/London 
2022-03-24 16:00 UTC  UTC   
2022-03-24 17:00 CET  Europe/Berlin 
2022-03-24 17:00 CET  Europe/Paris  
2022-03-24 21:30 IST  Asia/Calcutta 
 New Day: Friday -
2022-03-25 00:00 HKT  Asia/Hong_Kong
2022-03-25 00:00 +08  Asia/Singapore
2022-03-25 01:00 JST  Asia/Tokyo
2022-03-25 02:00 AEST Australia/Brisbane


 Links to all tickets below can be found at: 

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open=meeting

= Followup Actions =

#topic #pr-814
 * mhroncok
   talk to authors again, having a working example might help a lot

= Followup Issues =

#topic #886 Enable BRP for detecting RPATH 
.fpc 886
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/886

#topic #907 Which %__foo macros for executables are acceptable? 
.fpc 907
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/907

#topic #1058 How to handle %lang files in package owned directories? .fpc 1058
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1058

#topic #1132 Mark comments as scriplets for Sources (automation) 
.fpc 1132
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1132

#topic #1150 request for clarification wrt. base version / compat package 
naming 
.fpc 1150
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1150

#topic #1159 Ban use of %configure in %prep
.fpc 1159
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1159

= Followup Pull Requests =

#topic #pr-814 Add SELinux Independent Policy Guidelines.
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/814

#topic #pr-1045 WIP: Add discussion of macro names beginning with underscores.
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1045

#topic #pr-1071 Overhaul the RPATH section of the guidelines.
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1071

#topic #pr-1097 Use caret in Obsoletes to simplify
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1097

#topic #pr-1163 Sources: Add section about conditionalization 
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1163

= Open Floor = 

 For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket.  The
report of the agenda items can be found at:

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open=meeting

 If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can:
  * Reply to this e-mail
  * File a new ticket at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee
  * E-mail me directly
  * Bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note
    that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting.


___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

[Thomas Stephen Lee]

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 12:00 PM Thomas Stephen Lee  wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 11:14 PM Josh Boyer  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Fedora, CentOS, and EPEL Communities!
> >
> > As part of our continued 3 year major Red Hat Enterprise Linux release
> > cadence, RHEL 9 development is starting to wrap up with the spring
> > 2022 release coming soon.  That means planning for the next release
> > will start in earnest in the very near future.  As some of you may
> > know, Red Hat has been using both Bugzilla and Jira via
> > issues.redhat.com for RHEL development for several years.  Our
> > intention is to move to using issues.redhat.com only for the major
> > RHEL releases after RHEL 9.
> >
> > What does this mean for Fedora and CentOS?  This discussion is in part
> > to figure that out.  Based on some very brief analysis, the following
> > should hold:
> >
> > - RHEL customers should continue to file support cases through the Red
> > Hat Customer portal, which will remain consistent regardless of the
> > backend tooling used.
> >
> > - There is no imminent retirement of the Red Hat Bugzilla instance
> > being planned at this time.  RHEL 7, 8, and 9 will continue to use
> > bugzilla in some form and RHEL 9 has a very long lifecycle.
> >
> > - Fedora Linux and EPEL have their own Bugzilla product families and
> > are not directly impacted in their own workflows by the choice to use
> > only issues.redhat.com for RHEL.
> > - There will be impacts on existing documentation that provide
> > guidance on requesting things from RHEL in various places like EPEL.
> > We will be happy to help adjust these.
> >
> > - CentOS Stream contribution and bug reporting workflows will be
> > adjusted to use issues.redhat.com instead of bugzilla in the relevant
> > places.  This should apply to all versions of CentOS Stream for a
> > unified contributor workflow.  This will happen gradually as we
> > discover the best workflow to use.
> >
> > If there are other impacts that you can think of, please raise them on
> > this thread.  We’d like to ensure we’re covering as much as possible
> > as this rolls out.
> >
> > josh
>
> Hi,
>
> I tried logging in with my Red Hat id to see what it is.
> I got the below message.
> -%<-
> SAML Single Sign On failed
> Please contact your administrator and provide the tracker-id X or
> log in at the login page.
> SAML-Login failed: You’ve logged in with username user.name but you
> already have an account on Jira, so please relogin with email_id
> -%<-
>
> Thanks
>
> ---
> Lee

Issue resolved by Red Hat support.
Now I am able to log in.

---
Lee
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure