Re: F39 Change Proposal: Color Bash Prompt (System Wide)
On 7/9/23 22:20, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: Unfortunately there is no easy way to detect dark or light terminals, to my knowledge at least. You can use the xterm OSC 11;? sequence to request the text background color. Emacs uses this to select light or dark theming. -- --Per Bothner p...@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/ ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F39 Change Proposal: Color Bash Prompt (System Wide)
On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 9:36 PM Marián Konček wrote: > I actually copy-paste the Debian prompt since Debian Jessie on my systems. > Even though it uses blue-green colors, I can see it very well on both > white and black background. > Okay > I think it would be nicer if we played around with several options and > have the user have a simple way of choosing. > They *can* set PROMPT_COLOR to change coloring immediately. But it would be nice to have a configuration tool/UI some day. > There are many variants, some using git info, some using exit codes and > so... Exit code is already handled in the current implementation. I would like to make it more extensible in the future... But I made a criteria that this simple MVP should not use PROMPT_COMMAND nor should the default PS1 cause *any* external process to run by default. So anyway this Change is not setting the bar very high, by design: there are certainly lots of more powerful solutions around like powerline or starship etc, and this Change is not competing with them. :-) The hope is that a simple conservative solution like this would be broadly acceptable as a desktop default. Thanks, Jens ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F39 Change Proposal: Color Bash Prompt (System Wide)
Thanks for the replies so far. Unfortunately there is no easy way to detect dark or light terminals, to my knowledge at least. Green seems the most friendly color across different palettes and terminals. Though these days modern terminals tend to default to dark (most Fedora editions' default terminals are dark by default I think). https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/petersen/bash-color-prompt/bash-color-prompt.git/tree/bash-color-prompt.sh lists various examples of how users can customize the color: eg PROMPT_COLOR='33' (for yellow/brown). ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Introducing the New QA Dashboard: Gain Insights into the Fedora QA Community
Dear Fedora Community, The Fedora QA team is excited to announce the launch of our brand new QA Dashboard for the Fedora QA community! This dashboard has been designed to provide you with valuable insights into what is happening in the Fedora QA space, helping us all work together more efficiently and effectively. As an open-source community, our collective efforts have always been focused on ensuring the quality and reliability of Fedora. The new QA Dashboard is a significant step forward in enhancing our QA processes and fostering collaboration among contributors. Here are the key features and benefits of the QA Dashboard: Current Development Schedule: The dashboard provides an overview of the development schedule of the current release with important milestones for you to plan and stay ahead of the curve. Blockers and Freeze Exceptions: You can now view the current release Blockers and Freeze Exceptions along with the breakup of Proposed and Accepted. Calendar of Events: Take a look at what is coming up in the next 7 days. Meetings and Test Days to plan your schedule accordingly. Meeting Minutes: Stay up-to-date with the latest decisions made during the QA meeting. Meeting minutes will keep you informed, ensuring that you are always aware of the current state of Fedora QA. To access the new QA Dashboard, please visit https://qa.fedoraproject.org/ We encourage you to explore the QA Dashboard, take advantage of its features, and provide feedback. Your input is invaluable in improving the dashboard and making it even more beneficial to the entire Fedora QA community. Tell us what you would like to see in the dashboard! Thank you for your continued dedication to the Fedora QA community. Let's make the most of this new dashboard and work together to ensure the highest quality standards for Fedora. If you have any questions, suggestions, or need assistance with the QA Dashboard, please don't hesitate to reach out to us. Regards, -- S*UDHIR D* SENIOR MANAGER, FEDORA QE, ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On Sun, Jul 9, 2023 at 8:51 PM Demi Marie Obenour wrote: > > On 7/9/23 19:08, Allan via devel wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Jul 2023 18:54:18 -0400 > > Demi Marie Obenour wrote: > > > >> On 7/9/23 18:53, Allan via devel wrote: > >>> On Sun, 09 Jul 2023 06:59:11 + > >>> Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > >>> > Il 08/07/23 13:06, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto: > > On 06/07/2023 18:10, Aoife Moloney wrote: > >> but the conversation about each change > >> will take place on Fedora Discussion at > >> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-request-privacy-preserving-telemetry-for-fedora-workstation-system-wide/85320 > > It looks like they've started moving replies they don't like to > > other threads to cover up the flow of resentment that comes > > naturally to them. > > > > That's why switching to Fedora Discussion from the mailing lists > > is a very bad idea: admins or RH staff can easily delete your > > comments or bury them in another threads. > > > Can we please stop implying malevolence every time we don't agree > with something? > > BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to > clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to > FESCO: > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 > >>> > >>> How is that going to help anything, when some of us are using > >>> browsers from Fedora repos, that just gets this answer: > >> > >> Which browser? > > . > > Seamonkey, Falkon maybe more... > > SeaMonkey and Falkon are based on outdated versions of Firefox and > Chromium respectively. Mozilla stopped issuing security advisories > for SeaMonkey back in 2015, and QtWebEngine (used by Falkon) was a > month or more behind upstream Chromium last I checked. Please stop bringing this up. QtWebEngine is maintained by the Qt Company, and we all know that security advisories aren't the be-all end-all for maintenance. SeaMonkey is maintained by its community. And community projects rarely issue security advisories. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report
The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing gnulib-0-47.20230709git.el8 Details about builds: gnulib-0-47.20230709git.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-7159543bbd) GNU Portability Library Update Information: * Sun Jul 09 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-47.20230709git - Update on 2023-07-09 - Fix can't build on aarch64 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2220874) - Fix can't build on epel8 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2227816) * Thu Jul 06 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-46.20230706git - Update on 2023-07-06 - General clean-ups - Move built javaversion to new sub- package - Drop built javaversion from i686 ChangeLog: * Sun Jul 9 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-47.20230709git - Update on 2023-07-09 - Fix can't build on aarch64 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2220874) - Fix can't build on epel8 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2227816) * Thu Jul 6 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-46.20230706git - Update on 2023-07-06 - General clean-ups - Move built javaversion to new sub-package - Drop built javaversion from i686 * Thu Jan 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-45.20220212git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild * Thu Jul 21 2022 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-44.20220212git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild * Fri Feb 18 2022 Peter Lemenkov - 0-43.20220212git - Update (required for PSPP 1.4.1+, grub2, etc) * Sat Feb 5 2022 Jiri Vanek - 0-42.20200827git - Rebuilt for java-17-openjdk as system jdk * Thu Jan 20 2022 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-41.20200827git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild * Thu Jul 22 2021 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-40.20200827git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild * Tue May 25 2021 Florian Weimer - 0-39.20200827git - Rebuild with new binutils to fix ppc64le corruption (#1960730) * Tue Jan 26 2021 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-38.20200827git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Mass_Rebuild * Wed Sep 16 2020 Peter Lemenkov - 0-37.20200827git - Fix FTBFS * Wed Sep 16 2020 Peter Lemenkov - 0-36.20200809git - Update (required for PSPP 1.4.1+) * Sat Aug 1 2020 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-35.20200107git - Second attempt - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_33_Mass_Rebuild * Mon Jul 27 2020 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-34.20200107git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_33_Mass_Rebuild * Fri Jul 10 2020 Jiri Vanek - 0-33.20200107git - Rebuilt for JDK-11, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java11 * Tue Jan 28 2020 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-32.20200107git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_32_Mass_Rebuild References: [ 1 ] Bug #2104044 - gnulib-0-44.20220212git.fc37 FTBFS: depends on removed i686 java-openjdk packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104044 [ 2 ] Bug #2114533 - gnulib: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f37: javac: command not found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2114533 [ 3 ] Bug #2183558 - largefile.m4 is will break with Autoconf 2.72 (2.73) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183558 [ 4 ] Bug #2220874 - A failed test against aarch64 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2220874 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing report
The following Fedora EPEL 9 Security updates need testing: Age URL 1 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-6398dade97 yt-dlp-2023.07.06-1.el9 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 9 updates-testing gnulib-0-47.20230709git.el9 Details about builds: gnulib-0-47.20230709git.el9 (FEDORA-EPEL-2023-0a9e760449) GNU Portability Library Update Information: * Sun Jul 09 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-47.20230709git - Update on 2023-07-09 - Fix can't build on aarch64 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2220874) - Fix can't build on epel8 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2227816) * Thu Jul 06 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-46.20230706git - Update on 2023-07-06 - General clean-ups - Move built javaversion to new sub- package - Drop built javaversion from i686 - Update on 2023-07-06 - General clean-ups - Move built javaversion to new sub-package - Drop built javaversion from i686 ChangeLog: * Sun Jul 9 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-47.20230709git - Update on 2023-07-09 - Fix can't build on aarch64 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2220874) - Fix can't build on epel8 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2227816) * Thu Jul 6 2023 Mosaab Alzoubi - 0-46.20230706git - Update on 2023-07-06 - General clean-ups - Move built javaversion to new sub-package - Drop built javaversion from i686 * Thu Jan 19 2023 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-45.20220212git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_38_Mass_Rebuild * Thu Jul 21 2022 Fedora Release Engineering - 0-44.20220212git - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Mass_Rebuild References: [ 1 ] Bug #2104044 - gnulib-0-44.20220212git.fc37 FTBFS: depends on removed i686 java-openjdk packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104044 [ 2 ] Bug #2114533 - gnulib: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f37: javac: command not found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2114533 [ 3 ] Bug #2183558 - largefile.m4 is will break with Autoconf 2.72 (2.73) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2183558 [ 4 ] Bug #2220874 - A failed test against aarch64 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2220874 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On 7/9/23 19:08, Allan via devel wrote: > On Sun, 9 Jul 2023 18:54:18 -0400 > Demi Marie Obenour wrote: > >> On 7/9/23 18:53, Allan via devel wrote: >>> On Sun, 09 Jul 2023 06:59:11 + >>> Mattia Verga via devel wrote: >>> Il 08/07/23 13:06, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto: > On 06/07/2023 18:10, Aoife Moloney wrote: >> but the conversation about each change >> will take place on Fedora Discussion at >> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-request-privacy-preserving-telemetry-for-fedora-workstation-system-wide/85320 > It looks like they've started moving replies they don't like to > other threads to cover up the flow of resentment that comes > naturally to them. > > That's why switching to Fedora Discussion from the mailing lists > is a very bad idea: admins or RH staff can easily delete your > comments or bury them in another threads. > Can we please stop implying malevolence every time we don't agree with something? BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to FESCO: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 >>> >>> How is that going to help anything, when some of us are using >>> browsers from Fedora repos, that just gets this answer: >> >> Which browser? > . > Seamonkey, Falkon maybe more... SeaMonkey and Falkon are based on outdated versions of Firefox and Chromium respectively. Mozilla stopped issuing security advisories for SeaMonkey back in 2015, and QtWebEngine (used by Falkon) was a month or more behind upstream Chromium last I checked. -- Sincerely, Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers) ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
In hindsight, both of my comments were hastily posted to this discussion. It wasn't very constructive and I apologize for this. I do believe that this proposed change is being considered with the best intentions for both the user and Fedora. Could we see an example of the text/telemetry that would be sent? Would there be a notification to the user when/if this data is sent? If not, would the user be able to view this on their current install in some sort of log? ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On Sun, 9 Jul 2023 18:54:18 -0400 Demi Marie Obenour wrote: > On 7/9/23 18:53, Allan via devel wrote: > > On Sun, 09 Jul 2023 06:59:11 + > > Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > > >> Il 08/07/23 13:06, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto: > >>> On 06/07/2023 18:10, Aoife Moloney wrote: > but the conversation about each change > will take place on Fedora Discussion at > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-request-privacy-preserving-telemetry-for-fedora-workstation-system-wide/85320 > >>> It looks like they've started moving replies they don't like to > >>> other threads to cover up the flow of resentment that comes > >>> naturally to them. > >>> > >>> That's why switching to Fedora Discussion from the mailing lists > >>> is a very bad idea: admins or RH staff can easily delete your > >>> comments or bury them in another threads. > >>> > >> Can we please stop implying malevolence every time we don't agree > >> with something? > >> > >> BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to > >> clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to > >> FESCO: > >> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 > > > > How is that going to help anything, when some of us are using > > browsers from Fedora repos, that just gets this answer: > > Which browser? Seamonkey, Falkon maybe more... ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On 7/9/23 18:53, Allan via devel wrote: > On Sun, 09 Jul 2023 06:59:11 + > Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > >> Il 08/07/23 13:06, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto: >>> On 06/07/2023 18:10, Aoife Moloney wrote: but the conversation about each change will take place on Fedora Discussion at https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-request-privacy-preserving-telemetry-for-fedora-workstation-system-wide/85320 >>> It looks like they've started moving replies they don't like to >>> other threads to cover up the flow of resentment that comes >>> naturally to them. >>> >>> That's why switching to Fedora Discussion from the mailing lists is >>> a very bad idea: admins or RH staff can easily delete your comments >>> or bury them in another threads. >>> >> Can we please stop implying malevolence every time we don't agree >> with something? >> >> BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to >> clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to >> FESCO: >> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 > > How is that going to help anything, when some of us are using browsers > from Fedora repos, that just gets this answer: Which browser? -- Sincerely, Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers) ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On Sun, 09 Jul 2023 06:59:11 + Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 08/07/23 13:06, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto: > > On 06/07/2023 18:10, Aoife Moloney wrote: > >> but the conversation about each change > >> will take place on Fedora Discussion at > >> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-request-privacy-preserving-telemetry-for-fedora-workstation-system-wide/85320 > > It looks like they've started moving replies they don't like to > > other threads to cover up the flow of resentment that comes > > naturally to them. > > > > That's why switching to Fedora Discussion from the mailing lists is > > a very bad idea: admins or RH staff can easily delete your comments > > or bury them in another threads. > > > Can we please stop implying malevolence every time we don't agree > with something? > > BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to > clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to > FESCO: > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 How is that going to help anything, when some of us are using browsers from Fedora repos, that just gets this answer: "Unfortunately, your browser is unsupported. Please switch to a supported browser to view rich content, log in and reply." Thats why we still wants maillists for this - as clearly said in last discussion about it. > Just a simple question and a YES/NO reply. NO ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: getattr default value evaluation
The assertRaisesRegexp alias was removed in Python 3.12, along with a number of
other previously-deprecated TestCase method aliases. You can search for it in
https://docs.python.org/3.12/whatsnew/3.12.html. Upstream should just use
assertRaisesRegex unconditionally unless they are trying to support Python 2.7.
On Sun, Jul 9, 2023, at 1:27 PM, Mattia Verga wrote:
> This code:
> ```
> from unittest import TestCase
> _testcase = TestCase('setUp')
> getattr(_testcase, 'assertRaisesRegex', _testcase.assertRaisesRegexp)
> ```
> was working in Python 3.11, but doesn't work anymore in 3.12:
> AttributeError: 'TestCase' object has no attribute
> 'assertRaisesRegexp'. Did you mean: 'assertRaisesRegex'?
>
> The default value was previously ignored, while now it is evaluated
> even if it is not required. Is this an expected change behavior in
> Python 3.12?
> ___
> 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, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
___
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, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
getattr default value evaluation
This code:
```
from unittest import TestCase
_testcase = TestCase('setUp')
getattr(_testcase, 'assertRaisesRegex', _testcase.assertRaisesRegexp)
```
was working in Python 3.11, but doesn't work anymore in 3.12:
AttributeError: 'TestCase' object has no attribute 'assertRaisesRegexp'. Did
you mean: 'assertRaisesRegex'?
The default value was previously ignored, while now it is evaluated even if it
is not required. Is this an expected change behavior in Python 3.12?
___
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, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2221511] New: perl-LWP-Protocol-https-6.11 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221511 Bug ID: 2221511 Summary: perl-LWP-Protocol-https-6.11 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-LWP-Protocol-https Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: mspa...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 6.11 Upstream release that is considered latest: 6.11 Current version/release in rawhide: 6.10-9.fc38 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/LWP-Protocol-https/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/3050/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-LWP-Protocol-https -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221511 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202221511%23c0 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: more distinct default bash prompt?
On Sun Jul 9, 2023 at 3:04 AM EDT, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > Il 09/07/23 00:05, Leon Fauster via devel ha scritto: > > Am 08.07.23 um 22:44 schrieb Barry: > >> > >>> On 8 Jul 2023, at 19:56, Kushal Das wrote: > >>> > >>> White background is a good choice for accessibility iirc. > >> Isn’t is contrast that matters not any particular background? > > > > On the contrary it helps, a white background helps the human visual > > system to distinguish patterns better then a black on do but this is > > just one aspect to prefer the one or the other ... :-) > > > I also like white background while reading things on a support using > natural light, but when it comes to support using backlight I prefer > black background as I found that to be less eye tiresome (I don't know > what science/researches say about this, it's just my personal experience) ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
> Assuming the goal is to improve fedora, that would be pointless as > telemetry rarely produces useful results as opt-in. It makes sense to have > it opt-out, but I'd expect the telemetry output and inputs to be open and > available for fedora developers. > > Regards, > Nikos > > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 8:19 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel < > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: If the telemetry is presented in plain text that's easy to understand and the user is prompted if they wish to submit the data, sure that could be a possible compromise. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
> Remember, for avoidance of doubt, we will NEVER enable telemetry upload > without the user's consent, which is indicated by either (a) not > flipping the telemetry switch in gnome-initial-setup to the off > position, or (b) flipping the telemetry switch in gnome-control-center > to the on position. So it's considered consent if you don't know what you're signing up for? I would never consider something consent without it being overtly approved by the user, although I don't know how this applies to laws in different jurisdictions. This definition of consent would then have to match up with every country where there is a Fedora user, no? ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
> On Thu, Jul 6 2023 at 07:42:47 PM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour > > The problem is if users are expected to answer, they are going to > probably answer No and it's effectively the same as an opt-in. But if > we have a default value, users will be inclined to leave the default > value. > > My plan is to put this switch in gnome-initial-setup, not the > installer. But it will have a default value. > > Remember, for avoidance of doubt, we will NEVER enable telemetry upload > without the user's consent, which is indicated by either (a) not > flipping the telemetry switch in gnome-initial-setup to the off > position, or (b) flipping the telemetry switch in gnome-control-center > to the on position. (The telemetry might be enabled *locally only* for > users who upgrade from previous versions of Fedora Workstation and who > therefore have not seen the consent switch, but the data will never be > uploaded to Fedora. And upgraded users will see the switch default to > off rather than on, so it really will be opt-in for upgraded users.) > > I'm attaching a screenshot to give an idea of what this would look like > in gnome-initial-setup. I don't have a gnome-control-center screenshot > handy, but it would be similar, except there it would default to off. > On Thu, Jul 6 2023 at 07:42:47 PM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour > > The problem is if users are expected to answer, they are going to > probably answer No and it's effectively the same as an opt-in. But if > we have a default value, users will be inclined to leave the default > value. > > My plan is to put this switch in gnome-initial-setup, not the > installer. But it will have a default value. > > Remember, for avoidance of doubt, we will NEVER enable telemetry upload > without the user's consent, which is indicated by either (a) not > flipping the telemetry switch in gnome-initial-setup to the off > position, or (b) flipping the telemetry switch in gnome-control-center > to the on position. (The telemetry might be enabled *locally only* for > users who upgrade from previous versions of Fedora Workstation and who > therefore have not seen the consent switch, but the data will never be > uploaded to Fedora. And upgraded users will see the switch default to > off rather than on, so it really will be opt-in for upgraded users.) > > I'm attaching a screenshot to give an idea of what this would look like > in gnome-initial-setup. I don't have a gnome-control-center screenshot > handy, but it would be similar, except there it would default to off. > On Thu, Jul 6 2023 at 07:42:47 PM -0400, Demi Marie Obenour > > The problem is if users are expected to answer, they are going to > probably answer No and it's effectively the same as an opt-in. But if > we have a default value, users will be inclined to leave the default > value. Opt-out is and always will be incredibly disingenous when it comes to data collection. Now I'm to understand that you're hoping enough users don't understand/notice that there's an option to opt-out, so that you recieve enough users. What exactly is the reason this change is being considered? >One of the main goals of metrics collection is to analyze whether Red >Hat is achieving its goal to make Fedora Workstation the premier >developer platform for cloud software development. Accordingly, we >want to know things like which IDEs are most popular among our users, >and which runtimes are used to create containers using Toolbx. Then why not reach out to THESE users instead of casting a global net over all users? There has never been a telemetry inclusion to my knowledge, that has been to the benefit of its users. In understand that Red Hat sells products and services, but is it wise to do so at the expense of antagonizing its userbase of volunteers and avocates? At the end of the day, no matter how you word it, telemetry is still data that is actively transmitted from the user to a third party.I still have to trust that this third-party will not misuse my data and ONLY collect what it says it will.Can Red Hat GUARANTEE that it won't collect something else if there's a security breach or there's an update pushed to the telemetry app containing a bug that collects more than intended? Once it happens, no matter if by acccident or not, it will still have happened and leaked unintended data. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 09:59:08AM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 09/07/2023 08:59, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to > > clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to FESCO: > > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 > > > > Just a simple question and a YES/NO reply. > > Sorry, but we can't trust **ANONYMOUS** vote on a third-party platform. > Admins or other people with access to host can easily edit SQL database and > set 100500 votes for variant YES there. Yes they could, but this is ridiculous. -- Tomasz TorczTo co nierealne – tutaj jest normalne. to...@pipebreaker.pl Ziomale na życie mają tu patenty specjalne. ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Test-Announce] Kernel 6.4 Test Week
Hey All, I would like to invite all of you to participate in the Kernel 6.4 Test week is happening from 2023-07-09 to 2023-07-16 It's fairly simple, head over to the wiki [0] and read in detail about the test week and simply run the test case mentioned in[1] and enter your results. As usual, the Fedora QA team will hangout at #fedora-test-...@libera.chat for questions and discussion. P.S: We give out badges[2] for testing new Kernel builds that come out! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2023-07-09_Kernel_6.4_Test_Week [1] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/160 [2] https://badges.fedoraproject.org/badge/science-kernel-tester-i -- //sumantro Fedora QE TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Fedora rawhide compose report: 20230709.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20230708.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20230709.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:6 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 3 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 123 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 249.13 KiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 553.93 MiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 3.43 MiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = Image: Workstation live aarch64 Path: Workstation/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Workstation-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230709.n.0.iso Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree ppc64le Path: Kinoite/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20230709.n.0.iso Image: KDE live aarch64 Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-KDE-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20230709.n.0.iso Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree aarch64 Path: Silverblue/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-aarch64-Rawhide-20230709.n.0.iso Image: Onyx dvd-ostree x86_64 Path: Onyx/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Onyx-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230709.n.0.iso Image: Server_KVM qcow2 x86_64 Path: Server/x86_64/images/Fedora-Server-KVM-Rawhide-20230709.n.0.x86_64.qcow2 = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree ppc64le Path: Silverblue/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20230708.n.0.iso Image: Sericea dvd-ostree x86_64 Path: Sericea/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Sericea-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20230708.n.0.iso Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree aarch64 Path: Kinoite/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-aarch64-Rawhide-20230708.n.0.iso = ADDED PACKAGES = Package: golang-github-google-nftables-0.1.0-1.fc39 Summary: Go module to interact with nftables (the iptables successor) RPMs:golang-github-google-nftables-devel Size:87.25 KiB Package: golang-github-iovisor-gobpf-0.2.0-1.fc39 Summary: Go bindings for creating BPF programs RPMs:golang-github-iovisor-gobpf-devel Size:124.84 KiB Package: rust-archery-0.5.0-1.fc39 Summary: Abstract over the atomicity of reference-counting pointers RPMs:rust-archery+default-devel rust-archery+fatal-warnings-devel rust-archery-devel Size:37.05 KiB = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: CuraEngine-1:5.3.0-3.fc39 Old package: CuraEngine-1:5.3.0-2.fc39 Summary: Engine for processing 3D models into G-code instructions for 3D printers RPMs: CuraEngine Size: 3.95 MiB Size change: 1.44 KiB Changelog: * Sat Jul 08 2023 Vitaly Zaitsev - 1:5.3.0-3 - Rebuilt due to spdlog 1.12 update. Package: bear-3.1.2-4.fc39 Old package: bear-3.1.2-3.fc39 Summary: Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling RPMs: bear Size: 2.14 MiB Size change: 4.33 KiB Changelog: * Sat Jul 08 2023 Vitaly Zaitsev - 3.1.2-4 - Rebuilt due to spdlog 1.12 update. Package: breeze-icon-theme-5.108.0-1.fc39 Old package: breeze-icon-theme-5.107.0-1.fc39 Summary: Breeze icon theme RPMs: breeze-icon-theme breeze-icon-theme-devel breeze-icon-theme-rcc Added RPMs: breeze-icon-theme-devel Size: 11.48 MiB Size change: 12.51 KiB Changelog: * Sun Jul 02 2023 Marc Deop i Argem?? - 5.108.0-1 - 5.108.0 Package: coeurl-0.3.0-4.fc39 Old package: coeurl-0.3.0-3.fc39 Summary: Simple async wrapper around CURL for C++ RPMs: coeurl coeurl-devel Size: 280.28 KiB Size change: 707 B Changelog: * Sat Jul 08 2023 Vitaly Zaitsev - 0.3.0-4 - Rebuilt due to spdlog 1.12 update. Package: dnf-plugins-extras-4.1.0-2.fc39 Old package: dnf-plugins-extras-4.1.0-1.fc39 Summary: Extras Plugins for DNF RPMs: python3-dnf-plugin-kickstart python3-dnf-plugin-rpmconf python3-dnf-plugin-showvars python3-dnf-plugin-snapper python3-dnf-plugin-torproxy python3-dnf-plugin-tracer python3-dnf-plugins-extras-common Size: 147.36 KiB Size change: -3.55 KiB Changelog: * Wed Jun 14 2023 Python Maint - 4.1.0-2 - Rebuilt for Python 3.12 - Fixes: rhbz#2219977 Package: extra-cmake-modules-5.108.0-1.fc39 Old package: extra-cmake-modules-5.107.0-1.fc39 Summary: Additional modules for CMake build system RPMs: extra-cmake-modules Size: 374.20 KiB Size change: 37 B Changelog: * Sun Jul 02 2023 Marc Deop i Argem?? - 5.108.0-1 - 5.108.0 Package: flatseal-2.0.2-1.fc39 Old package: flatseal-2.0.1-1.fc39 Summary: Manage Flatpak permissions RPMs: flatseal Size: 110.31 KiB Size change: 2.29 KiB Changelog: * Sun Jul 09 2023 Yaakov Selkowitz - 2.0.2-1 - Update to 2.0.2 Package: flrig-2.0.02-1.fc39 Old package: flrig-1.4.7-2.fc38 Summary: Transceiver control program RPMs: flrig Size: 5.17 MiB Size change: 353.64 KiB Changelog: * Sat Jul 08 2023 Richard Shaw - 2.0.02-1 - Update to 2.0.02. - Update license format to SPDX identifier. Package: freeopcua-0-43.20220717.bd13aee.fc39 Old package: freeopcua-0-42.20220717.bd13aee.fc39 Summary: Open
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On 09/07/2023 08:59, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to FESCO: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 Just a simple question and a YES/NO reply. Sorry, but we can't trust **ANONYMOUS** vote on a third-party platform. Admins or other people with access to host can easily edit SQL database and set 100500 votes for variant YES there. You have already received a lot of feedback in several threads. FESCO can count these replies. Most of them overwhelmingly oppose this change. -- 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
On 09/07/2023 08:59, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: Can we please stop implying malevolence every time we don't agree with something? What malevolence? All 4 of my replies are gone from the main thread. I can treat this as a censoring attempt by the RH staff. This is absolutely unacceptable for free projects like Fedora. -- 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2221456] New: F39FailsToInstall: perl-Alien-pkgconf
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221456 Bug ID: 2221456 Summary: F39FailsToInstall: perl-Alien-pkgconf Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Alien-pkgconf Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com Reporter: fti-b...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com Blocks: 2168845 (F39FailsToInstall,RAWHIDEFailsToInstall) Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Hello, Please note that this comment was generated automatically by https://pagure.io/releng/blob/main/f/scripts/ftbfs-fti/follow-policy.py If you feel that this output has mistakes, please open an issue at https://pagure.io/releng/ Your package (perl-Alien-pkgconf) Fails To Install in Fedora 39: can't install perl-Alien-pkgconf: - nothing provides libpkgconf-devel(x86-64) = 1.9.4 needed by perl-Alien-pkgconf-0.19-3.fc39.x86_64 If you know about this problem and are planning on fixing it, please acknowledge so by setting the bug status to ASSIGNED. If you don't have time to maintain this package, consider orphaning it, so maintainers of dependent packages realize the problem. If you don't react accordingly to the policy for FTBFS/FTI bugs (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/), your package may be orphaned in 8+ weeks. P.S. The data was generated solely from koji buildroot, so it might be newer than the latest compose or the content on mirrors. To reproduce, use the koji/local repo only, e.g. in mock: $ mock -r fedora-39-x86_64 --config-opts mirrored=False install perl-Alien-pkgconf P.P.S. If this bug has been reported in the middle of upgrading multiple dependent packages, please consider using side tags: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#updating-inter-dependent-packages Thanks! Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168845 [Bug 2168845] Fedora 39 Fails To install Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221456 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202221456%23c0 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2221452] New: perl-PerlIO-eol-0.19 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221452 Bug ID: 2221452 Summary: perl-PerlIO-eol-0.19 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-PerlIO-eol Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 0.19 Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.19 Current version/release in rawhide: 0.18-1.fc39 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/PerlIO-eol/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/3228/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-PerlIO-eol -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2221452 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202221452%23c0 ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: more distinct default bash prompt?
Il 09/07/23 00:05, Leon Fauster via devel ha scritto: > Am 08.07.23 um 22:44 schrieb Barry: >> >>> On 8 Jul 2023, at 19:56, Kushal Das wrote: >>> >>> White background is a good choice for accessibility iirc. >> Isn’t is contrast that matters not any particular background? > > On the contrary it helps, a white background helps the human visual > system to distinguish patterns better then a black on do but this is > just one aspect to prefer the one or the other ... :-) > I also like white background while reading things on a support using natural light, but when it comes to support using backlight I prefer black background as I found that to be less eye tiresome (I don't know what science/researches say about this, it's just my personal experience). Anyway, I don't care about defaults as far as I can found the way to set back settings with ease. Mattia ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)
Il 08/07/23 13:06, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto: > On 06/07/2023 18:10, Aoife Moloney wrote: >> but the conversation about each change >> will take place on Fedora Discussion at >> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-request-privacy-preserving-telemetry-for-fedora-workstation-system-wide/85320 > It looks like they've started moving replies they don't like to other > threads to cover up the flow of resentment that comes naturally to them. > > That's why switching to Fedora Discussion from the mailing lists is a > very bad idea: admins or RH staff can easily delete your comments or > bury them in another threads. > Can we please stop implying malevolence every time we don't agree with something? BTW in the spirit of openness, I've set up a poll (UNOFFICIAL) to clearly state community sentiment about enabling OPT-OUT metrics to FESCO: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unofficial-poll-about-opt-out-metrics-proposal/85494 Just a simple question and a YES/NO reply. Mattia ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
