Re: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 9:09 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:56 AM Tomáš Popela wrote: > > > > Hi Stephen > > > > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 7:15 PM Stephen Gallagher > wrote: > >> > >> * AGREED: All packages currently included in ELN Extras will have > >> an EPEL 10 branch created for them (@sgallagh:fedora.im, 16:28:51) > > > > > > Please exclude Thunderbird and Firefox from the EPEL 10 as they are > packaged in RHEL. See > https://github.com/minimization/content-resolver-input/pull/1019 on why > they're there and not in ELN (to not "pollute" the ELN buildroot). > > Unless plans have changed compared to what was stated in the pull > request, someone can and may request that both Firefox and Thunderbird > be made available as RPMs in EPEL, especially if they don't want to > use Flatpak for whatever particular reason. Flatpaks are not a reason > to exclude from EPEL, since RPM content does not conflict with Flatpak > content. > Yes, if someone wants to chime in and do whatever they want with those packages in EPEL, they're free to do so, but I don't want the packages to be branched there based on my request which never had the intention of putting anything into EPEL. > But yes, we don't have to auto-branch it. > +1 Tom > > > > -- > 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 > -- ___ 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: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG
Hi Stephen On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 7:15 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote: > * AGREED: All packages currently included in ELN Extras will have > an EPEL 10 branch created for them (@sgallagh:fedora.im, 16:28:51) > Please exclude Thunderbird and Firefox from the EPEL 10 as they are packaged in RHEL. See https://github.com/minimization/content-resolver-input/pull/1019 on why they're there and not in ELN (to not "pollute" the ELN buildroot). Tom -- ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 1:28 PM Leigh Scott wrote: > > Hi Leigh, > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:03 AM Leigh Scott > > > wrote: > > > > > > As I'm on my laptop again, I was able to try to run the rebase again and > > for Philip it was about rpmfusion-nonfree-updates, but I'm hitting: > > > > error: Updating rpm-md repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates': cannot update repo > > 'rpmfusion-free-updates': Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: Status > code: > > 404 for > > > https://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/metalink?repo=free-fedora-updates-released-. > .. > > (IP: 78.47.223.143); Last error: Status code: 404 for > > > https://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/metalink?repo=free-fedora-updates-released-. > .. > > (IP: 158.69.60.128) > > > > Tom > > I will need to get the mirrormanager admin to add updates for f39 even > though it's unused until fedora final release. > Can you disable repos on silverblue? > Yes, one can disable them by editing the files under /etc/yum.repos.d. I'm not that worried about myself, but rather about others. But to confirm disabling them works. Tom ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
Hi Leigh, On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:03 AM Leigh Scott wrote: > Those warnings should disappear once the 39 release rpm's are installed. > I have fixed the missing repodata for the unused updates repo's. > As I'm on my laptop again, I was able to try to run the rebase again and for Philip it was about rpmfusion-nonfree-updates, but I'm hitting: error: Updating rpm-md repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates': cannot update repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates': Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: Status code: 404 for https://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/metalink?repo=free-fedora-updates-released-39&arch=x86_64 (IP: 78.47.223.143); Last error: Status code: 404 for https://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/metalink?repo=free-fedora-updates-released-39&arch=x86_64 (IP: 158.69.60.128) Tom ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F38 to F39
Hi Leigh, On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 7:26 PM Leigh Scott wrote: > > just a note rpmfusion free and nofree not ready > > > > > > What do you mean? > I branched rpmfusion two week ago, the repo deps look fine to me. > See the reply from Philip Rhoades - I've hit the same on Silverblue when trying to rebase it to Fedora 39: Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'rpmfusion-nonfree-updates': - Status code: 404 for https://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/metalink?repo=nonfree-fedora-updates-released-39&arch=x86_64 (IP: 158.69.60.128) - Status code: 404 for https://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/metalink?repo=nonfree-fedora-updates-released-39&arch=x86_64 (IP: 78.47.223.143) Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree-updates': Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: Status code: 404 for https://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/metalink?repo= nonfree-fedora-updates-released-39&arch=x86_64 (IP: 78.47.223.143) Ignoring repositories: rpmfusion-nonfree-updates Tom ___ 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: Fedora 38 mass rebuild is finished
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 8:56 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 01:36:10PM -0600, Jonathan Wright via devel wrote: > > I'm seeing the same errors on rawhide buildroot right now. > > The problem was libunistring-1.1-3.fc38 (again). > > We untagged it in december, but looks like no one followed up to get > dependent packages rebuilt: > > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11175 > > I have untagged it (again) for now. > I see that the ELN buildroot is broken in the same way, can you Kevin or Stephen untag the libunistring from ELN? Tom > > kevin > ___ > 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 > ___ 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: Starting Flatpak SIG
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 4:30 PM Kalev Lember wrote: > On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 10:55 AM Kalev Lember > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Hopefully most people are back from vacations now so I think we can go on >> with organizing the first Flatpak SIG meeting. >> >> I have created a whenisgood poll for the next week: >> https://whenisgood.net/s3rzh5h >> Please put your name in there and what times would work for you. >> >> I am thinking that a weekly meeting would be too often, but maybe >> bi-weekly? So that we do one next week, and then again two weeks after etc. >> 10 people have already signed up on the >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Flatpak page so I suspect it's going >> to be hard to make it work for everybody, but hopefully we can find >> something that would work for most of the group. >> >> I'll collect the results later this week when it looks like most of the >> people have replied. >> >> Thanks and Happy New Year everybody! >> > > OK, we now have a time for the first Flatpak SIG meeting. 10 people > replied to the poll and we managed to find a time slot that actually works > for everybody: > > 15:00 GMT on Monday, starting on January 23, and recurring every two > weeks. > > Looks like the #fedora-meeting IRC channel is available at that time so > I've gone ahead and made a reservation in > https://calendar.fedoraproject.org/SIGs/2023/1/23/#m10431 > > Some topics for the first meeting, off the top of my head: introductions, > why do we need to do Fedora Flatpaks, how to handle openh264, announcements. > I've created the https://etherpad.opensuse.org/p/fedora-flatpaks-sig to gather topics for the agenda there. Tom ___ 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: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in February
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 5:46 PM Michel Alexandre Salim < sali...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 01:58:51PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Dear maintainers. > > > > Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following > packages > > should be retired from Fedora 38 approximately one week before branching. > > > > 5 weekly reminders are required, hence the retirement will happen > > approximately in 5 weeks, i.e. around 2023-02-08. > > Since this is unfortunately after the branching, > > packages will be retired on rawhide and f38. > > > > I apologize for starting this process a bit later than required. > > > > Policy: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/ > > > > libgnome alexl, caolanm, > gnome-sig, > > mbarnes, rhughes, > rstrode, > > ssp, trawets > > I was initially thinking I should just retire grhino, which has not been > updated since 2010 and will be affected by libgnome retirement, but... > there's a lot of other packages that will be affected if libgnome is > pulled. > > Is it still worth maintaining? If libgnome should be retired I guess we > should proactively retire them now rather than waiting after the mass > rebuild then having to untag packages from f38 too. > We (gnome-sig) have already and proactively retired the libgnome package and others few weeks ago - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/RKCWXFPGLMAMHYYSRLRFEGWU4UFNY3V7/ - but they were then taken by others. ___ 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: Small rant: installer environment size
On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 6:45 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2022-12-08 at 08:53 +0100, Tomáš Popela wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 5:30 AM Adam Williamson < > adamw...@fedoraproject.org> > > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2022-12-08 at 03:28 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 12:42 AM Adam Williamson > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi folks! Today I woke up and found > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2151495 , which > diverted > > > me > > > > > down a bit of an "installer environment size" rabbit hole. > > > > > > > > Does the "new and improved" web based installer help this > > > > in any way? > > > > > > I haven't looked yet but I suspect it'll probably be a wash, mostly. If > > > anything it's likely slightly negative because the new installer itself > > > hard requires webkitgtk, so we can't really do anything to finesse that > > > requirement any more. With the old installer, we could maybe try and > > > figure out some way of being able to show the help pages without > > > needing yelp/webkitgtk. Since the new installer itself needs webkitgtk, > > > seems like there's no way we're getting rid of that ~40M compressed. > > > > > > > You should also try to do this - remove webkitgtk and yelp packages and > add > > firefox, because that's what the web based installer should/will use in > the > > end - see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142779. We > already > > had a meeting with Anaconda dev and told him to use Firefox instead of > > WebKitGTK for the web installer - due to resources that are internally > (and > > frankly in upstream as well) allocated to WebKitGTK. > > I can try that. What will Firefox run on top of? Is that decided? A > bare X server? Weston? Something else? Thanks! > I think that it will run on top of gnome-kiosk (what anaconda uses now - implemented in https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/pull/3307), but I will add @Radek Vykydal here to confirm. Tom ___ 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: Small rant: installer environment size
Hi Adam, On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 5:30 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2022-12-08 at 03:28 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 12:42 AM Adam Williamson > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi folks! Today I woke up and found > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2151495 , which diverted > me > > > down a bit of an "installer environment size" rabbit hole. > > > > Does the "new and improved" web based installer help this > > in any way? > > I haven't looked yet but I suspect it'll probably be a wash, mostly. If > anything it's likely slightly negative because the new installer itself > hard requires webkitgtk, so we can't really do anything to finesse that > requirement any more. With the old installer, we could maybe try and > figure out some way of being able to show the help pages without > needing yelp/webkitgtk. Since the new installer itself needs webkitgtk, > seems like there's no way we're getting rid of that ~40M compressed. > You should also try to do this - remove webkitgtk and yelp packages and add firefox, because that's what the web based installer should/will use in the end - see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142779. We already had a meeting with Anaconda dev and told him to use Firefox instead of WebKitGTK for the web installer - due to resources that are internally (and frankly in upstream as well) allocated to WebKitGTK. Tom ___ 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: Review Request: ImageMagick7
Hi Neal, On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:15 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > Yes, the EOL period is further out, but I'd rather make it so that the > next RHEL will have ImageMagick 7 right from the beginning. > Just to be transparent: ImageMagick (or GraphicsMagick) won't be in RHEL 10 (or in any future version of RHEL). It might be in EPEL, but not in RHEL. Tom ___ 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: Should the policy documents better reflect real package maintenance practice?
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 2:34 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 04:04:59PM -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote: > > In the wild, I often see Fedora described as a "semi-rolling" release. > As a > > policy matter, the distribution promises to be mostly stable, but I find > it > > increasingly hard to honestly present it as such. > > > > As a couple of quick examples, I'd point out that in Fedora 35, Blender > > updated from 2.93 (an LTS version) to version 3. In Fedora 36, Emacs > > updated from version 27 to 28. I've read in the KDE Matrix channel that > KDE > > will be updated in Fedora 36 to 5.26, even though it has already been > > updated from 5.24 -> 5.25 (my reading of the KDE update policy is that > > Fedora used to update all releases with every KDE release, but decided to > > stop). Firefox and Thunderbird get updates in most releases, even when > they > > contain API-breaking changes (those really should have an explicit > > exception, IMHO.) I could offer more, but my point is simply that > examples > > of updates in prominent packages isn't hard to find. > > FWIW, I was sure that we have an explicit exception for Firefox. But > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#exceptions-list > doesn't list it. > > Although not explicitly stated there, Firefox is mentioned as a first example in https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#examples. Also nearly all Firefox and Thunderbird updates there are the security ones there really isn't another way (unless someone will package Firefox ESR releases in Fedora, but that would need to be rebased yearly anyway). Tom ___ 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: GTK 2 removal from RHEL 10+
Hi Sérgio, Dne so 27. 8. 2022 21:53 uživatel Sérgio Basto napsal: > As Kevin Kofler (more or less) wrote in "Pcre Deprecation" thread, > maybe we should be prepared to support pcre-1 forever and IMO we also > can extend the concept to other packages, btw GTK2 is one of them . > > > Checking on rawhide gtk2 still have 385 packages that depend on gtk2 > ... Please don't mix apple and oranges - the email is about RHEL and not about Fedora. We don't have any intentions for removing GTK 2 from Fedora (at least not for the foreseeable future) and even if that would happen, we would orphan the package so anyone from the community can step in. Bye, Tom ___ 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: GTK 2 removal from RHEL 10+
Hi Kevin, Dne so 27. 8. 2022 1:44 uživatel Kevin Kofler via devel < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> napsal: > Tomáš Popela wrote: > > This is an early heads-up about GTK 2 removal from RHEL 10+ (the gtk2 > > package was marked as unwanted in ELN with > > > https://github.com/minimization/content-resolver-input/commit/b6d44e496f46bd2444e8e24dd3e9113b326817ac > ). > > I suppose it could be carried in EPEL if needed. Yes, definitely someone can come in and package it in EPEL if they want to. Or is somebody attempting > to veto that too? > I don't see why anyone would do that. Bye, Tom ___ 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
GTK 2 removal from RHEL 10+
Hi everyone, This is an early heads-up about GTK 2 removal from RHEL 10+ (the gtk2 package was marked as unwanted in ELN with https://github.com/minimization/content-resolver-input/commit/b6d44e496f46bd2444e8e24dd3e9113b326817ac). The toolkit served us gratefully, but it starts to show its age with regards to modern technologies such as Wayland, HiDPI screens, HDR and others. In RHEL 10 the GTK 3 and GTK 4 will still continue to be available for everyone to use. Regards, Tom Popela -- Tomáš Popela Desktop and Desktop Applications Subsystems Product Owner Display Systems Red Hat ___ 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: Non-responsive packagers: michaelanguskelly
Hi Pierre, Is the subject right? It talks about "michaelanguskelly", but the queries are for Benjamin (benzea). I can talk to Benjamin if needed (already pointed him at this thread just in case). Tom On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 9:59 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Everyone, > > The packagers listed here have been receiving a daily email asking them to > either adjust their bugzilla or their FAS account so the email address in > FAS > matches an existing bugzilla account. > > Having a bugzilla account is mandatory per: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Create_a_Bugzilla_Account > > - benzea contacted since June 23rd 2022 > benzea is maintainer of rpms/bolt > benzea is main admin of rpms/devtodo > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/devtodo > benzea is main admin of rpms/fprintd > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/fprintd > benzea is main admin of rpms/fwts > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/fwts > benzea is maintainer of rpms/gamemode > benzea is main admin of rpms/gnome-network-displays > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/gnome-network-displays > benzea is main admin of rpms/libfprint > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/libfprint > benzea is maintainer of rpms/libusb > benzea is maintainer of rpms/libusb-compat-0.1 > benzea is maintainer of rpms/libusb1 > benzea is main admin of rpms/libusbx > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/libusbx > benzea is main admin of rpms/thermald > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/thermald > benzea is maintainer of rpms/umockdev > benzea is maintainer of rpms/upower > benzea is main admin of rpms/uresourced > benzea has a bugzilla override on rpms/uresourced > > > > Does anyone know how to contact them? > > > Thanks, > > Pierre > ___ > 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 > ___ 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: Fedora Flatpaks: fedmod has been retired
Hi Artur, On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 7:58 PM Artur Frenszek-Iwicki < s...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > I wanted to try building a Fedora Flatpak, so I headed over to the docs > and started with the tutorial. > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/flatpak/tutorial/ > > The first step instructed me to install some packaging tools: > $ dnf install flatpak-module-tools fedmod > > DNF complained that it could not find "fedmod". > I checked in dist-git and it looks like it has been retired over 6 months > ago. > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedmod > > So my question is... what's up with that? > Looking at the tutorial, I get the impression that fedmod was just a > helper tool > and isn't strictly required to build a Fedora Flatpak. If that's the case, > I'd appreciate it if someone knowledgeable can update the docs. > No, it's required. Please take a look at https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/cant-install-fedmod-for-flatpak-packaging/39947/2?u=tpopela that describes the current state and also contains useful links that will lead you to https://pagure.io/modularity/fedmod/pull-request/112 where you can download the F35 package build with many Fedora Flatpak related fixes. Tom ___ 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: Gnome BZ untouched for years #1414539
On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 4:47 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 10:38 AM Michal Schorm wrote: > > > > How many more years can I expect it will take to resolve or at least > > seriously examine this following BZ? > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1414539 > > > > Does the maintainer of the utility care ? Does he check the BZ tickets ? > > Does the gnome-sig triage the BZs against gnome components at least once > a year? > > > > Who to contact? > > Who to turn onto ? > > > > It is the position of the GNOME maintainer team that all RHBZs > basically go to /dev/null unless they're blocker bugs for releases, > unfortunately. > Also please see https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/131 - Red Hat Bugzilla: GNOME packages are in bad shape Bye, Tom ___ 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: AArch64 support for container and flatpak builds
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 11:47 AM Mark O'Brien wrote: > All, > We are very happy to announce that we now have AArch64 support for flatpak > and container fedpkg builds in production! > > By default all flatpak and container builds will be built on both > architectures from now on. > > Thanks, > Fedora OSBS initiative > Thank you everyone involved! We really appreciate this! Bye, Tom ___ 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
Re: Fedora 34 Change: Route all Audio to PipeWire (System-Wide Change)
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > Screencasting still does not work in Fedora 33. It pretends to work as > in claiming through the applications and GNOME indicators that the > screen / application window / browser tabs are shared but nothing gets > actually shared. Tested today with Firefox and Chrome on Wayland for > Google Meet, BlueJeans, Jitsi. > Works flawlessly here (Firefox and Chrome/Chromium) for some time. Do you have the chrome://flags/#enable-webrtc-pipewire-capturer option enabled in Chrome/Chromium? Tom ___ 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
Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Make nano the default editor
On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 3:24 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 8:15 PM Chris Murphy > wrote: > > > > Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-x86_64-33-20200830.n.0.iso does not have nano > > on the install media itself. Is it intentional? > > > > It's supposed to be there, but I don't know how Silverblue is > "defined" so it would be pulled in. I thought it'd get it from the > comps groups... > It should be there :/ : https://pagure.io/workstation-ostree-config/blob/f33/f/fedora-common-ostree-pkgs.yaml#_139 ___ 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
Re: Release criteria proposal: networking requirements
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 4:34 AM Chris Murphy wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 7:52 PM Chris Murphy > wrote: > > > The IPP Everywhere specification requires clients to support DNS-SD > > (mDNS is part of that) or WS-Discovery. Printers are required to > > support both DNS-SD and WS-Discovery. Avahi and systemd-resolved > > support DNS-SD, functionally equating DNS-SD and mDNS. > > From the spec: > > "Printers MUST publish a text (TXT) record that provides service > information over mDNS. > Printers that support dynamic DNS updates MUST publish separate TXT > records for each > domain that is updated." > > I'm not completely certain, but I'm wondering whether it's possible to > print IPP Everywhere at all, if DNS-SD or WS-Discovery aren't working > on the client. Even having the IP address might not be enough. > > I guess one way to test it would be to run the printing test case with > an IPP Everywhere printer, and try to print with avahi stopped. > Adding +Marek Kasik and +Zdenek Dohnal who might know the answer. Tom ___ 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
Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Use %make_build and %make_install macros
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:24 AM Dan Čermák wrote: > Sorry about the empty email, I've hit send too fast… > > Anyway, on the topic of parallel builds: what is everyone's opinion on > adding the %limit_build macro from openSUSE (see: > > https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/network:chromium/memory-constraints/memory-constraints.macros?expand=1 > )? > > tl;dr; %limit_build -m 1500 will set the number of parallel processes so > that if all of them consume 1500 MB of RAM at most, that they will not > OOM your worker (especially handy on workers with many cores, but not > much RAM). > We are being hit by this in WebKitGTK and in Firefox/Thunderbird from time to time. There is an RFE for RPM to solve it - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1118734. Bye, Tom ___ 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
Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:56 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I > think that a distribution should be built with a consistent toolchain > wherever possible. > Kevin, that's not true at all. Maybe it looks like it builds fine for you, because all the fixes get to you, but I as a co-maintainer of Chromium in Fedora and ex-maintainer of Chromium in RHEL can say that most of the time I spent fixing GCC problems. Just look at the current SPEC file and search for gcc there.. There are several gcc related bugs - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/chromium/blob/master/f/chromium.spec. Or even better look at https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=819294 where the GCC related patches are tracked. In the end I realized that I really don't have time to fix all the time some GCC related issues so I moved the RHEL 6 Chromium package to use clang to save some of my time so I could devote it somewhere else. Bye, Tom ___ 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
Re: perl-Digest-SHA3, perl-Gtk3-WebKit (was: Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers)
I'm sorry as I didn't see this downstream patch - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Gtk3-WebKit/blob/master/f/Gtk3-WebKit-0.06-Port-to-webkitgtk4.patch . Then it's fine and sorry for the noise. Tom On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 10:14 AM Tomáš Popela wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 6:33 PM Richard W.M. Jones > wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 04:24:22PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> > rjones: perl-Digest-SHA3, perl-Gtk3-WebKit >> > > No open bugs in perl-Gtk3-WebKit? Please read > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/7APAJVWLKRJWNLIW2N4SOGL2JOOYLW5N/ > and https://lwn.net/Articles/730185/ and > https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/02/01/on-webkit-security-updates/ > . The package should be removed from Fedora as it puts the users in the > risk. > ___ 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
Re: perl-Digest-SHA3, perl-Gtk3-WebKit (was: Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers)
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 6:33 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 04:24:22PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > rjones: perl-Digest-SHA3, perl-Gtk3-WebKit > No open bugs in perl-Gtk3-WebKit? Please read https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/7APAJVWLKRJWNLIW2N4SOGL2JOOYLW5N/ and https://lwn.net/Articles/730185/ and https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/02/01/on-webkit-security-updates/ . The package should be removed from Fedora as it puts the users in the risk. ___ 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
