Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On 4 April 2014 17:59, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: > > Broken deps for i386 > -- > [solr3] > solr3-3.6.2-5.fc21.noarch requires > mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-stempel) > solr3-3.6.2-5.fc21.noarch requires > mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-smartcn) > solr3-3.6.2-5.fc21.noarch requires > mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-phonetic) > solr3-3.6.2-5.fc21.noarch requires > mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-kuromoji) > solr3-3.6.2-5.fc21.noarch requires > mvn(org.apache.lucene:lucene-icu) > > solr3 should be retired and dependent packages should be ported to solr4. I think there is only one package that still requires solr3: $ repoquery --repoid=rawhide --whatrequires solr3 hibernate-search-0:4.5.0-1.fc21.noarch -- Mat Booth http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
W dniu 04.04.2014 19:43, Mikolaj Izdebski pisze: > On 04/04/2014 07:14 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> [snip] >> >> Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that >> matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise. > > It is definitely useful, but I wish there was some way of excluding > long-standing problems that no one cares to fix. Also list of most common blockers would be nice. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
> It is definitely useful, but I wish there was some way of excluding > long-standing problems that no one cares to fix. It might be nice if there was a counter for how many weeks they have been broken, though probably a bit harder to implement. Jens -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On 04/06/2014 03:11 AM, Christopher Meng wrote: > [totpcgi] > totpcgi-selinux-0.5.5-1.fc21.noarch requires > file:///usr/share/doc/selinux-policy/html/index.html > > If I understand correctly such packages which need extra selinux policy, > shouldn't they depend on a more vital dep instead of this? > > > According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SELinux_Policy_Modules_Packaging_Draft#Runtime_Dependencies it looks like there are some updated ways of setting %selinux_policyver for Fedora 20+. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@cora.nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
[totpcgi] totpcgi-selinux-0.5.5-1.fc21.noarch requires file:///usr/share/doc/selinux-policy/html/index.html If I understand correctly such packages which need extra selinux policy, shouldn't they depend on a more vital dep instead of this? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 09:08:57 -0600 Orion Poplawski wrote: > Like wise. The one change that might be nice would be to try would be > to consolidate the broken deps a bit - just a single note that a > package has broken dep in all arches (and listing those deps) rather > than repeating three times. It also will not scale if we add more > primary architectures. Where is the source for this mail? I'm glad you asked. ;) The base calls are all in the buildrawhide script: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/releng/tree/scripts/buildrawhide#n195 basically it's the start time, the depcheck from /usr/share/mash/spam-o-matic (in the mash package) repodiff output from the previous day and finish time. So, the depcheck part is in mash: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/mash/tree/utils/spam-o-matic Ideas for better output welcome! kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On 04/04/2014 01:17 PM, Al Dunsmuir wrote: > On Friday, April 4, 2014, 1:42:49 PM, Matthew Milleru wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 11:32:57AM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: >>> As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am >>> looking mostly at "Broken deps" and "Summaries", with only an occasional >>> peek at a changelog information, but on a number of occasions these >>> messages were crucial for me in disentangling broken dependencies on >>> my rawhide installation and/or filing some packaging bugs. Without that >>> information I would have a much harder time and either would add some >>> spurious junk to bugzilla or would not bother at all. They seem mostly to just raise the noise. >>> As opposed to what? > >> As opposed to meaningful discussion generated intentionally by human >> collaborators. But it appears that quite a few people do find them >> beneficial, and that's all I was asking. > > Very beneficial. > > Knowing the state of Rawhide (based on changes, and what is known to > be broken) seems like critical information for someone using or > testing on Rawhide. > > Unfortunately, not all changes that affect other packages are > announced in the fedora-announce list. Seeing replies to the "rawhide > report" is usually a heads up that someone broke something. > > Putting these and other script-generated reports elsewhere just makes > it harder for folks to keep track on what is happening. > > Al > Like wise. The one change that might be nice would be to try would be to consolidate the broken deps a bit - just a single note that a package has broken dep in all arches (and listing those deps) rather than repeating three times. It also will not scale if we add more primary architectures. Where is the source for this mail? -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@cora.nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
Hi, On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 01:42:49PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 11:32:57AM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > > As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am > > looking mostly at "Broken deps" and "Summaries", with only an occasional > > peek at a changelog information, but on a number of occasions these > > messages were crucial for me in disentangling broken dependencies on > > my rawhide installation and/or filing some packaging bugs. Without that > > information I would have a much harder time and either would add some > > spurious junk to bugzilla or would not bother at all. > > > They seem mostly to just raise the noise. > > As opposed to what? > > As opposed to meaningful discussion generated intentionally by human > collaborators. But it appears that quite a few people do find them > beneficial, and that's all I was asking. As far as I am concerned, these mails are more useful than a significant part of the "meaningful discussion generated intentionally by human collaborators". For one thing, it is the easiest way to discover which packages have been newly added to Fedora. Out of curiosity: do you really find one additional mail per day a problem, in the context of the usual traffic on fedora-devel? D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 01:14:30PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > [snip] > > Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that > matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise. To add to what others have said, I also find this a useful message. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On Friday, April 4, 2014, 1:42:49 PM, Matthew Milleru wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 11:32:57AM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: >> As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am >> looking mostly at "Broken deps" and "Summaries", with only an occasional >> peek at a changelog information, but on a number of occasions these >> messages were crucial for me in disentangling broken dependencies on >> my rawhide installation and/or filing some packaging bugs. Without that >> information I would have a much harder time and either would add some >> spurious junk to bugzilla or would not bother at all. >> > They seem mostly to just raise the noise. >> As opposed to what? > As opposed to meaningful discussion generated intentionally by human > collaborators. But it appears that quite a few people do find them > beneficial, and that's all I was asking. Very beneficial. Knowing the state of Rawhide (based on changes, and what is known to be broken) seems like critical information for someone using or testing on Rawhide. Unfortunately, not all changes that affect other packages are announced in the fedora-announce list. Seeing replies to the "rawhide report" is usually a heads up that someone broke something. Putting these and other script-generated reports elsewhere just makes it harder for folks to keep track on what is happening. Al -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On 04/04/2014 07:14 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > [snip] > > Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that > matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise. It is definitely useful, but I wish there was some way of excluding long-standing problems that no one cares to fix. -- Mikolaj Izdebski Software Engineer, Red Hat IRC: mizdebsk -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 11:32:57AM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am > looking mostly at "Broken deps" and "Summaries", with only an occasional > peek at a changelog information, but on a number of occasions these > messages were crucial for me in disentangling broken dependencies on > my rawhide installation and/or filing some packaging bugs. Without that > information I would have a much harder time and either would add some > spurious junk to bugzilla or would not bother at all. > > They seem mostly to just raise the noise. > As opposed to what? As opposed to meaningful discussion generated intentionally by human collaborators. But it appears that quite a few people do find them beneficial, and that's all I was asking. -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project-- "Tepid change for the somewhat better!" -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 07:39:18PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > I'm definitely going through this email every day. Not just to see what > is broken but what is new as well. Okay, carry on then. Just checking! -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project-- "Tepid change for the somewhat better!" -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
Dne 4.4.2014 19:14, Matthew Miller napsal(a): > [snip] > > Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that > matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise. > > > I'm definitely going through this email every day. Not just to see what is broken but what is new as well. Vít -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 13:14:30 -0400 Matthew Miller wrote: > [snip] > > Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that > matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise. > > > it is very useful to see what is changed and what is broken. if people fixed their broken deps quicker then it would be much more useful. Dennis -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTPukTAAoJEH7ltONmPFDR/GcP/2v9mpTeefs5purwaQlzgqMA +n3gDgtc/vGWRITmQiu9xNvWAnmEacxeVy/vsbwHtnUEj8ERTsV6TOuU/QT2csTU Qju2O0/+8NlZ2BBTVwNd6uhB/eb5jF4JRe6gLHbFrgVgr9GFFMTdi1haHWPgzJxj 3g17McMiviF2hTc7tgzDuI27Q4JA6MsFM7VSssnBLJ9aGv4TUNtAbrNPn2EW1S1K AzY+GYo1ddmvxmdRotM4KvveLOgadcawpIm2gC7X/M9O7BVmQ+43jzX7H8HSqTfK SnO86HmKfr89whNVJev+VV+IQ+sHvYHlG5VePpkGtnXaDuiYdfYshzJh6EE67w1s wvey1TcW2LOliMc/lQOlA75nZUc/2d9sz1lNtOgz4C8t8fkSMwwwmfzTsJf2TxCV e0Et1wiog1CKcVrpYk6OgoS0QCaNogsfzIXDKSmopSuNhretqCTfeiNT5Ia5jDGd v7pnqtoaauuAEaipOMLFBFu2D5qYNCrnL7wyV3FbffAymE3edTH8vTO/d6bNAhEw PWp+1TSRyey9m16b9/4NDHPTwsXOsTSn5UVyDCGRo+fCZd/J4Wb+Zh/t6WglLZDh e9psTeZzYkD/0ZK0CtsSgkfarWEnDindUFAynqTCZwzTkQv0b0aoB0YO0MG6DvxM uoaBZvhwj9BuqnyraHeW =Bfja -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes
[snip] Is it useful for these messages to go to the devel (or test, for that matter) lists? They seem mostly to just raise the noise. -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project-- "Tepid change for the somewhat better!" -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
