[EPEL-devel] Re: VLC via EPEL vs via RPMFUSION

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello, Leon.

On Monday, 08 January 2024 at 17:18, Leon Fauster via epel-devel wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> it seems that VLC is in EPEL9 now. Looks like some license changes
> allows packaging some multimedia stuff now. I noticed also the
> new epel-cisco-openh264 repo.
> 
> Unfortunately, I'm not involved in the upstream/Fedora discussions.
> So, I miss some kind of documentation. A look into Fedoras Wiki also
> doesn't show any article that explains the current status/motivation
> /limitations of such components and their differences to RPMFUSIONs
> one.  Also the concept of "freeworld" packages is unclear (at least to
> me).

What kind of documentation would you like to see? What exact questions
woud you like to see answered in such documentation?

> Some RPMFUSION packages were in conflict with the new packages in
> epel- testing. Currently, the conflicts are resolved but the
> epel-testing packages would overwrite the ones installed from
> RPMFUSION now (someone stated no assurance for such repo
> compatibility).

Perfect coordination is, unfortunately, not possible. Even if we pushed
the packages to testing and to stable repos at the same time in both
Fedora and RPM Fusion, there will still be delays due to mirroring.

> Any pointers to sources/docs/threads that explains the new strategies
> and activities or any other suggestions to read would be greatly
> appreciated.

I did a presentation on this topic at a local conference last year, but
it seems they haven't put it online yet. I'll try to post my slides when
I find them at least.

> BTW, do the RPMFUSION and Fedora Devs coordinate such overlap? Where?

We usually do it over bugzilla[1] and e-mail[2]. Sometimes on IRC[3] and
Matrix[4].

"We" here means the Multimedia SIG:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Multimedia_SIG

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org
[2] Direct or 
https://lists.rpmfusion.org/archives/list/rpmfusion-develop...@lists.rpmfusion.org/
[3] irc://#rpmfus...@libera.chat
[4] https://matrix.to/#/#multimedia:fedoraproject.org

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://fedoraproject.org
Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that
makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic.
-- from "The Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
--
___
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] Re: EPEL2RHEL - New Wording? - New Workflow?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Friday, 02 September 2022 at 18:25, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 12:12:07PM -0500, Maxwell G via epel-devel wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > EPEL2RHEL is part of the RHEL 8 and 9 new package workflow.  When a RHEL
> > > maintainer wants to add a package to RHEL 8 or 9 they start a "new package
> > > workflow".  There are several automations that happen when they start that
> > > workflow.  One of them is checking if the package is already in epel.  If
> > > it is, it creates a bugzilla against that package, and links that bug
> > > against the EPEL2RHEL tracker. [1]
> > > Remember, this check currently happens at the beginning of the new package
> > > workflow.  Before a package has been branched, built, or put into testing
> > > repos.
> > 
> > I think this whole process should be automated. File bugs that say "Heads 
> > up: 
> > your package will be automatically retired after the release of RHEL X.X" 
> > and 
> > provide some explanation. This will have multiple benefits:
> > 
> > 1. Saying "you'll have to do something in six months, but it'll be bad if 
> > you 
> > do it now" is quite difficult to follow.
> > 
> > 2. We can send out one announcement to epel-announce about which packages 
> > are 
> > going to be retired and when that'll happen, instead of retiring packages 
> > in a 
> > piecemeal manner.
> > 
> > 3. The maintainers won't have to remember to do it.
> > 
> > 4. If we find out that a package is buildroot only, then we'll close the 
> > bug 
> > and exclude it from the automatic retiring.
> 
> I really like this approach... :) 

It would be really nice if the wording of the bug could contain some
kind of a "thank you" note to the EPEL maintainers of the package in
question. Not everyone will understand this process as "great, I don't
have to maintain package X anymore, Red Hat will be doing that for me
from now on". Some folks may take it as "Oh no! Red Hat is taking away
my toy! Why?!" Ideally, there should still be a way for EPEL
maintainer(s) to continue contributing to the RHEL package.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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] Re: Postgrey packaging issue

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 10:21, Nick Howitt wrote:
> Hi,
> This app recently updated and I've noticed that it stomped on my
> /etc/sysconfig/postrgey file isn't this wrong? Looking at the spec file, in
> the %files section it has:
> 
> %{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/postgrey
> 
> Shouldn't this be:
> 
> %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/postgrey

It most probably should. This looks like a packaging bug and I'd suggest
opening a bug report, with a patch or even a pull request against the
spec file.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[EPEL-devel] using newer nodejs from SCL on EPEL7

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Dear all,
I'm attempting to package binaryen for Fedora (and EPEL7+)[1]. Unlike
Debian[2], I want to run its testsuite in %check. The testsuite uses
nodejs to run some of the optional tests, but it needs a newer nodejs
than the EOL'd version 6 that is in EPEL7 repo. I'd like to have the
same coverage on EPEL7, but it seems one cannot use the rh-nodejs*
packages even though they're available in CentOS sclo repo[3], because
mock config makes only devtoolset* packages visible[4].

Is the answer simply "no, you can't use newer nodejs on EPEL7"?

Regards,
Dominik

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860012
[2] https://packages.debian.org/sid/binaryen
[3] 
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/sclo/x86_64/rh/Packages/r/rh-nodejs12-nodejs-12.16.1-1.el7.x86_64.rpm
[4] 
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/blob/master/mock-core-configs/etc/mock/templates/epel-7.tpl#L82

-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Questions about installing epel-release

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi,

On Tuesday, 30 June 2020 at 04:17, Wei, Catherine wrote:
[...]
>   *   Results of rpm -V epel-release and rpm -qi epel-release
> [root@katt-shanghai katt-server-install]# rpm -V epel-release
> [root@katt-shanghai katt-server-install]# rpm -qi epel-release
> Name: epel-release
> Version : 7
> Release : 11
> Architecture: noarch
> Install Date: Sun 28 Jun 2020 04:25:48 PM CST
> Group   : System Environment/Base
> Size: 24834
> License : GPLv2
> Signature   : RSA/SHA256, Fri 11 May 2018 08:21:29 PM CST, Key ID 
> 24c6a8a7f4a80eb5
> Source RPM  : epel-release-7-11.src.rpm
> Build Date  : Tue 03 Oct 2017 01:45:58 AM CST
> Build Host  : buildvm-ppc64le-05.ppc.fedoraproject.org

This looks fine, although it seems it was re-signed with CentOS signing
key. The current version is 7-12, by the way.

[...]
> ?  Contents of  /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo
> [root@katt-shanghai katt-server-install]# cat  /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo
> [epel]
> name=Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 7 - $basearch
> #baseurl=http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/7/$basearch
> metalink=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=epel-7&arch=$basearch

That looks correct.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Questions about installing epel-release

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Monday, 29 June 2020 at 03:27, Wei, Catherine wrote:
> Thanks. I fixed this by changing the reposdir=/etc/yum.163.yum.repos.d
> to /etc/yum.repos.d/, then the epel repository can be found.

There are no such references in the epel-release package. Have you
downloaded the package over HTTPS? Can you post the output of:
rpm -V epel-release
rpm -qi epel-release
and the contents of /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo ?

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: What to do about python 3.4 in EPEL7?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Thursday, 07 May 2020 at 05:07, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 5/6/20 4:31 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 06. 05. 20 3:39, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > > This is related to my breaking of various packages by dropping
> > > python34-six. Should we:
> > > 
> > > - re-add python34-six
> > 
> > For now, yes please. This will need a big announcement and coordination,
> > in the meantime, users are impacted.
> 
> Agreed - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-d06905e9a7

Thanks!

> > > - Make an announcement and start removing python34- from EPEL7

Definitely. I assume bugs will be filed against all affected packages.

Question: should I be using %{python3_pkgversion} at all? Some packages
still use it, e.g. python3-ply (python36-ply binary package), and
some don't.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Trying to find Sponsor to help me get Sensu Go into EPEL7/EPEL8

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello, Devin.
Welcome to Fedora (EPEL)!

On Monday, 20 April 2020 at 17:54, Devin Acosta wrote:
> My name is Devin Acosta, I am a Red Hat Certified Architect, and I
> have for the past about month now been trying to get Sensu Go (Open
> Source Edition) into EPEL 7 / EPEL 8. I have joined the fedora-devel
> mailing list and followed the process so far to the best of my
> ability. I was wondering if anyone here could provide some assistance,
> as this is the EPEL devel list.

Unfortunately, we don't have that many sponsors, and many of the
existing ones are not very active. Please be patient.

> I have opened a bugzilla back on March 30th, located here:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1818670#
> 
> I have had a few people comment on my SPEC file, and I have made
> several modifications per their request on it, but then the track has
> gone cold at this point.
> 
> Hoping someone may have some ideas or shed light on what I need to do
> in order to try to get this finally into EPEL?

I checked out your SPEC file. It's not too bad, but it still needs a bit
more work. I put some more comments in the review ticket.

Do you intend your package to be built for EPEL only or in Fedora as
well? I hope it's the latter, as the package would be very useful for
server applications.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: RHEL8 package list

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Sunday, 29 March 2020 at 15:59, Mattia Verga wrote:
> Is there a way to get the package list and their version available in
> RHEL8?  For example, I would like to make kpmcore and
> kde-partitionmanager available in EPEL8, but they require util-linux
> >= 2.33.2. Since I can't find what version is available in
> Bodhi/Koji/etc. I would like to know if there's some other web
> service where I can find that without having to install a VM just for
> that...

Unofficial, but very useful:
http://rpms.remirepo.net/rpmphp/zoom.php

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL Steering Committee Request: Allow minizip-compat

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Monday, 04 November 2019 at 23:38, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Stephen John Smoogen  wrote:
> >
> > So I started to review
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1767883 which is a package
> > which is normally in the zlib package but has been commented out from
> > shipping on RHEL-8. It is needed for chromium and other items so Tom
> > Callaway has made up a package for it. However the naming guidelines
> > for packages have deprecated -compat packages even though this seems
> > to have been added after that rule was put in place.
> >
> > In reviewing the package the name was the only thing which came up and
> > i would like to give it a pass versus having it renamed to minizip1.2
> > (or better yet libminizip since all it is a library) untl the upstream
> > zlib package is named that way also.
> >
> 
> Honestly, it should probably be fixed in Fedora to be minizip1 /
> minizip1-devel instead of minizip-compat / minizip-compat-devel...
> 
> But I guess that as long as it's not that in Fedora, it's fine to be
> not it in EPEL...

I'd use the correct name and add Provides with what's in Fedora to
be removed when Fedora package is renamed. I don't see a good reason
not to do it properly when you have a chance. Dropping Provides: is
easier than package renaming.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: TeamViewer on RHEL 8 and qt. Help needed

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi,

On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 at 06:56, Thomas Stephen Lee wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 12:17 AM Troy Dawson 
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 10:53 AM Stephen John Smoogen
> >  wrote:
> > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 12:31, Thomas Stephen Lee
> > >  wrote:
[...]
> > > > Ran the command on RHEL 8 and most libraries are missing
> > > > (epel-playground and epel-testing repos are enabled).
> > > > Is it something to do with RHEL 8 not supporting KDE?
> > > >
> > > > What is the solution to get TeamViewer working on RHEL 8?
> >
> > From the teamviewer page
> > https://www.teamviewer.com/en-us/download/linux/
> > you can download an rpm designed for CentOS and Fedora
> >
> > https://www.teamviewer.com/en-us/teamviewer-automatic-download/?package=teamviewer&extension=x86_64.rpm&packageOS=linux
> >
> > That package seems to be able to install on both Fedora and RHEL8
> > with epel8-playground enabled.

> Working fine now.
> Thanks a lot😊.
> 
> did
> 
> dnf install qt5-qtwebchannel qt5-qtsensors qt5-qtlocation
> qt5-qtbase-gui qt5-qtx11extras qt5-qtdeclarative

FWIW, I don't like their package at all (as usual with vendor-provided
binaries), so I'm rolling my own:
https://gitlab.com/greysector/teamviewer

Feel free to use it.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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

[EPEL-devel] Re: What version of gcc is available in EPEL-7?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Friday, 07 June 2019 at 11:01, José Abílio Matos wrote:
> On Friday, 7 June 2019 09.50.08 WEST Florian Weimer wrote:
> > There are publicly available builds of GCC 8 for CentOS:
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > It still uses the old C++ ABI.   and many other things will work,
> > though.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Florian
> 
> Can we use those packages as BR (build requirements) when building for epel-7?
> 
> That is my main concern. I would like to make lyx-2.4 available also for 
> epel-7.

Yes. Please check the mkvtoolnix package, for example. In short:

BuildRequires: devtoolset-7-gcc-c++
...
%build
. /opt/rh/devtoolset-7/enable

Should be enough. I haven't tried devtoolset-8 yet. I'll try it when I
do the next mkvtoolnix update.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Proposal: Ending PPC64 support for EPEL6 and EPEL7

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Friday, 10 May 2019 at 23:06, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
[...]
> This is not a zero cost on our side to keep this going, and its benefits
> are currently to 90 systems versus 1.5 million systems (x86_64). If it is
> important enough that we need to keep doing it, then we will have to find
> something else to drop.

Are these numbers the number of unique IPs accessing EPEL repos?
If yes, the difference in magnitude is staggering and I have no
doubts it's not worth the effort to keep maintaining ppc64 builders
for such small user base.

Oh well. At least I managed to report quite a few endianness-related
bugs thanks to ppc64 support in Fedora. ;)

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Proposal: Ending PPC64 support for EPEL6 and EPEL7

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Friday, 10 May 2019 at 18:07, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> With Fedora soon to no longer build for the PPC64 platform, the ability for
> EPEL to continue support of this platform is going to get much harder.

I assume that's because the builders are running Fedora. What if they
were rebuilt to run RHEL7?

> As such, it would be good to look at ending support for this platform in
> our build system when RHEL-7.7 happens.

Pity. I was hoping to keep my ppc64 VM at OpenPowerHub alive by
rebuilding it with RHEL7 instead of Fedora.

With ppc64 in EPEL we had at least one big-endian arch to build for
across both Fedora (s390x) and EPEL (ppc64). Now, we're going to lose
the latter.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPM Fusion  http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: cairo issue with RHEL 7.6?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 31 October 2018 at 04:47, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-10-30 at 20:57 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > I'm getting this:
> > 
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Error: Package: cairo-1.15.12-3.el7.ppc64 (build)
> > DEBUG util.py:439: Requires: libEGL.so.1()(64bit)
> > DEBUG util.py:439:  Error: Package: cairo-1.15.12-3.el7.ppc64 (build)
> > DEBUG util.py:439: Requires: libGL.so.1()(64bit)
> > 
> > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/logback?collection=epe
> > l7
> > 
> > That appears to be the appropriate latest version of cairo in RHEL
> > 7.6. 
> > Did it somehow not get properly rebuilt against the latest mesa-
> > libGL/EGL?
> 
> +1 
> 
> perl-Qt's dependencies failed to resolve in EPEL 7
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/perl-Qt?collecti
> on=epel7
> 
> debconf's dependencies failed to resolve in EPEL 7
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/debconf?collecti
> on=epel7
> 
> smokeqt's dependencies failed to resolve in EPEL 7
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/smokeqt?collecti
> on=epel7
> 
> clamav's dependencies failed to resolve in EPEL 7
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/clamav?collectio
> n=epel7
> 
> mlt's dependencies failed to resolve in EPEL 7
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/mlt?collection=e
> pel7

Same here, trying to build the latest mkvtoolnix (with a security fix!)
fails everywhere except aarch64:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=30569456

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPMFusion   http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: certbot for EL 6?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi, Ricardo.

On Tuesday, 30 October 2018 at 19:33, Ricardo J. Barberis wrote:
> I was wondering if it's possible to ask for certbot for EL6, or is it
> too much trouble to package it?

There's some work in progress towards this. Feel free to jump in and
assist: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288744

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPMFusion   http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: building with devtoolset

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 10 October 2018 at 19:46, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Dave Love wrote:
> > I thought devtoolset was now available for building EPEL packages, but
> > I've just tried with something that needs a more recent gcc than el6's
> > but neither devtoolset-6 nor -7 are found.  Should that work?
> 
> I don't think devtoolset was added to koji for el6.  It's in
> the mock configs, so you can build locally.  But IIRC,
> support for el6 was left out with an informal "let's wait to
> see if there's much (or any) demand for it" policy.

It seems to be available for epel7 in koji, but mock-core-configs
doesn't contain a ppc64 target config even though koji does have it.
I opened https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1637059 and was
told that epel7 ppc64 mock configs never existed before, which is
strange, considering koji does build for epel7 on ppc64.

What's more worrying is that CentOS mirrors seem to be missing
devtoolset repo for ppc64. It's available only for x86_64, aarch64 and
ppc64le. Consequently, it's not possible to reproduce koji builds with
devtoolset on ppc64 locally in mock. Any ideas where I should open
a bug report for this?

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPMFusion   http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Python2 and Python3 SCons

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi, Antonio.

On Tuesday, 26 December 2017 at 13:23, Antonio Trande wrote:
> Hi all.
> 
> It seems that we need separated Python2 and Python3 SCons scripts,
> that's, Scons built with Python2 does not work with Python3 code and
> viceversa.

Out of curiosity, what breaks in the mixed scenarios and how? What are
the errors?

> For that reason, i have rebuilt Scons in two different packages with
> Python2 and Python3 in Fedora; with Python2 only on Epel7.
> http://copr-fe.cloud.fedoraproject.org/coprs/sagitter/ForTesting/build/691292/
[...]

Unfortunately, copr's dist-git is timing out on me, so I'm unable
to see your sources.

Regards,
Dominik

-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPMFusion   http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: borgbackup for el6 possible?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello, Rainer.

On Tuesday, 19 December 2017 at 17:52, Rainer Traut wrote:
[...]
> Is there a chance to see an epel6 borgbackup release?

The best chance is when you become its maintainer, at least for the el6
branch. :)

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPMFusion   http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: missing protobuf-c-devel in ppc64

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Monday, 23 October 2017 at 12:05, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 11:49:29 +0200
> Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos  wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >  It seems that the ppc64 buildroot of epel does not contain
> > protobuf-c- devel. Error during installation (from [0]) is:
> > Error: No Package found for protobuf-c-devel
> > 
> > That issue does not exist in the ppc64le, nor any other architecture.
> > Is there an issue with the ppc64 architecture?
> 
> most likely protobuf-c is a dependency of a product that's not
> made available on ppc64, thus neither protobuf-c is available

And you might need to submit (or ask Fedora maintainer to submit)
protobuf as a limited-arch package for ppc64:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#Limited_Arch_Packages

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora   https://getfedora.org  |  RPMFusion   http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] orphaning: ctorrent

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Dear EPEL community,
I've just orphaned the EL6 branch of ctorrent, a console torrent client.
I don't use it anymore. I switched to rtorrent a long time ago.

Regards,
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] orphaning packages

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Dear EPEL maintainers,
I've orphaned el6 branches of a couple of old packages:
dx  (11 years since last release)
dx-examples
raidutils   (management tools for 10+yo hardware, no longer developed)
vaspview(16 years since last release)

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: 0.0 Draft of EPEL Charter

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 08 March 2017 at 18:40, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 8 March 2017 at 10:32, Jeff Sheltren  wrote:
> > What's the backstory on this? It mostly looks good to me. Is there a way to
> > propose edits off-list (editing this in an email doesn't seem great).
> >
> 
> I am going to put these up on the epel pagure so that people can make
> pulls and such.
> 
> The back story is that EPEL has a ton of very old and out of date
> information that people find on the wiki. EPEL also has not had its
> 'charter' looked at or renewed by Fedora in a long time while most
> other groups have. So I am trying to get us back under a clear set of
> documents and to remove all the old cruft.

For the record, I brought back the deleted SysV init script guidelines
and moved them over to EPEL namespace:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#SysV_initscripts
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:SysVInitScripts

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Fwd: Interested in joining EPEL SIG

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello, Beth, and welcome.

On Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 21:25, Beth Lynn Eicher wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I am interested in joining the EPEL SIG. If I am in the wrong place, please
> inform me.

This is the right place. There's also the #epel IRC channel. There's a
wiki page at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Package_Maintainers .
If there's anything unclear, please ask.

> To be more specific, I am interested in helping in any of the following
> areas:
> 1. Identify any packages in need of ownership.
> 2. Volunteer to own orphaned packages and/or take on packages that ought to
> be a part of EPEL and are not already.
> 3. Communicate with the modularity efforts in Fedora.
> 4. Keep the CentOS community updated regarding EPEL.
> 5. Attend IRC meetings specific to the EPEL SIG. If these don't exist, I am
> willing to coordinate.

There are weekly meetings on Tuesdays at 18:00 UTC.

> 6. EPEL QA
> 7. Wiki gardening EPEL related pages.
> 8. Anything else?!?
> 
> Please let me know if there is anything else that I can do to get involved
> with EPEL.

That's a pretty long list and it'd be awesome if you were able to help
ith even half of that.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: unison240 and epel7

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Thursday, 22 September 2016 at 02:18, jason taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 07:26 -0400, jason taylor wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 08:34 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > 
> > > Let's keep the discussion on the epel-devel mailing list.
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 08:33:49PM -0400, jason taylor wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Rich,
> > > > 
> > > > I updated the spec to include:
> > > > 
> > > > %if 0%{?el7}
> > > > ExcludeArch:   ppc64
> > > > %endif
> > > > 
> > > > The scratch build is here:
> > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15711388
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Is the conditional something you would want to merge into the
> > > > other
> > > > branches or in this case maintain the epel spec seperately from
> > > > the
> > > > other branches?
> > > 
> > > Please keep these changes in the epel 7 branch.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I noticed that the latest upstream stable release is 2.48.4 and
> > > > also
> > > > that we build for very specific versions of unison.
> > > > 
> > > > I was wondering what the history behind the RPM versioning that
> > > > we
> > > > have
> > > > is and would it be possible/advisable to update to 2.48 while we
> > > > are
> > > > adding the epel7 branch?
> > > 
> > > If you want to build the latest version in the epel 7 branch, then
> > > go
> > > ahead.  I need to get round to updating the OCaml packages in
> > > master
> > > at some point when I have the time.
> > > 
> > > Rich.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sounds good, thanks!
> > 
> > JT
> 
> With regard to package naming, how do packages with specific naming
> like this get handled?
> 
> For instance in this case, when updating to the latest upstream unison-
> 2.48.4 this changes the package name to unison248.
> 
> Does this requires a new package request/review?

In Fedora, not anymore[1]. If EPEL doesn't have a specific guideline for
this, then not here, either.

Regards,
Dominik

[1] 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_Process
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Adding the devtoolset repo for EPEL builds

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 31 August 2016 at 10:58, dani wrote:
[...]
> As far as i could tell, the main argument against my scheme was usage of
> /opt, yet it is approved for scl, despite scl's limitations.

SCL was never approved for Fedora. It's something that Red Hat provides
in their products only.

> I'm only asking for a clear policy regarding multiversion packages, which
> would define clear guidelines on any submission requests.

RPM already supports installation of multiple versions of a package
as long as they don't conflict.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] review swap

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Dear EPEL packagers,
is anyone up for a swap review?

Review Request: antlr-python - Python runtime support for
ANTLR-generated parsers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1189171

This is an addon for the RHEL6 package which is missing python bindings.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Re: Broken torque update with enabled NUMA

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 13 April 2016 at 22:15, Brown, David M JR wrote:
[...]
> This does however bring to mind something that¹s been growing in my head
> for a while now. I think we need a Fedora HPC SIG to help communicate the
> needs of the HPC community to Fedora (and then hopefully Redhat) about how
> HPC clusters work and what kinds of support we need when it comes to the
> software we run.
[...]

+1, though it seems to overlap a bit with the SciTech SIG, which
focuses on packaging scientific software for Fedora/EPEL.

I'd be interested in joining the HPC SIG as maintainer of several
packages which are meant to be used on HPC clusters.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [EPEL-devel] epel CD

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 21:01, Carpenter, Rob wrote:
> Is is possible to create an EPEL CD for installation of packages
> onto standalone systems not connected to the internet?

It's technically possible to put a copy of EPEL repo on any removable
media provided it has enough space, but as far as I know nobody is
producing EPEL "images". Why don't you try doing it yourself?

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] crlibm and libscs for EPEL 7?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Saturday, 10 October 2015 at 01:01, Rich Rauenzahn wrote:
> On 10/9/2015 1:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> >You could ask to become the maintainer in EPEL: 
> >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Become_a_co-maintainer
> >
> >>That looks like quite an involved process with an uncertain outcome ...
> >The process may look involved at first, but it's usually not that much
> >work after the initial formalities. Why do you think the outcome is
> >uncertain?
> 
> There are a lot of caveats listed in the requirements to be approved as a
> package maintainer after the initial formalities (some of which I started!).
> Finding a sponsor, contributing in "other ways" than just supporting the
> specific packages that I need.  I don't want to commit to things I wouldn't
> be able to follow through on.

That's quite understandable. Speaking as a sponsor myself, the minimum
I require from the people I sponsor is that they make at least two
non-trivial informal package reviews to show that they understand the
Packaging Guidelines and that they submit one package of their own.

In this case showing the crlibm and libscs spec files for EPEL7 branch
and doing a couple of informal reviews should be enough for sponsorship.
Unfortunately I don't have time for another sponsoree at the moment.

> >>Is that the only viable option at the moment?  Adopt it myself?
> >I'm afraid that's how it works for most packages. People who use the
> >software and have the skills to maintain it usually do it.
> >
> >You can also pay someone to maintain it for you. ;)
> 
> Don't have that ability (pay) in the position I'm in at my company, and

I was half-kidding there.

> realistically, I can just check the rpm I built into our ansible repository.
> Or rewrite my software to not use pyinterval.

Of course, but in my opinion, it's better to share.

> I've re-built/modified some rpm packages, but don't profess to be anywhere
> near an expert level.  More in the amateur realm, but enough to modify an
> existing rpm to build on newer platforms or to swap out versions of source.

Don't worry. Nobody is born with rpm packaging knowledge. Many of us are
(still) amateurs and there are a lot of people ready to lend a hand in
this community, so don't be afraid to get your feet wet, please.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] crlibm and libscs for EPEL 7?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello,

On Friday, 09 October 2015 at 01:59, Rich Rauenzahn wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Orion Poplawski  wrote:
> > On 10/07/2015 02:05 PM, Rich Rauenzahn wrote:
> >> Tim got back to me quickly.  He doesn't have the time or need to
> >> maintain them for EPEL 7.  He offers to pass on the ownership to
> >> another packager.
> >
> > You could ask to become the maintainer in EPEL:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Become_a_co-maintainer
> 
> That looks like quite an involved process with an uncertain outcome ...

The process may look involved at first, but it's usually not that much
work after the initial formalities. Why do you think the outcome is
uncertain?

> Is that the only viable option at the moment?  Adopt it myself?

I'm afraid that's how it works for most packages. People who use the
software and have the skills to maintain it usually do it.

You can also pay someone to maintain it for you. ;)

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] ImageMagick soname bump in RHEL 6.7

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Monday, 27 July 2015 at 21:33, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Apparently RHEL 6.7 has updated from ImageMagick 6.5.4.7 to 6.7.2.7 including
> a soname bump.  The following EPEL packages are affected:
[...]
> dx-4.4.4-11.el6.3.src.rpm
[...]
> A bug has already been filed against dx, but no idea about any others.

Thanks, I'll take a look at it in a bit.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] websvn epel package appears to be missing some javascript files

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello,

On Tuesday, 05 May 2015 at 13:29, Ian Macdougall wrote:
> On 30 April 2015 at 17:11, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <
> domi...@greysector.net> wrote:
> 
> > Hello, Ian.
> >
> > On Thursday, 30 April 2015 at 12:32, Ian Macdougall wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I have just installed websvn on a RHEL 6 machine and there seems to be
> > some
> > > things missing, specifically the javascript dir and inside that the
> > > javascript file group-collapse.js needed to collapse the listing of
> > grouped
> > > repos:
> >
> > Judging by
> > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/websvn.git/tree/websvn.spec?h=el6#n76
> > it seems the javascript directory is not getting installed:
> > [...]
> > mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_datadir}/%{name}
> > cp -a *.php include languages templates $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_datadir}/%{name}
> > [...]
> >
> 
> I think the javascript is missing from the RPM too.

That's what I (implicitly) meant. Whatever is not installed in %install
section doesn't end up in the final RPM.

> > Please file a bug against websvn in EL6 branch, preferably with a patch
> > fixing the issue. That's the best way to get maintainer attention.
> >
> >
> I have filed a bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218590

Excellent, thank you. Hopefully the maintainer acts on it soon, as the
fix seems to be easy.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] websvn epel package appears to be missing some javascript files

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello, Ian.

On Thursday, 30 April 2015 at 12:32, Ian Macdougall wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I have just installed websvn on a RHEL 6 machine and there seems to be some
> things missing, specifically the javascript dir and inside that the
> javascript file group-collapse.js needed to collapse the listing of grouped
> repos:

Judging by 
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/websvn.git/tree/websvn.spec?h=el6#n76
it seems the javascript directory is not getting installed:
[...]
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_datadir}/%{name}
cp -a *.php include languages templates $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_datadir}/%{name}
[...]

Please file a bug against websvn in EL6 branch, preferably with a patch
fixing the issue. That's the best way to get maintainer attention.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] python-reportlab available in RHEL6 but not in EPEL6 buildroot

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi, Kevin.

On Sunday, 08 February 2015 at 18:22, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 17:18:02 +0100
> Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  wrote:
[...]
> > > DEBUG util.py:389:  Getting requirements for
> > > python-biopython-1.65-1.el6.src
> > > DEBUG util.py:389:   --> python-devel-2.6.6-52.el6.x86_64
> > > DEBUG util.py:389:   --> flex-devel-2.5.35-9.el6.x86_64
> > > DEBUG util.py:389:   --> numpy-1.4.1-9.el6.x86_64
> > > DEBUG util.py:389:   --> MySQL-python-1.2.3-0.3.c1.1.el6.x86_64
> > > DEBUG util.py:389:   --> python-psycopg2-2.0.14-2.el6.x86_64
> > > DEBUG util.py:389:  Error: No Package found for python-reportlab
> > > DEBUG util.py:500:  Child return code was: 1
> > > 
> > > Any ideas?
> 
> The package wasn't blocked correctly. 
> 
> It was just completely blocked, but when a package moves into RHEL, we
> need to block it in EPEL and unblock it in the koji RHEL repo so you
> can still build against it. ;) 
> 
> I've done this, so hopefully it will work for you after the next
> newrepo...

It built successfully just now. Thanks a lot!

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] python-reportlab available in RHEL6 but not in EPEL6 buildroot

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Small correction:

On Friday, 06 February 2015 at 16:32, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Dear EPEL developers,
> I'm trying to package some scientific software written in python which
> depends on python-biopython.

Missing sentence:
python-biopython is branched for el6, but failed to build due to missing
python-reportlab.

> While that exists in Fedora, it was retired
> in EPEL6 because it exists in RHEL6:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=628546
> 
> ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS/python-reportlab-2.3-3.el6.src.rpm
> 
> However, it doesn't seem to be available in the buildroot:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=602954
> 
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5350/8845350/root.log
> [...]
> DEBUG util.py:389:  Getting requirements for
> python-biopython-1.65-1.el6.src
> DEBUG util.py:389:   --> python-devel-2.6.6-52.el6.x86_64
> DEBUG util.py:389:   --> flex-devel-2.5.35-9.el6.x86_64
> DEBUG util.py:389:   --> numpy-1.4.1-9.el6.x86_64
> DEBUG util.py:389:   --> MySQL-python-1.2.3-0.3.c1.1.el6.x86_64
> DEBUG util.py:389:   --> python-psycopg2-2.0.14-2.el6.x86_64
> DEBUG util.py:389:  Error: No Package found for python-reportlab
> DEBUG util.py:500:  Child return code was: 1
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Regards,
> Dominik
> -- 
> Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
> RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
> "Faith manages."
> -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
> ___
> epel-devel mailing list
> epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

[EPEL-devel] python-reportlab available in RHEL6 but not in EPEL6 buildroot

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Dear EPEL developers,
I'm trying to package some scientific software written in python which
depends on python-biopython. While that exists in Fedora, it was retired
in EPEL6 because it exists in RHEL6:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=628546

ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS/python-reportlab-2.3-3.el6.src.rpm

However, it doesn't seem to be available in the buildroot:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=602954

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/5350/8845350/root.log
[...]
DEBUG util.py:389:  Getting requirements for
python-biopython-1.65-1.el6.src
DEBUG util.py:389:   --> python-devel-2.6.6-52.el6.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:389:   --> flex-devel-2.5.35-9.el6.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:389:   --> numpy-1.4.1-9.el6.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:389:   --> MySQL-python-1.2.3-0.3.c1.1.el6.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:389:   --> python-psycopg2-2.0.14-2.el6.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:389:  Error: No Package found for python-reportlab
DEBUG util.py:500:  Child return code was: 1

Any ideas?

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] .spec file mentoring

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi, Bryan.

On Monday, 20 October 2014 at 11:37, Bryan Hepworth wrote:
> Does anyone on the list do mentoring at all? I'd like to build a package
> and could do with a bit of a hand.

In theory, any packager should be able to help you. I think you might
find someone faster if you go to one of the IRC channels (e.g. #epel,
#fedora-devel)

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: [EPEL-devel] transitioning packages to EPEL version

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello,

On Thursday, 16 October 2014 at 11:40, Sharuzzaman Ahmat Raslan wrote:
> I have previously installed backuppc 3.1.0 from centos 5 testing. The
> package is now not maintaned by centos anymore.
> 
> EPEL have BackupPC version 3.3.0, but yum check-update did not suggest that
> this package is a replacement for the backuppc package by centos

It isn't. At least not according to package name (hint: package names
are case-sensitive). The requisite Obsoletes: tag is most probably missing
as well in the EPEL package.

> How do I transition the backuppc centos to BackupPC EPEL?

You have to either fix the EPEL package .spec file yourself and rebuild
or file a bug against the package.

Regards,
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: EPEL missing amavisd-new dependencies in epel6-arm

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello, Robert.

On Wednesday, 08 October 2014 at 18:04, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
[...]
> But there is an equiv to Centos6-arm, and that is Redsleeve6.  There is that
> large community of Rasp-PI out there, but I see the Allwinner chip,
> particularly the Cubieboard as a more server device (has a sata interface
> and 1 - 2 G memory).
> 
> I was told that I might have to use cpan2rpm for these two, but that will be
> yet another new advanture.

No. You should be able to rebuild current EPEL6 packages on your
Redsleeve 6 box using mock (if you have the disk space and RAM).
The resulting packages should be functionally identical to what
you would get if there were an EPEL6 repo for ARM.

> And for Dovecot, I am missing:
> 
> perl-Email-Valid
> perl-Log-Log4perl
> perl-MIME-EncWords
> imapsync
> 
> Going to have to figure out how to get those.
> 
> In the epel6 repo they all show as -noarch

noarch packages should work on any arch, so you should be able
to just use those.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: EPEL httpd-itk doesn't work with latest version of httpd-2.2.15

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi, Scott.

On Tuesday, 05 August 2014 at 23:27, Scott O'Neil wrote:
> On Aug 5, 2014, at 5:17 AM, Christopher Meng wrote:
> 
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121148
> > 
> 
> This doesn't look like the same problem.
> 
> CentOS6 is having linking problems with mod_status.so as a result of
> changes made to rectify CVE-2014-0226. CentOS7 is having linking problem
> with mod_access_compat.so (and I bet others) because httpd is at version
> 2.4.6, but httpd-itk is at version 2.2.22.
> 
> I've never packaged anything for Fedora EPEL, I'm not sure what's good
> protocol here. I've got a good C6 spec file with all the CVE patches from
> 2.2.15 (and one from a JBoss 2.2.22) RPMs rolled into the httpd-itk RPM.
> It builds, installs, starts, and runs cleanly from what I can tell.

Please see https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/310 before doing any
further work on this. httpd-itk requires full Apache HTTPD source
to build and so requires a bundling exception.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: EPEL thoughts or views on packages deliberately left out of rhel?

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 30 April 2014 at 15:02, Jim Perrin wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/29/2014 10:43 PM, s...@shk.io wrote:
> > On 2014-04-30 06:57, Jim Perrin wrote:
> >> The RC for el7 specifically omits packages that have drawn interest in
> >> the past. A few examples of such packages would be kmail and pidgin.
> >>
> >> kmail is ordinarily part of the kde-pim suite, but is stripped from the
> >> final build via some 'rm' handiwork in the spec. Pidgin is omitted from
> >> the build via a check to see if the build host is rhel. The libs are
> >> used and included, but the binary is no longer produced.
> > 
> > In the pidgin case is libpurple the main thing that gets used in RHEL?
> > If so but it's under the 'pidgin' namespace then maybe a -bin package
> > could be provided via EPEL or some other means. Alternatively it might
> > make sense to file a BZ to have it moved under a different package name
> > altogether?
> 
> 
> Yes, libpurple seems to be the main thing needed/wanted. Important bits
> from the spec appear to be ->
> 
> %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7
> %global build_only_libs 1
> %global api_docs0
> %endif
> 
> 
> %if %{build_only_libs}
> SWITCHES="$SWITCHES --disable-consoleui --disable-gtkui"
> %endif
> 
> 
> %if ! %{build_only_libs}
> desktop-file-install --vendor pidgin --delete-original  \
>  --add-category X-Red-Hat-Base  \
>  --dir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications  \
>  $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications/pidgin.desktop
> %endif
> 
[snip - about kmail]
> 
> I guess I have two specific questions for this.
> 
> 1. Can epel track and provide the same source versions of packages that
> RH provides for RHEL?
> 2. Is the demand worth the effort?

I'd be interested in the pidgin package. However, current package in
RHEL7 disables Gadu-gadu support in libpurple, which is a deal-breaker
for me. I filed a bug[1] about it, but if it's not fixed, I'll be rolling
my own packages anyway.

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064053

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

Re: EPEL 7 branch requests

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Sunday, 23 February 2014 at 18:22, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 18:10:10 +0100
> Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  wrote:
> 
> > Hello everyone,
> > are the EPEL7 branch requests on
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7/Requests still being
> > processed or are we back to the standard branch requests in the
> > original review bugs?
> 
> Yes they are. 
> 
> I'll look at processing it later today if no one beats me to it. 

OK, thanks. I'm in no hurry, I was just wondering if I did the right
thing.

Thanks and regards,
Dominik

-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel

EPEL 7 branch requests

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hello everyone,
are the EPEL7 branch requests on
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7/Requests still being processed
or are we back to the standard branch requests in the original review
bugs?

Regards,
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel