> As I already mentioned in person when this came up in a DevConf talk, I
> think that this is a plan that will likely break a lot of things, especially
> the expectations all our users rely on (that everything in Everything has a
> consistent guaranteed life time), and that doing away with that
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 01:45:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > Of course, EPEL vs Fedora comes to mind here, but I wonder: if the EPEL
> > maintainer has also commit on the Fedora branches, is it really that much
> > of a big deal? And vice-versa?
>
> Well, I don't w
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 01:45:12AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> > Of course, EPEL vs Fedora comes to mind here, but I wonder: if the EPEL
> > maintainer has also commit on the Fedora branches, is it really that much
> > of a big deal? And vice-versa?
>
> Well, I don't w
On 03/25/2017 01:45 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
Of course, EPEL vs Fedora comes to mind here, but I wonder: if the EPEL
maintainer has also commit on the Fedora branches, is it really that much
of a big deal? And vice-versa?
Well, I don't want to get the EPEL bugs assigne
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Of course, EPEL vs Fedora comes to mind here, but I wonder: if the EPEL
> maintainer has also commit on the Fedora branches, is it really that much
> of a big deal? And vice-versa?
Well, I don't want to get the EPEL bugs assigned to me.
> PS2: I am also considering thi
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 02:34:42PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > "PC" == Pierre-Yves Chibon writes:
>
> PC> So, does per-branch ACLs make sense to you? Have you had cases where
> PC> you thought it was good/bad? More importantly, have you had cases
> PC> where you would want to give
Missing expected images:
Server dvd i386
Server boot i386
Failed openQA tests: 12/108 (x86_64), 1/2 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
ID: 70218 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/70218
ID: 70230 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join
On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 15:37 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Oh good — this was going to be my comment… having different main
> contacts and package admins might be.
Oh good — this was going to be my comment ☺
I do like and use the ability to have bug reports for different
branches go to different
On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 13:38 +, Petr Pisar wrote:
> third-party == from different host (bodhi.fedoraproject.org. !=
> taskotron.fedoraproject.org.).
The JavaScript that loads the taskotron results from resultsdb is in
Bodhi, not taskotron:
https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/blob/2.4.0/bodhi
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 16/107 (x86_64), 3/18 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20170323.n.0):
ID: 70097 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/70097
ID: 70098 Tes
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:35:55AM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 03/21/2017 07:33 AM, Jerry James wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Jerry James wrote:
> > > I'm really not sure what to check next. If an aarch64 box for
> > > packagers will be available in the not too distant
I also wanted to add that a small bit of ACL flexibility is a very small
cost if we gain what Pagure offers. Easy personal package forks. Pull
requests for packages. I'd give up more than per-branch ACLs for that,
certainly.
- J<
___
devel mailing li
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:37:59PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> PS2: I am also considering this question having in mind the change in
> branching model the modularity work will bring (ie: branch no longer
> tied to a Fedora version but rather to upstream's version)
Oh good — this was going t
> "PC" == Pierre-Yves Chibon writes:
PC> So, does per-branch ACLs make sense to you? Have you had cases where
PC> you thought it was good/bad? More importantly, have you had cases
PC> where you would want to give someone access to just one branch and
PC> really really do *not* want them to ha
Hi everyone,
As I am working on bringing pagure as a front-end to our dist-git, a question is
troubling me.
Currently ACLs are stored in pkgdb, it allows having a per-branch ACL model,
which in itself is quite cool, but I wonder: is it that useful?
I know pkgdb brings us other things too and I a
On Friday, March 24, 2017 10:08:05 AM EDT Rex Dieter wrote:
> Steve Grubb wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 12:15:30 PM EDT Rex Dieter wrote:
> >> Steve Grubb wrote:
> >> > you have to reboot your system because it dies holding a video driver
> >> > mutex
> >>
> >> If you happen to be using
Hi, I'm Travis (aka Pouar in the Furry Fandom) and I'm hoping to become
a package co-maintainer (assuming there are any packages needing one,
not sure where to find them so I might need help). If not there are a
few packages I could probably submit, but I'm not exactly available 24/7
atm. I've been
Hi,
I am no longer able to devote any time to maintain freemarker. I am
orphaning it.
I believe it is a dependency for the following packages.
bval-0:1.1.1-3.fc26.src
bval-json-0:1.1.1-3.fc26.noarch
cookcc-0:0.3.3-15.fc26.noarch
cookcc-0:0.3.3-15.fc26.src
eclipse-cdt-1:9.2.0-4.fc26.src
eclipse-cd
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2017-03-24)
===
Meeting started by dgilmore at 16:00:55 UTC. The full logs are
available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2017-03-24/fesco.2017-
03-24-16.00.log.html
.
Meeting summary
On 03/23/2017 08:43 PM, Andrew Toskin wrote:
... Does anyone here know the risk factors [of running sensors-detect],
and how much risk there really is today ...
My experience is that sensors[-detect] works best for an Intel x86* CPU
with 100% PCI/PCI-e cards, and for some older AMD x86* PCI/PCI
> so your argument is that Solaris created IPS because they wanted to
> steal a rpm of ksh93?
I'm not here to argue one way or another.
It is well documented that at IPS creation time, Solaris userspace was in a
terrible state, both terribly incomplete and (for the bits that were present)
in va
On 24.03.2017 13:34, nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
>> Why would Solaris switch to rpm, when they already had SysV
>> packages at the time, which are pretty much equivalent in
>> functionality?
>
> Solaris at the time had degenerated into a barebones system, they
> needed to find a way to impo
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 03:43:09AM -, Andrew Toskin wrote:
> I've used both Freon and lm_sensors without blowing up my computer,
> and it since `sensors-detect` is mandatory for Freon to work, it seems
> like it should be included in a %post scriptlet. But I don't want to
> damage unsuspecting
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:42:10PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 15/03/17 18:31 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >Does anybody know why I'd have got this today?
I think you should file a bug against rpm-mpi-hooks.
rpm-mpi-hooks was installed in the mock root for the last boost build.
Not sure
Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Thursday, March 23, 2017 12:15:30 PM EDT Rex Dieter wrote:
>> Steve Grubb wrote:
>> > you have to reboot your system because it dies holding a video driver
>> > mutex
>>
>> If you happen to be using nouveau, I may be able to help with a
>> workaround to use software rend
On 2017-03-24, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:11:22AM +, Petr Pisar wrote:
>> > It would be under the "Automated Test Results",
>>
>> So this the stuff loaded by a third-party javascript code that I have
>> disabled. That explains why I wasn't able to see it anywhere.
>
>
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:11:22AM +, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > It would be under the "Automated Test Results",
>
> So this the stuff loaded by a third-party javascript code that I have
> disabled. That explains why I wasn't able to see it anywhere.
I don't think we use any "third-party" javascri
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 08:00:35PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> Due to blockers found during the last days [1] we have decided to
> delay the Fedora 26 Alpha release for one more week. There is going to
Of particular note, this does *not* automatically delay the F27
release. That means that with the
On 15/03/17 18:31 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Does anybody know why I'd have got this today?
The only recent change to Boost is to enabled the MPI packages on
ppc64le, but that shouldn't have affected all arches:
--- a/boost.spec
+++ b/boost.spec
@@ -7,11 +7,8 @@
%global boost_docdir __tmp_d
> Why would Solaris switch to rpm, when they already had SysV packages at
> the time, which are pretty much equivalent in functionality?
Solaris at the time had degenerated into a barebones system, they needed to
find a way to import all the stuff packaged by Linux distros of repackage
thousand
Hello and welcome to the community Simon!
Charalampos Stratakis
Associate Software Engineer
Python Maintenance Team, Red Hat
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Fels"
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 1:20:50 PM
Subject: Self Introduction: Simon Fels
Hey ever
Hey everybody,
My name is Simon Fels. I am now working with open-source for quite some
time, both in my personal and work time.
I am currently mostly interested in bringing snaps
(https://snapcraft.io) to Fedora and will help Neal Gompa to work on the
relevant snapd package and will also help to
TL;DR: If you are packaging software that uses NSS, please test if it works
correctly, if TLS 1.3 support is enabled. COPR packages are available.
Although still in draft status, the development of the new TLS 1.3 protocol
version is making progress.
The upstream Mozilla NSS library already supp
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
> Michael Mraka composed on 2017-03-24 08:54 (UTC+0100):
>
>> Felix Miata:
>
>
>>> [mc-4.8.18 has been broken since release, so I locked 4.8.17]
>
> ...
>>>
>>> How is one expected to discover via dnf when (18 day old) 4.8.19
>>> finally becomes
On 24.03.2017 10:35, nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IPS is a tweak on rpm. I suspect a mostly overengineered one, SUN had
> massive ego problems and looked down on Linux systems. So they could
> not just adopt rpm, they had to change it sufficiently to one up
> Linux peasants (many o
Michael Mraka composed on 2017-03-24 08:54 (UTC+0100):
Felix Miata:
[mc-4.8.18 has been broken since release, so I locked 4.8.17]
...
How is one expected to discover via dnf when (18 day old) 4.8.19
finally becomes available and time to delete the lock has arrived?
Is this a bug in the vers
Hi,
IPS is a tweak on rpm. I suspect a mostly overengineered one, SUN had massive
ego problems and looked down on Linux systems. So they could not just adopt
rpm, they had to change it sufficiently to one up Linux peasants (many of the
original IP packages are based on an import of Fedora rpm s
On 2017-03-24, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:10:47 + (UTC)
> Petr Pisar wrote:
>
>> On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> >> That's not true, there are ABI checks in the sidebar on koji.
>> >
>> > Sorry, in the
On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 09:54 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 09:20 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> >
> > > FWIW, I would be *extremely* reluctant to use something that big
> > > that's
> > > a) written in shell script (ugh) and b) has no tests.
> >
> > How did you fig
On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 08:27 +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:10:47 + (UTC)
> Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> > On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > > That's not true, there are ABI checks in the sidebar on koji.
Felix Miata:
> [mc-4.8.18 has been broken since release, so I locked 4.8.17]
>
> # grep RETT /etc/os-release
> PRETTY_NAME="Fedora 26 (Twenty Six)"
> # dnf versionlock list
> Last metadata expiration check: 1:33:30 ago on Thu Mar 23 16:44:17 2017 EDT.
> mc-1:4.8.17-2.fc25.*
> # dnf list mc
> Last
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Replace Yumex-DNF with dnfdragora =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Replace_yumex-dnf_with_dnfdragora
Change owner(s):
* Björn Esser
* Christian Dersch
Replace the current alternative graphical package manager.
== Detailed Description ==
Yumex-DNF need
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:10:47 + (UTC)
Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> >> That's not true, there are ABI checks in the sidebar on koji.
> >
> > Sorry, in the sidebar in *Bodhi*.
>
> Could you be more
On 2017-03-23, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 06:32 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> That's not true, there are ABI checks in the sidebar on koji.
>
> Sorry, in the sidebar in *Bodhi*.
Could you be more specific (URL or so)? I cannot find it on Bodhi web
site.
-- Petr
___
44 matches
Mail list logo
