Re: F28 System Wide Change: Binutils version 2.29.1

On 01/23/2018 08:16 AM, Tom Hughes wrote: This seems to be breaking things. I have so's failing to link due to this even though the man page says -zdefs doesn't affect shared libraries. Examples? It will cause link failures because binutils now reports that it does not have enough

Re: F28 System Wide Change: Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 08:00:08AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 01/22/2018 10:15 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 19:19 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > On 01/22/2018 06:26 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm trying to prepare xserver for this change, and it seems

Re: F28 System Wide Change: Binutils version 2.29.1

On 17/01/18 11:35, Florian Weimer wrote: On 01/09/2018 04:16 PM, Tomasz Torcz ️ wrote:    I'm a bit perplexed by this change.  It looks like minor version   update, in such case it need no to be announced so widely.    On the other hand, you are changing the source.  According to the  

Re: F28 Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators

On 01/23/2018 02:16 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: > > ZJ> What about BuildRequires? Quite often that list even more work to > ZJ> generate, and your proposal does not address it in any way. > > Does any dependency

Re: F28 System Wide Change: Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc

On 01/22/2018 10:15 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 19:19 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: On 01/22/2018 06:26 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: I'm trying to prepare xserver for this change, and it seems to provoke an awkward warning when building on F27: In file included from

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 15:58 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:21:19PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > Yet anther thought .. > > As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences > > using %{rhel} within

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 14:33 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 02:23:16PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > What I'm trying to say here is that each time we want to implement > > some feature in Fedora, we either need to have some

Re: F28 Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 21:24 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:51:43PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators = > >

Re: ABI gate: internal-only shared object

On 22 January 2018 at 22:12, Scott Talbert wrote: > Yep, bodhi is definitely blocking things now without any way to override that > I can see. :-( > I've got a similar situation, I was able to push to batched 5 days ago but > just now bodhi sent me an email saying "Bodhi is unable to request

Re: ABI gate: internal-only shared object

> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Rex Dieter > I am logged into bodhi. I am looking at the page for the gap-pkg-io > update I mentioned earlier: > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-e45a7bb9a7 > > There is no button to push to batched. There

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

> "VO" == Vít Ondruch writes: VO> I think FPC does not know. Certainly we know what we generally try to do, but Fedora changes quickly and some things aren't always stated as well as they could be. Plus the experts who draft the more esoteric guidelines often have other

Re: F28 Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators

> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: ZJ> What about BuildRequires? Quite often that list even more work to ZJ> generate, and your proposal does not address it in any way. Does any dependency generation we use currently (i.e. Perl or even just the plain C/C++

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 18:57 -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 21 January 2018 at 14:42, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > On 21 January 2018 at 14:06, Howard Howell > > wrote: > > > On Sun, 2018-01-21 at 15:25 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > >

[Bug 1537328] perl-Module-ExtractUse-0.342 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537328 --- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- hotness's scratch build of perl-Module-ExtractUse-0.342-1.el7.src.rpm for rawhide completed

[Bug 1537328] perl-Module-ExtractUse-0.342 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537328 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Created attachment 1384624 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1384624=edit [patch] Update to 0.342 (#1537328) -- You are

[Bug 1537328] New: perl-Module-ExtractUse-0.342 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537328 Bug ID: 1537328 Summary: perl-Module-ExtractUse-0.342 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-Module-ExtractUse Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On 21 January 2018 at 14:42, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 21 January 2018 at 14:06, Howard Howell wrote: >> On Sun, 2018-01-21 at 15:25 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >>> Folks, please move this discussion to us...@lists.fedoraproject.org. >>>

Re: ABI gate: internal-only shared object

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: > As far as I know and can tell, those gating things are advisory only at this > point. I am logged into bodhi. I am looking at the page for the gap-pkg-io update I mentioned earlier:

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 20:58, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:21:19PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > Yet anther thought .. > > As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences > > using %{rhel} within %ifings operators like <,

[HEADS UP] Changes in date formatting (strftime, nl_langinfo)

I'd like to notify you that today I've finished my works on date formatting in glibc, that means upstream. These changes are already arriving to Fedora Rawhide (they should be there tomorrow) and will be part of Fedora 28. They will be included in glibc 2.27 (to be released on February 1), or in

Re: ABI gate: internal-only shared object

Jerry James wrote: > Are ABI changes completely disallowed in all circumstances? no. As far as I know and can tell, those gating things are advisory only at this point. -- Rex ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Modularity WG (once every two weeks)

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Modularity WG (once every two weeks) on 2018-01-23 from 10:00:00 to 11:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: Meeting of the Modularity Working Group. More information available at: [Modularity

Re: F28 Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:51:43PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnablingPythonGenerators It's great that this is finally happening. > == Detailed Description == > There is RPM dependency

Re: F28 System Wide Change: Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 19:19 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 01/22/2018 06:26 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > > > I'm trying to prepare xserver for this change, and it seems to provoke > > an awkward warning when building on F27: > > > > In file included from ../os/rpcauth.c:47:0: > >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:21:19PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > Yet anther thought .. > As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences > using %{rhel} within %ifings operators like <, <=, >, >= does not make to > much sense. That's likely true. But I think it'd be even

ABI gate: internal-only shared object

Here's something I didn't expect from the new ABI gate. Which, before I go further, I think will be a great idea nearly all of the time. I think avoiding unintentional ABI breaks in stable releases is a worthy goal. But ... I maintain a package called gap. It provides what amounts to a

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 19:45, Matthew Miller wrote: [..] > This might have been a past pattern, but we (Fedora leadership working > at Red Hat, along with RH counterparts) are working to make this > better. (See the "What does Red Hat want?" talks from previous >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 19:40, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 08:07:29PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > So (quoting you) "As EPEL is the only reason I stay in Fedora" you want > to > > say that you are you are not interested at all Fedora but only some

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 20:06, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: [..] > Logic says that only %{rhel} or even better %{el6}, %{el7} (and so on) > should be in use. > Yet anther thought .. As long as between major EL releases is huge "distance" in differences using %{rhel} within

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 19:11, R P Herrold wrote: [..] > and very curiously as to 'strace' in your list, of course > there ** is no ** > '0%{?centos} >= 8 > > nor a released rhel at that number either ;) > First possible explanation is that here it is some kind of

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On 22/01/18 15:58, Adam Williamson wrote: I have a dual monitor setup with both monitors rotated, using an NVIDIA adapter (9600 GT). Works fine, uses Wayland. Again, you need to be *very specific* about graphics issues. They are very often very specific to the exact hardware in use - down to

F28 Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Enabling Python Generators = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnablingPythonGenerators Change owner(s): * Igor Gnatenko * Neal Gompa This change enables the ability to choose to use the Python module

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:38:56AM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > It happens only when next major EL release is made. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Relationship_with_Fedora > After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. This might have been a past

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 08:07:29PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > So (quoting you) "As EPEL is the only reason I stay in Fedora" you want to > say that you are you are not interested at all Fedora but only some > EL6/EPEL packages. > Is that correct? Remember that EPEL is _part of Fedora_.

Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

On 22 January 2018 at 12:21, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 22 January 2018 at 15:53, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > [,,] >> >> > OK so here you just gave me +1 for a). Thx. >> > >> >> No I didn't. It is clear that our versions of English are not syncing >>

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 02:23:16PM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > What I'm trying to say here is that each time we want to implement > some feature in Fedora, we either need to have some replacement in > EPEL or diverge Fedora branches from EPEL branches. Having > replacement is not always

Re: Building Fedora modules on EL [was Re: Python3 will be in next major RHEL release, please adjust %if statements accordingly]

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 02:55:37AM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > It's the plan of record that by default, all modules will be built > > across all available buildroots. I'm not sure if that means EPEL7 > > will be an available option for technical reasons, but I hope so. > > This will possibly

Re: Unresponsive maintainer

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 05:38:12PM -0600, Tao Zhao wrote: > Thanks for the information! I've pinged his gmail. Let's see how it goes. I saw him mention that he'll be at DevConf.cz, so maybe someone can catch him there. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader

Re: Please stop re-adding gtk-update-icon-cache scriptlets (for Fedora)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:51:15AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > As you know, I want to go the other way. I want to bring Fedora > > improvements to Fedora packages built for EL _more quickly_. That may > > not be possible with EL7 and certainly not with EL6, but let's not > > close ourselves

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018, Tomasz K?oczko wrote: > [tkloczko@domek SPECS.fedora]$ (for i in centos ; do echo -n "$i "; \ grep '%{?'$i * ; done) | grep -v "rhel specific macros" > ceph.spec:%if ( ( 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 7) && ! 0%{?centos} ) > ceph.spec:%if ( ( 0%{?rhel} &&

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 15:54, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko > wrote: > > > > On 22 January 2018 at 10:42, Josh Boyer > wrote: > > [..] > >> > >> > After make major release no

Re: F28 System Wide Change: Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc

On 01/22/2018 06:26 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 12:19 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: = System Wide Change:Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SunRPCRemoval Change owner(s): * Florian Weimer fweimer AT redhat DOT com> This system-wide

Re: F28 System Wide Change: Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc

On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 12:19 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: > = System Wide Change:Removal of Sun RPC Interfaces From glibc = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SunRPCRemoval > > Change owner(s): > * Florian Weimer fweimer AT redhat DOT com> > > > This system-wide change covers the removal of

Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

On 22 January 2018 at 15:53, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: [,,] > > OK so here you just gave me +1 for a). Thx. > > > > No I didn't. It is clear that our versions of English are not syncing > up so I am not sure how to communicate clearly with you. You think I > am reading in

[Bug 1537217] New: perl-gettext: Obsoletes work by package name, not by provides

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1537217 Bug ID: 1537217 Summary: perl-gettext: Obsoletes work by package name, not by provides Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: perl-gettext Assignee:

[HEADS UP] Manging shebangs in Rawhide

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello, I'm planning to merge PR[0] somewhere later this week. Essentially it does: For each executable files: * Replaces /usr/bin/env foo with /usr/bin/foo * Replaces /usr/bin/python with /usr/bin/python2 * Removes exectuable bit (and shows

Re: Wyland is a disaster

Hi On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 07:16 -0500, Christian Fredrik Schaller wrote: > > Sorry for responding to myself here, but I thought it could also be > > worthwhile to mention that one of our primary tools for

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 12:31 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good > > to > > prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 15:39 +, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 22/01/18 15:34, Tom Hughes wrote: > > On 22/01/18 15:26, Jerry James wrote: > > > > > One configuration that appears to be particularly unstable is a > > > dual-monitor setup with nouveau. I experience frequent system hangs > > > with

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 08:26 -0700, Jerry James wrote: > > One configuration that appears to be particularly unstable is a > dual-monitor setup with nouveau. I experience frequent system hangs > with that setup, and don't seem to be alone; e.g., >

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > On 22 January 2018 at 10:42, Josh Boyer wrote: > [..] >> >> > After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. >> >> This is false. Even by your own reasoning, lots

Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

On 22 January 2018 at 00:29, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 22 January 2018 at 03:10, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> >> On 21 January 2018 at 15:54, Tomasz Kłoczko >> wrote: > > [..] >> >> > 8) Why we have %{centos} %ifings?

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 07:16 -0500, Christian Fredrik Schaller wrote: > Sorry for responding to myself here, but I thought it could also be > worthwhile to mention that one of our primary tools for identifying > problems is the Fedora ABRT server. Looking at the current stats it looks > to me like

Re: Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging

- Mail original - De: "Neal Gompa" Hi, Thanks for the review ! > I really do like this. There are only two issues I have with it: > 1. This seems to mandate that all packages must be named by their > import path. My golang package (snapd) is not, intentionally so. I > don't want to

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On 22/01/18 15:34, Tom Hughes wrote: On 22/01/18 15:26, Jerry James wrote: One configuration that appears to be particularly unstable is a dual-monitor setup with nouveau.  I experience frequent system hangs with that setup, and don't seem to be alone; e.g.,

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On 22/01/18 15:26, Jerry James wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:29 AM, Christian Fredrik Schaller wrote: I am sad to hear that people are having issues when using Wayland (and even the X.org session). Be aware though that we have devs dedicated at RH to look at Fedora

Re: Wyland is a disaster

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:29 AM, Christian Fredrik Schaller wrote: > I am sad to hear that people are having issues when using Wayland (and even > the X.org session). Be aware though that we have devs dedicated at RH to > look at Fedora Wayland bugs, so if you file bugs we

-z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning because the are not necessarily bound to the correct symbol version at run time. (rhbz#1535422) ### Disable strict symbol checks in the link

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 10:42, Josh Boyer wrote: [..] > > After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. > > This is false. Even by your own reasoning, lots of people certainly > care in the context of the release after the current one. However >

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging

- Original Message - > From: "Marcin Dulak" > To: "Discussion of RPM packaging standards and practices for Fedora" > > Cc: gol...@lists.fedoraproject.org, "Development discussions related to > Fedora"

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 2:45 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune > wrote: > >> I really do like this. There are only two issues I have with it: > >> > >> 1. This seems to mandate that all packages must be

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 22 January 2018 at 10:22, Mark Wielaard wrote: [..] > I think this depends on the team(s) that are maintaining the Fedora and > RHEL packages, and whether they are the same or different people. For > the packages I maintain personally in both Fedora and RHEL I make

Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

On 22 January 2018 at 12:10, Neal Gompa wrote: <<>> [..] > >> > 8) Why we have %{centos} %ifings? Theoretically Centos is EL derivate > up > >> > to > >> > ABI level so all this should be: > >> > > >> > a) removed > >> > b) replaced by %{el6} and %{el7} (and if it is

[Bug 1536702] perl-MogileFS-Utils-2.30 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536702 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|ppi...@redhat.com

[Bug 1536702] perl-MogileFS-Utils-2.30 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536702 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED

[HEADS UP] rust-pest changes license from MPLv2.0 to MIT or ASL 2.0

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Thanks for attention. - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlpl8mAACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0zq+w//fSiqqAkXyQtnKuGyMAkc9VwbROgyu0LVmToAZZ9VDhvj9gbX4wP7Gz4P

[Bug 1536701] perl-MogileFS-Server-2.73 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536701 --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- perl-MogileFS-Server-2.73-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-fe2f50a7d6 -- You are receiving this

Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: >> I really do like this. There are only two issues I have with it: >> >> 1. This seems to mandate that all packages must be named by their >> import path. My golang package (snapd) is not, intentionally so. I

Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging

> I really do like this. There are only two issues I have with it: > > 1. This seems to mandate that all packages must be named by their > import path. My golang package (snapd) is not, intentionally so. I > don't want to change this. > > 2. Mandating a forge is going to be tricky for self-hosted

Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging

On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 2:11 AM, wrote: > Hi, > > I am proposing for inclusion a set of rpm technical files aimed at automating > the packaging of forge-hosted projects. > > - Packaging draft: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/More_Go_packaging > -

Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

On 22 January 2018 at 03:39, Neal Gompa wrote: [..] > Personally, I'd like it to be easier to make multi-distro spec files > by leveraging the increasing commonality among distributions. It's > already not that bad these days, the main issue is what RPM features > are

GSoC Ideas Time

Our Application for GSoC is ready and we will make the submission deadline tomorrow. Therefore we should start working on ideas. See https://docs.stg.fedoraproject.org/mentored-projects/gsoc/2018/#mentor-information for details. Text is also below. regards, bex How to Propose a Project

Re: Re: Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

- Mail original - De: "Fabio Valentini" Hi, > I'm particularly looking forward to improvements regarding golang. The > automated .spec generation is nice for getting new packages started, but > maintaining those packages currently is a small nightmare in itself due to > brittle

[Bug 1536773] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20180120 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536773 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Module-CoreList-5.20180120-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5c539827e2 -- You are receiving

[Bug 1536773] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20180120 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536773 --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Module-CoreList-5.20180120-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-ba7045015e -- You are receiving

[Bug 1536773] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20180120 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536773 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED

Re: Wyland is a disaster

Sorry for responding to myself here, but I thought it could also be worthwhile to mention that one of our primary tools for identifying problems is the Fedora ABRT server. Looking at the current stats it looks to me like F27 is actually doing better than F26 used to in terms of minimizing

[Bug 1536694] perl-Catalyst-Runtime-5.90116 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536694 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 1536773] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20180120 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536773 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 12:29 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 22 January 2018 at 03:10, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> >> On 21 January 2018 at 15:54, Tomasz Kłoczko >> wrote: > > [..] >> >> > 8) Why we have %{centos} %ifings?

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 22.1.2018 v 12:31 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a): > Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): >> Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good >> to >> prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if conditionals >> in >> (at least) master

[Bug 1536768] perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.07048 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536768 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1537071

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 06:47:50PM +0100, Alec Leamas wrote: > > > On 20/01/18 13:52, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Jan 20, 2018 12:29, "Igor Gnatenko" > >> TL;DR: > >> - We need an authoritative source that tells us packagers which > >> Guidelines apply to

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 20.1.2018 v 12:27 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > Why I'm writing this? I want to hear from you if you think it would be good to > prohibit (or advise, or whatever mechanism would work) usage if conditionals > in > (at least) master branch to allow us to develop features faster. Thoughts? -1 If

Re: Wyland is a disaster

Hi there, I am sad to hear that people are having issues when using Wayland (and even the X.org session). Be aware though that we have devs dedicated at RH to look at Fedora Wayland bugs, so if you file bugs we will try our best to look at them and figure out what is happening. It obviously works

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 22.1.2018 v 11:50 Florian Weimer napsal(a): > On 01/22/2018 08:40 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: >> Problem only is that as Fedora is on the constant move but RH doesn't. >> Main RH goal is delivery solid distro, then security fixes and some >> other critical fixes. Only occasionally they are

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

Dne 20.1.2018 v 14:30 Igor Gnatenko napsal(a): > > > It would be really useful to have a wiki page outlining where the > > Guidelines for stable branches are different to the most recent > version of > > the Packaging Guidelines (if such a page already exists, please > ignore this > > and point

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 01/22/2018 09:38 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: After make major release no one cares what happen next in Fedora. Again, that really depends on the package. Some are not even fully branched. For some of the totally branched packages, package maintainers create separate backports of

Re: Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

On Jan 22, 2018 11:32, wrote: - Mail original - De: "Stephen John Smoogen" > They pull in what they want to make it work and could > give a care if it is readable to anyone else. The problem is that past a certain point those become effectively

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On 01/22/2018 08:40 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: Problem only is that as Fedora is on the constant move but RH doesn't. Main RH goal is delivery solid distro, then security fixes and some other critical fixes. Only occasionally they are updating some set of packages. It really depends on the

Re: Wyland is a disaster

- Original Message - > From: "Stephen John Smoogen" > To: hlhow...@pacbell.net, "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Cc: "Francesco Frassinelli" > Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 8:42:46 PM > Subject: Re:

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 3:38 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 22 January 2018 at 07:58, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > [..] >>> On 22 January 2018 at 02:12, R P Herrold wrote: >>> [..] >>> What I'm worry it is that this

Re: Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

- Mail original - De: "Neal Gompa" > the main issue is what RPM features are supported for each target distribution. Making things less ugly for gracefully degrading would be very nice. :) Well it would be really nice if someone @downstream watched for Fedora packaging guidelines

Re: Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

- Mail original - De: "Stephen John Smoogen" > They pull in what they want to make it work and could > give a care if it is readable to anyone else. The problem is that past a certain point those become effectively unmaintainable and start dragging Fedora in the EL blackhole instead

Re: EPEL support in "master" branch (aka speeding up Fedora development)

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 08:38 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > Effectively Fedora has not to much from relation with RH *between* > major EL releases in form of straight contribution to Fedora constant > changes. They may be sending back some fixes done for RHEL customers > but that is all. However as

[Bug 1536767] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.46 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536767 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.46-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-7f2cae7c26 -- You are receiving

[Bug 1536767] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.46 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536767 --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.46-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-bcae7a802a -- You are receiving

[Bug 1536767] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-3.46 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536767 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED

[Bug 1536730] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.16 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1536730 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.16-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-72d8bc3682 -- You are receiving

Re: EPEL analyse/observation, some question, PR proposals/questions and more ..

Hi, I can get a few hundreds of those disappear if the Go packaging guidelines I posted get accepted Otherwise, they are a symptom of technical debt accumulation in EL, nothing more Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot ___ devel mailing list --

  1   2   >