Fedora Rawhide-20181214.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check! all required tests passed Failed openQA tests: 2/24 (i386), 13/131 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) Old failures (same test failed in Rawhide-20181212.n.1): ID: 319833 Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20181214.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20181212.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20181214.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:3 Dropped images: 5 Added packages: 8 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 92 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 57.05 MiB Size of dropped packages

request to claim and take over maintenance of the Hoard package

Hi, Per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package, I am requesting to claim and take over maintenance of the Hoard package. I am the author and maintainer of Hoard itself. Thanks, -- Emery -- Professor Emery Berger College

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On 12/14/18 12:33 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: Hello folks, for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architecture. For example if you have following in

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On Friday, December 14, 2018 2:33:36 PM EST Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Hello folks, > > for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific > BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure > how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architecture. > > For

Re: Heads up: OpenImageIO 2.0 released

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 9:02 PM Richard Shaw wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 6:12 PM Kevin Kofler > wrote: > >> Richard Shaw wrote: >> > NOTE: The patch for Blender is not backward compatible so if for some >> > strange reason Blender has a new release in the near future, it will not >> > build

Re: Heads up: OpenImageIO 2.0 released

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 6:12 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > Richard Shaw wrote: > > NOTE: The patch for Blender is not backward compatible so if for some > > strange reason Blender has a new release in the near future, it will not > > build with OIIO < 2.0 and current rawhide should not be merged with

Problems building a module

I'm trying to build a module, and it's failing without much useful information: octave (4.4)]$ fedpkg module-build Submitting the module build... Could not execute module_build: The build failed with: The following invalid modulemd was encountered: /tmp/tmpCyuFOY/octave/octave.yaml So somethi

Re: Broken el7 ppc64 koji

On 12/14/18 7:41 AM, Dan Horák wrote: On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 09:29:26 -0500 Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 08:53, Vascom wrote: But it was here in previous build few months ago. https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/mediainfo/18.08.1/1.el7/data/logs/ppc64/root.log

Re: Heads up: OpenImageIO 2.0 released

Richard Shaw wrote: > NOTE: The patch for Blender is not backward compatible so if for some > strange reason Blender has a new release in the near future, it will not > build with OIIO < 2.0 and current rawhide should not be merged with > another release (or if you do, just remove the patch). Or y

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On 14. 12. 18 22:38, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On 12/14/18 11:33 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: Hello folks, for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architectur

Re: Which I/O scheduler is Fedora switching to in 4.21? mq-deadline or BFQ?

Chris Murphy writes: > [root@fnuc ~]# cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler > noop deadline [cfq] > [root@fnuc ~]# insmod > /usr/lib/modules/4.19.8-300.fc29.x86_64/kernel/block/bfq.ko.xz > [root@fnuc ~]# lsmod | grep bfq > bfq69632 0 > [root@fnuc ~]# cat /sys/block/sda/queue/sch

Re: Which I/O scheduler is Fedora switching to in 4.21? mq-deadline or BFQ?

[root@fnuc ~]# cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler noop deadline [cfq] [root@fnuc ~]# insmod /usr/lib/modules/4.19.8-300.fc29.x86_64/kernel/block/bfq.ko.xz [root@fnuc ~]# lsmod | grep bfq bfq69632 0 [root@fnuc ~]# cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler noop deadline [cfq] [root@fnuc

Re: Which I/O scheduler is Fedora switching to in 4.21? mq-deadline or BFQ?

Chris Murphy writes: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:34 AM Jeff Moyer wrote: >> >> stan writes: >> >> > On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 17:24:21 +0100 >> > Tomasz Torcz wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 04:30:20PM -0700, stan wrote: >> > >> >> > Enabled deadline and cfq again, but still no bfq availa

Re: Which I/O scheduler is Fedora switching to in 4.21? mq-deadline or BFQ?

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:34 AM Jeff Moyer wrote: > > stan writes: > > > On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 17:24:21 +0100 > > Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 04:30:20PM -0700, stan wrote: > > > >> > Enabled deadline and cfq again, but still no bfq available. > >> > $ cat /sys/block/sda/q

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On 12/14/18 11:33 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > Hello folks, > > for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific > BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure > how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architecture. > > For example if you have f

Re: Multilib inconsistencies between fedora/updates/updates-testing composes

On 12/14/18 1:50 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 12/14/18 4:06 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Florian Weimer: >> >>> We have seen reports that glibc-headers.i686 comes and goes from the >>> x86_64 updates compose. Previously, we have seen this only for the >>> updates-testing compose:

Re: Bodhi updates permanently locked in PENDING

On 12/14/18 2:08 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 12/14/18 4:38 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I need to make changes to these updates: >> >> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-2efb53dc71 >> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-0e5b278265 >> >> They have been locked in

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

Le ven. 14 déc. 2018 à 20:34, Igor Gnatenko a écrit : > > Hello folks, > > for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific > BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure > how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architecture. > > For example i

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 3:09 PM Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > That makes sense that we can do something like this from DNF code.. > However, it would be kinda hard to do any dependency resolution > checks.. > > Although we already have one which is module(platform:$PLATFORM_ID) > which is automatically

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

That makes sense that we can do something like this from DNF code.. However, it would be kinda hard to do any dependency resolution checks.. Although we already have one which is module(platform:$PLATFORM_ID) which is automatically populated from os-release by libdnf. Which is actually causing pro

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 2:50 PM Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 8:45 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 2:34 PM Igor Gnatenko > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello folks, > > > > > > for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific > > > BuildRequires, you s

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 8:45 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 2:34 PM Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > > > > Hello folks, > > > > for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific > > BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure > > how koji chooses tha

Re: OUTAGE: Bugzilla outage today

> Note that this will affect Bodhi updates that change state during the > outage. If updates go stable, get created, or have bugs added during > the window Bodhi will not alter the state of the associated Bugzilla > tickets. I hope to one day add a true task working system to Bodhi that allows fai

Re: OUTAGE: Bugzilla outage today

On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 14:28 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > There is going to be a quick bugzilla.redhat.com maintenance at 21:00 > UTC (16:00 Eastern) today (14 December) > > bugzilla.redhat.com will be unavailable for ~30 minutes, estimated. Note that this will affect Bodhi updates that change stat

Re: Backwards incompatible changes planned for Bodhi 4.0.0

On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 09:10 +, Mattia Verga wrote: > Il 12/13/18 3:36 PM, Randy Barlow ha scritto: > > * Remove critpath karma[5]. > > > I know Fedora wants to move to a more community driven process, but > I > think the ideas behind adamw proposal [1] of the critpath field are > still valid

Re: RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 2:34 PM Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > Hello folks, > > for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific > BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure > how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architecture. > > For example if

RFC: make fedora-release archful and add some provides

Hello folks, for long time we have problem if you have some arch-specific BuildRequires, you still get one src.rpm from one of arches (not sure how koji chooses that one) which might not work for your architecture. For example if you have following in spec: %ifarch %{ldc_arches} BuildRequires: ld

OUTAGE: Bugzilla outage today

There is going to be a quick bugzilla.redhat.com maintenance at 21:00 UTC (16:00 Eastern) today (14 December) bugzilla.redhat.com will be unavailable for ~30 minutes, estimated. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

Re: Bodhi updates permanently locked in PENDING

On 12/14/18 4:38 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > I need to make changes to these updates: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-2efb53dc71 > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-0e5b278265 > > They have been locked in the pending state for hours. How can I get >

Re: Multilib inconsistencies between fedora/updates/updates-testing composes

On 12/14/18 4:06 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Florian Weimer: > >> We have seen reports that glibc-headers.i686 comes and goes from the >> x86_64 updates compose. Previously, we have seen this only for the >> updates-testing compose: >> >> This leads to a ve

Re: Backwards incompatible changes planned for Bodhi 4.0.0

On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 09:36 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote: > * Change how the edit APIs work so that a diff is sent rather than > the > entire set of fields[4]. > > > [4] https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/2208 I've made this one a little more expansive - the real problem is that Bodhi's

Re: Why is bugzilla spamming me?

On 12/14/18 8:50 AM, Martin Kolman wrote: > On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 00:31 +, Leigh Scott wrote: >> I'm currently getting up to 9 emails per new issue, each attachment >> generates a separate email! > AFAIK it has always been like this, each attachment generates one email, even > if the bug is c

Re: Which I/O scheduler is Fedora switching to in 4.21? mq-deadline or BFQ?

stan writes: > On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 17:24:21 +0100 > Tomasz Torcz wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 04:30:20PM -0700, stan wrote: > >> > Enabled deadline and cfq again, but still no bfq available. >> > $ cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler >> > noop deadline [cfq] >> >> Those are single-que

Self Introduction: Anthony McInerney

Hi All, as per the packaging guidelines i'm just touching base to say hello. I'm hoping to get cockpit-composer into fedora, and willing to triage bugs etc as required. Need a sponsor. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659556 I have previously packaged for debian, and have been using fed

Re: Why is bugzilla spamming me?

On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 00:31 +, Leigh Scott wrote: > I'm currently getting up to 9 emails per new issue, each attachment generates > a separate email! AFAIK it has always been like this, each attachment generates one email, even if the bug is created via API by something like abrt. Maybe you h

Re: Unresponsive Maintainer: python-ldap3

On 14. 12. 18 16:11, Avram Lubkin wrote: I've been trying to reach the maintainers for python-ldap3 (ignatenkobrain, mcyprian) for the last month. I've sent multiple emails, submitted pull requests[1] [2], and a bug [3]. fedora_active_user.py shows occasional activity for ignatenkobrain. Does

Unresponsive Maintainer: python-ldap3

I've been trying to reach the maintainers for python-ldap3 (ignatenkobrain, mcyprian) for the last month. I've sent multiple emails, submitted pull requests[1] [2], and a bug [3]. fedora_active_user.py shows occasional activity for ignatenkobrain. Does anyone know how to contact either maintainer?

Re: PSA: Please check that your Python 2 package doesn't have dependent packages before dropping it

On 09. 10. 18 23:08, Randy Barlow wrote: Greetings! I've been bitten twice in the past week by dependencies of my packages dropping the Python 2 RPMs, presumably due to the Fedora 30 change[0]. Note that the change does state that the package should not be dropped if other packages depend on th

Re: Broken el7 ppc64 koji

Thanks. пт, 14 дек. 2018 г., 17:30 Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com: > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 08:53, Vascom wrote: > > > > But it was here in previous build few months ago. > > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/mediainfo/18.08.1/1.el7/data/logs/ppc64/root.log > > OK.. yeah my f

Re: Broken el7 ppc64 koji

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 09:29:26 -0500 Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 08:53, Vascom wrote: > > > > But it was here in previous build few months ago. > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/mediainfo/18.08.1/1.el7/data/logs/ppc64/root.log > > OK.. yeah my fault for not

Re: Broken el7 ppc64 koji

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 08:53, Vascom wrote: > > But it was here in previous build few months ago. > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/mediainfo/18.08.1/1.el7/data/logs/ppc64/root.log OK.. yeah my fault for not looking closer than the koji package sets currently available. So there was

Re: Broken el7 ppc64 koji

But it was here in previous build few months ago. https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/mediainfo/18.08.1/1.el7/data/logs/ppc64/root.log пт, 14 дек. 2018 г. в 16:49, Stephen John Smoogen : > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 01:47, Vascom wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > Whats wrong with ppc64 in koji? >

Re: Broken el7 ppc64 koji

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 01:47, Vascom wrote: > > Hi. > > Whats wrong with ppc64 in koji? > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31454970 > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4970/31454970/root.log > > DEBUG util.py:439: Error: Package: wxGTK3-3.0.2-15.el7.ppc64 (build) >

Re: desktop-file-validate fails with error: file contains group "Catia Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-"

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 7:14 AM, Martin Gansser wrote: how can i solve this ? Thanks Martin All the custom groups need to start with "X-" (for "extension"). E.g.: [Catia Shortcut Group] Replace it with: [X-Catia Shortcut Group] Michael ___ devel

desktop-file-validate fails with error: file contains group "Catia Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-"

Hi, when compiling Cadence with desktop-file-validate enabled in the rpm spec file, i get this errors: + cd /home/martin/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd Cadence-4a5f5b445bfb3cd23a797c172dfbcb42e0cf114f + desktop-file-validate /home/martin/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/Cadence-1.0.0-0.1.20180827git4a5f5b4.fc29.x86_64/u

Re: Heads up: OpenImageIO 2.0 released

On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 9:19 AM Richard Shaw wrote: > I plan on updating OIIO to the 2.0.3 release this weekend for rawhide > after completing test builds of dependencies. This includes a soname bump > and there are some small API changes. > > $ dnf --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rawhide repoquery -

Bodhi updates permanently locked in PENDING

I need to make changes to these updates: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-2efb53dc71 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-0e5b278265 They have been locked in the pending state for hours. How can I get them unstuck? Thanks, Florian __

Re: Commit notifications for Fedora dist-git

* Florian Weimer: > * Kevin Fenzi: > >> On 11/1/18 6:51 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> On src.fedoraproject.org, I selected “Watch Issues, PRs, and Commits” >>> for various packages and assumed that I would receive notifications for >>> new commits. But nothing arrives anymore, as far as I can tel

Re: Multilib inconsistencies between fedora/updates/updates-testing composes

* Florian Weimer: > We have seen reports that glibc-headers.i686 comes and goes from the > x86_64 updates compose. Previously, we have seen this only for the > updates-testing compose: > > This leads to a very bad update experience. Users file bugs against t

Re: Backwards incompatible changes planned for Bodhi 4.0.0

Il 12/13/18 3:36 PM, Randy Barlow ha scritto: > * Remove critpath karma[5]. > I know Fedora wants to move to a more community driven process, but I think the ideas behind adamw proposal [1] of the critpath field are still valid. I think we could make regular users post regular karma only and pr