On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 11:50 PM Jan Pokorný wrote:
>
> On 25/04/19 09:35 +0200, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> > Also please note that fedora-cisco-openh264.repo ships with
> > "skip_if_unavailable=true".
>
> off-topic: which in fact doesn't matter much, since you'll, sooner
> or later and whether yo
Dne 25. 04. 19 v 20:37 Tom Hughes napsal(a):
> On 25/04/2019 19:29, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 at 04:23, Nicolas Mailhot
>> mailto:nicolas.mail...@laposte.net>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Le mercredi 24 avril 2019 à 16:14 -0400, Stephen Gallagher a écrit :
>> >
>>
On 26. 04. 19 10:55, Vít Ondruch wrote:>> How does modularity make it easier
though?
It seems to me that it does the exact opposite - instead of having
one version of each package to maintain I now have multiple versions
to worry about! I mean obviously I could convert to a module and
only main
On 26. 04. 19 3:08, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 3:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 25. 04. 19 20:35, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> How much is going to be needed for "mock" to still work for older
> operating systems?
I'm confused. How is the change relevant
Dne 26. 04. 19 v 11:15 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> On 26. 04. 19 10:55, Vít Ondruch wrote:>> How does modularity make it
> easier though?
>>>
>>> It seems to me that it does the exact opposite - instead of having
>>> one version of each package to maintain I now have multiple versions
>>> to worry a
hi all,
I am planning to retire ffgtk as I no longer use it and it does no
longer work with "recent" Fritzbox modem firmware from AVM. Any
objections?
I now Roger exists s replacement, but I have no interest in packiging
it.
best regards, Louis
___
deve
Hi!
Is it still valid request to add update-desktop-database into %post,
like mentioned by fedora-review tool [1]? Almost at the end of the
comment. I were not able to find any information about it in Package
Guidelines. Should that hint be removed from fedora-review or should be
documentation upd
No. It must be removed from %post.
пт, 26 апр. 2019 г. в 12:30, Petr Mensik :
>
> Hi!
>
> Is it still valid request to add update-desktop-database into %post,
> like mentioned by fedora-review tool [1]? Almost at the end of the
> comment. I were not able to find any information about it in Package
On Friday, 26 April 2019 11:30:22 CEST Petr Mensik wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Is it still valid request to add update-desktop-database into %post,
> like mentioned by fedora-review tool [1]? Almost at the end of the
> comment. I were not able to find any information about it in Package
> Guidelines. Should
On 2019-04-26, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 26. 04. 19 10:55, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> How does modularity make it easier though?
>>>
>>> It seems to me that it does the exact opposite - instead of having
>>> one version of each package to maintain I now have multiple versions
>>> to worry about! I mean
Upstream moved the ocaml-emacs subpackage into a separate repository,
out of the main compiler repository:
https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/commit/20425ec4bbc3b7a22b1494970f5ed8a0aed0041d
As a result I will drop the ocaml-emacs subpackage when we move to
OCaml 4.08.0 in Fedora 31.
We already pac
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 5:17 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 26. 04. 19 3:08, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 3:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25. 04. 19 20:35, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >>> > How much is going to be needed for "mock" to still work for older
>
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 8:09 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 5:17 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 26. 04. 19 3:08, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 3:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 25. 04. 19 20:35, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > >>>
Petr Mensik wrote:
> Is it still valid request to add update-desktop-database into %post,
> like mentioned by fedora-review tool [1]? Almost at the end of the
> comment. I were not able to find any information about it in Package
> Guidelines.
Here's a link to relevant guideline,
https://docs.fe
Le jeudi 25 avril 2019 à 20:00 -0400, Christopher a écrit :
> Fighting with the "Modularity team", whoever they are
> (a SIG? a mailing list?, a team at RedHat? ... I don't really know
> who they are)
Just to be clear: this is not about fighting the Modularity team (or
any other team, for that ma
The following modular packages require Python 3.7 on Fedora 30:
$ dnf repoquery --releasever 30 --repo=fedora-modular
--repo=updates{,-testing}-modular --whatrequires 'libpython3.7m.so.1.0()(64bit)'
python3-pygit2-0:0.27.4-1.module_f30+2959+693db98d.x86_64
$ dnf repoquery --releasever 30 --rep
I'll take them.
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:56 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 15. 04. 19 18:52, Christopher wrote:
> > If nobody picks up the ones by my name (nodejs-path-exists,
> > nodejs-bluebird, nodejs-grunt-known-options), then I will probably
> > have to orphan js-jquery, because it probably
Hi,
I've noticed that my bodhi updates started showing rpmlint errors for
my packages again, where they were previously silent because I supply
a $SRCNAME.rpmlintrc file in my dist-git repos.
It looks like taskotron is broken and/or ignores this file again. Is
this a known issue?
For example, th
On 26. 04. 19 16:24, Zuzana Svetlikova wrote:
> I'll take them.
Already mine (announced in the js-jquery orphaning thread) ;)
--
Jan Staněk
Associate Software Engineer, Core Services
Red Hat Czech
jsta...@redhat.com IM: jstanek
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 3:23 PM Nicolas Mailhot
wrote:
>
> Le jeudi 25 avril 2019 à 20:00 -0400, Christopher a écrit :
> > Fighting with the "Modularity team", whoever they are
> > (a SIG? a mailing list?, a team at RedHat? ... I don't really know
> > who they are)
>
> Just to be clear: this is no
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 8:25 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> There was the packager UX initiative draft [2] proposed in December 2018,
> however it seems nobody really is eager to go and start doing this.
> It seems that this is a bit too much for volunteers and Red Hat paid Fedora
> contributors are alr
On 32-bit ARM Fedora's %{configure} macro forces:
./configure ... --host=armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu ...
On the same host, config.guess prints:
armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf
The OCaml configure script tests for:
AS_CASE([$host],
...
[armv7*-*-linux-gnueabihf],
[arch=arm; model=armv
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190425.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190426.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:9
Dropped images: 3
Added packages: 10
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 76
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 39.22 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On Fri, 2019-04-26 at 16:38 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On 32-bit ARM Fedora's %{configure} macro forces:
>
> ./configure ... --host=armv7hl-redhat-linux-gnu ...
>
> On the same host, config.guess prints:
>
> armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf
>
> The OCaml configure script tests for:
>
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 11:07:54 - (UTC)
Petr Pisar wrote:
I am a fedora user with no dog in this fight.
> Controversial property of modules are private build-time dependencies.
> Modularity allows packagers to hide them and to not to support them
> (to the extend that they work in my module).
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2019-04-29)
===
Meeting started by bowlofeggs at 15:00:00 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2019-04-26/fesco.2019-04-26-15.00.log.html
.
Meeting summar
Missing expected images:
Atomichost raw-xz x86_64
Atomichost qcow2 x86_64
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
2 of 47 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 9/146 (x86_64), 3/23 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
ID:
The Fedora 30 Final RC1.2 compose [1] is GO and will to be shipped
live on Tuesday, April 30, 2019.
For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes [2] or logs [3].
Thank you to everyone who has worked on this release and getting it out on time.
[1] https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pu
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:42:30 +0200
Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed that my bodhi updates started showing rpmlint errors for
> my packages again, where they were previously silent because I supply
> a $SRCNAME.rpmlintrc file in my dist-git repos.
>
> It looks like taskotron is brok
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019, 20:24 Tim Flink wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:42:30 +0200
> Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've noticed that my bodhi updates started showing rpmlint errors for
> > my packages again, where they were previously silent because I supply
> > a $SRCNAME.rpmlintrc fi
On 4/25/19 6:10 PM, Björn Persson wrote:
It's perfectly possible for a number to be unique without being random.
As an example, you could hash the machine ID, which is supposedly
unique in space, and the system clock, which is unique in time. That
makes the hash unique in both space and time. Pro
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Minimal_GDB_in_buildroot
== Summary ==
Create gdb-minimal package (without XML support, Python
support, Syntax Highlight and such) and switch to it in buildroot.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:ignatenkobrain|Igor Gnatenko]], [[User:sergiodj|Sergio
Durigan Junior
On 26. 04. 19 23:49, Ben Cotton wrote:
* Python 3 will disappear from buildroot (yes, it was there just because of GDB)
\o/ That would simplify Python 3.N+1 bootstrapping!
Thanks.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailin
OLD: Fedora-30-20190425.n.0
NEW: Fedora-30-20190426.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:9
Dropped images: 4
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 33
Downgraded packages: 20
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
34 matches
Mail list logo
