Happy to help!
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019, 08:13 Clement Verna wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The Container SIG has been busy in the last few weeks working on
> getting the Fedora container base image smaller (It was growing over
> 300MB). While a few minor changes [0-1] have recently landed in the
> fedora:lat
* Pierre-Yves Chibon:
> Good Morning Everyone,
>
> TL;DR: On July 24th we will turn on the first phase of Rawhide package gating,
> for single build updates.
How does this interact with the mass rebuild?
Will Fedora 31 release with an unrebuilt package if gating fails?
Thanks,
Florian
_
Hi all,
The Container SIG has been busy in the last few weeks working on
getting the Fedora container base image smaller (It was growing over
300MB). While a few minor changes [0-1] have recently landed in the
fedora:latest and fedora:rawhide images.
Last couple days a bigger change [2] have been
> Le mar. 23 juil. 2019 à 08:30, Igor Gnatenko
> > * Define new architecture in RPM/libsolv (let's call it "haswell" or
>> "x86_64modern")
> x86_64avx2 ? or even avx2 ?
SOMETHING, though. I can't be the only one here old enough to remember when
Linux packages came in .i386, .i486, .i586, and then
On 7/23/19 7:52 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>
> In the interest of a productive discussion, could we maybe focus on what
> the benefits are, both of changing the baseline in general and of
> enabling any particular features?
As someone whose software heavily depends on SSE and AVX2 assembly code
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/07/24/report-389-ds-base-1.4.1.6-20190723git9ea5b9b.fc30.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.
Following the bug report[1], I would like to take ownership of
gimp-resynthetizer because of its use on Fedora Design Suite Labs. Would
it be possible to orphan that package?
Reference
--
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674969
Luya
Dave Love wrote:
> they'd be rather limited by the compiler options we're supposed to use,
> that don't include vectorization, so you don't even get the benefit you
> could from SSE2. (I've been told off in review for turning that on,
> though an FPC member has approved it.)
Why don't we enable -
Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> Features like SSE2: enabling SSE2 as the basic floating point mechanism
> changes the ABI drastically. But x86_64 already requires SSE2, so this is
> irrelevant.
For what it's worth, only the x86_64 ABI actually makes use of this. For
i686 (32-bit), even when Fedora mo
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 7:14 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Peter Robinson wrote:
> > The problem with that is getting someone to do the work. The whole
> > reason that the i686 kernel was retired was due to people not stepping
> > up to do the maintenance of the kernel, and the kernel alone. Having
>
On 7/23/19 11:36 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "KK" == Kaleb Keithley writes:
>
> KK> I built the latest ceph-14 (14.2.2) on rawhide successfully two days
> KK> ago. Two different builds on f30 built or are building fine on
> KK> x86_64, i686, and aarch64, but failed with different erro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1732635
Anyone knows how to contact Moez?
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorap
Peter Robinson wrote:
> The problem with that is getting someone to do the work. The whole
> reason that the i686 kernel was retired was due to people not stepping
> up to do the maintenance of the kernel, and the kernel alone. Having
> been one of the few people in the community that's been involv
On 23/07/2019 21:51, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
When you run `fedpkg build` on Rawhide, your package will be built in a new koji
tag (which will be the default target for Rawhide). The package will be picked
up from this koji tag, signed and moved onto a second tag. Bodhi will be
notified by koji
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:51:28PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> TL;DR: On July 24th we will turn on the first phase of Rawhide package gating,
This is very exciting! I suppose I'll not jinx things by congratulating too
soon, but this is great work and huge news.
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:50:17PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > I would suggest that there is this nebulous thing called "the cloud"
> > that mitigates a small part of that, but I also fully understand using
> > that magical machine resource presents its own challenges.
> As the FSF puts it: "The
Good Morning Everyone,
TL;DR: On July 24th we will turn on the first phase of Rawhide package gating,
for single build updates.
In a later phase, Rawhide updates that contain multiple builds will also be
enabled for gating. Our goal is to improve our ability to continuously turn out
a useful Fedor
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 09:32 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>
> > I'd suggest we do what we do all over the place: carry patches as
> > necessary. It sucks, and rebasing is non-trivial work, but I would argue
> > it's not nearly as much work as rebuilding everything from scratch.
> > That's like f
* Nicolas Mailhot via devel [23/07/2019 11:51] :
>
> That is not true. Search the list archive for Michael Zhang’s questions on
> how to get Open Liberty in Fedora. About 4 months later, can anyone do a dnf
> install open liberty, pointing to a Fedora repo?
No but that's probably because he got se
Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> From what I saw, openblas does not do any runtime detection. You
> either compile it with avx2 or not. And in runtime it will check
> whether it was enabled during compilation and use some kind of
> fallback.
If built with the DYNAMIC_ARCH option, which is the case in the Fe
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 3:48 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> What "wider aspects" would you want to consider? What implications other
> than technical matter for a technical decision such as this one?
>
This is much larger than a technical decision. There are big impacts,
as we've seen, on who can use
Josh Boyer wrote:
> I would suggest that there is this nebulous thing called "the cloud"
> that mitigates a small part of that, but I also fully understand using
> that magical machine resource presents its own challenges.
As the FSF puts it: "There is no cloud, just other people's computers."
Josh Boyer wrote:
> I think too often we focus on the technical implications (performance
> gain, etc) and sometimes don't consider wider aspects.
What "wider aspects" would you want to consider? What implications other
than technical matter for a technical decision such as this one?
Kev
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 04:15 +, Fedora compose checker wrote:
> No missing expected images.
>
> Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
> 24 of 47 required tests failed, 19 results missing
> openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
> below
> Unsatisfied
On 7/23/19 4:18 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
Also, for $DAYJOB, I run a GitLab server. If you think maintaining a
GitLab server is easy, you have another think coming.
For what it's worth: I'm afraid I have to agree. I've been running
Gitlab for my employer for the last 18 months. It's *incredibly
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AArch64_Xfce_Desktop_image
== Summary ==
Add an AArch64 Xfce Desktop image to deliverables in Fedora 31.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:pwhalen| Paul Whalen]]
* Email: pwha...@fedoraproject.org
* Responsible WG: ARM SIG
== Detailed Description ==
We currently
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 14:57 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > Also, we can't really solve the machine resources of mirrors. Well, I
> > mean, I guess we *could*, but I doubt anyone in RH is going to sign off
> > on us buying a ton of expensive storage hardware and shipping it off to
> > random univer
The software string freeze begins 30 July. For more information, see
the String Freeze Policy[1]. For more upcoming development[2] and
translation[3] milestones, see the schedule site.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Software_String_Freeze_Policy
[2] https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-3
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 2:37 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 13:32 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:39 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > On 7/22/19 10:34 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 4:31 AM Igor Gnatenko
> > > > wrote:
> > > > Thi
On 22/07/19 12:03, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hello Bcc'ed maintainers.
Hi Miro.
> sagitter ProDy autowrap future preprocess scons
These packages should be okay.
'Scons' will need of an exception for Python2
>
> According to the
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python_means_Python3 change
Hi all,
Per the Fedora 31 schedule[1] we will be starting a mass rebuild for Fedora
31 tomorrow. We are doing a mass rebuild for Fedora 31 for all the changes
listed in
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8555
we will start the mass rebuild on 2019-07-23
This is a heads up that it will be done in a
> "KK" == Kaleb Keithley writes:
KK> I built the latest ceph-14 (14.2.2) on rawhide successfully two days
KK> ago. Two different builds on f30 built or are building fine on
KK> x86_64, i686, and aarch64, but failed with different errors on
KK> ppc64le at different places in the build. One l
I was going to argue this would make us lose a lot of hardware and
most likely a lot of our the hardware owners as users too.
But I see that most of what I planned to say is already said, so I'll
just add my: please, don't do this.
(My sample from home and work: out of 6 Fedora hosts expected to
ohhh, i'm alive, sorry, i'll repply soon
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
Lis
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 13:32 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:39 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On 7/22/19 10:34 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 4:31 AM Igor Gnatenko
> > > wrote:
> > > Thinking about this even more, it should not be very hard thing to do:
>
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 05:11:23PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > I think I'd be more inclined to consider it if the Change was proposed
> > as a new architecture bring-up. Effectively, this would be a whole new
> > architecture that would just happen to be largely compatible with
> > x86_64.
>
> Th
I built the latest ceph-14 (14.2.2) on rawhide successfully two days ago.
Two different builds on f30 built or are building fine on x86_64, i686, and
aarch64, but failed with different errors on ppc64le at different places in
the build. One looks like it ran out of space in the file system. The
o
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Anaconda_Reclaim_Disk_Space
== Summary ==
The installer shows the Resize Disk Space dialog to reclaim disk space
for the automatic partitioning in the graphical user interface. The
Anaconda team would like to replace this dialog with a simple list of
predefin
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:39 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On 7/22/19 10:34 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 4:31 AM Igor Gnatenko
> > wrote:
>
> > Thinking about this even more, it should not be very hard thing to do:
> >
> > * Define new architecture in RPM/libsolv (let's call
Hi everybody,
Does anybody know how to contact tonet666p? One of his packageshas
been broken for a while, and he doesn't respond on bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1480028
If there's no positive response within the next week, I'll open a
fesco ticket in accordance with the
Tradeoffs to satisfy a wide variety of users - a base system with most
common software easy to try which can then be re-installed for
performance. Flatpacks should help with easy but not performance optimal
installation of many packages. Spack (https://spack.io/) may be a
packaging approach tha
On 7/22/19 10:34 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 4:31 AM Igor Gnatenko
> wrote:
> Thinking about this even more, it should not be very hard thing to do:
>
> * Define new architecture in RPM/libsolv (let's call it "haswell" or
> "x86_64modern")
> * Define set of capabilities it
I'm afraid this turned into a bit of and essay on more useful things
Fedora could do for portable performance engineering, should anyone
care.
I actually have no interest in Fedora except as a requirement to work on
packaging for research software around EPEL, specifically for HPC and so
performan
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 11:10, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:28 AM Stephen John Smoogen
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 09:33, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >>
> >>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Add_LLD_As_Update_Alternatives_Option_For_LD
> >>
> >>
> >> == Depe
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:52:09AM -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> Things like CMPXCHG16B that change the set of things that can be done on
> the CPU. I could easily imagine programs that use algorithms that
> fundamentally depend on CMPXCHG16B. There is no drop-in replacement.
FWIW, CMPXCH16B
A new Fedora Atomic Host update is available via an OSTree update:
Version: 29.20190722.0
Commit(x86_64): 74566c9d78aeb334f497b77d85d726932ebf5b6ee6ef33594fb4ec072ac880bc
Commit(aarch64):
c570fbbcc753ee9c3198ddd7c6344ecb7d4b3ee456a20e309bec4ec4a811ab0e
Commit(ppc64le):
41ffdaa7a8271976a8db344ec
>...I think this should be retracted before it ends up being a
> phoronix article making the project look bad.
I 100% agree... but too late:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fedora-31-Possible-AVX2-Require
___
devel mailing list -- d
On Di, 23.07.19 10:56, Adam Jackson (a...@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 11:01 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Hi,
> > directories /proc/ and /sys/ are owned by filesystem package. This worked
> > in past where we needed those directories to
> > exist so we can mount the procfs and s
On 23. 07. 19 16:08, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 23. 07. 19 13:27, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
Soon after Fedora 31 branching I intend to retire java-packaging-howto
package and orphan byaccj and javapackages-tools packages. The reason
is that I i
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:25:59AM -0400, Solomon Peachy wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:05:59AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > assume. And if you ask me, we should just stick to SSE2 as the baseline.
>
> Ie the status quo.
>
> > What are the big gains to be had from SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, and
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 11:01 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Hi,
> directories /proc/ and /sys/ are owned by filesystem package. This worked in
> past where we needed those directories to
> exist so we can mount the procfs and sysfs.
>
> However this cause issues in containers:
> https://bugzilla.r
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:52 AM Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/x86-64_micro-architecture_update
>
> == Summary ==
>
> After preliminary discussions with CPU vendors, we propose AVX2 as the
> new baseline. AVX2 support was introduced into CPUs from 2013 to
> 2015. See
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:28 AM Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 09:33, Ben Cotton wrote:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Add_LLD_As_Update_Alternatives_Option_For_LD
>>
>>
>> == Dependencies ==
>> N/A (not a System Wide Change)
>>
>
> I am not sure about t
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 23. 07. 19 13:27, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
> > Soon after Fedora 31 branching I intend to retire java-packaging-howto
> > package and orphan byaccj and javapackages-tools packages. The reason
> > is that I intend to maintain these packages as
Hi Fellipe,
if layer in your case means a particular set of repositories, then
Nicolas advice with using distinct prefixes for repositories in each
layer and then passing --repoid=-* to the dnf is probably most
straightforward solution.
If you really need a custom plugin, then there is a problem
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:18:56AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 5:47 AM Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> > > As I said already, my primary worry is where we would clash our needs
> > > with those of GitLab commercial entity. For example, Kerberos
> > > a
Hi,
Now that things are starting to move fonts-side[1], I’d like the various
actors to agree on a common font model target.
Without a a common target, we’ll end up working at odds with one
another. Upstream font files can not serve as a an officious target.
They are full of quirks, you end u
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 09:33, Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Add_LLD_As_Update_Alternatives_Option_For_LD
>
>
> == Dependencies ==
> N/A (not a System Wide Change)
>
>
I am not sure about this. We are looking at making a system-wide change of
having /usr/bin/ld be a
Ping for updates.
I've build menu-cach 1.1.0 in Copr and already tested against LXQt.
If you are not willing to grant me write permission, can you build this
in EPEL directly?
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/zsun/epel7/build/948489/
On 7/15/19 1:58 PM, Zamir SUN wrote:
> Ping for update
Ping for updates.
I've build menu-cach 1.1.0 in Copr and already tested against LXQt.
If you are not willing to grant me write permission, can you build this
in EPEL directly?
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/zsun/epel7/build/948489/
On 7/15/19 1:58 PM, Zamir SUN wrote:
> Ping for update
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Add_LLD_As_Update_Alternatives_Option_For_LD
== Summary ==
Allow users to optionally use update-alternatives to make /usr/bin/ld
point to /usr/bin/lld.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email:
== Detailed Description ==
Update the lld p
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeepinDE_15.11
== Summary ==
Update the Deepin Desktop Environment to 15.11 in Fedora.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:Zsun|Zamir SUN]] - main coordinator, packager
* Email: zsun#AT#fedoraproject.org
* [[User:cheeselee|Robin 'cheese' Lee]] - main packager
* Emai
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenLDAPwithBerkleyDBasModule
== Summary ==
Change the ''openldap-servers'' package so that BDB and HDB backends
are required to be dynamically loaded.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:mhonek| Matus Honek]]
* Email: mhonek (at) redhat (dot) com
== Detailed Descri
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:05:59AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> assume. And if you ask me, we should just stick to SSE2 as the baseline.
Ie the status quo.
> What are the big gains to be had from SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, and SSE4.2?
Each of those individually, and from a general system library
pe
Le 2019-07-23 14:09, Stephen John Smoogen a écrit :
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 08:00, Nicolas Mailhot via devel
wrote:
Le 2019-07-23 12:01, Fellipe Henrique a écrit :
Hi
First, Thanks very much for you reply...
I need to add a "global" argument so I can change the layer of a
repository... For
Hi Marek,
Thanks again for your reply..
I already tried to use __init__ method... arguments was added without
error ( I can get any message when add on optparser), but, dnf still
say: unrecognized arguments
I believe it's because plugin is loaded after args was passed inside dnf,
so, dnf not r
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 08:08, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Hello, Igor Gnatenko.
>
> Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:34:06 +0200 you wrote:
>
> > * Define new architecture in RPM/libsolv (let's call it "haswell" or
> > "x86_64modern")
>
> I have a better idea: use modules
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 08:00, Nicolas Mailhot via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Le 2019-07-23 12:01, Fellipe Henrique a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> > First, Thanks very much for you reply...
> >
> > I need to add a "global" argument so I can change the layer of a
> > repository... For exa
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
23 of 47 required tests failed, 19 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
MISSING: fedora.u
On 23. 07. 19 13:27, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
Soon after Fedora 31 branching I intend to retire java-packaging-howto
package and orphan byaccj and javapackages-tools packages. The reason
is that I intend to maintain these packages as part of modules.
I will continue to maintain non-modular packag
Thinking here about these...
If I made a fork from dnf package, and put arguments inside OptionParser
class, on option_parser.py... I get the "global" argument as I needed...
but how can I get these argument value inside my plugin? Any idea?
cheers
T.·.F.·.A.·. S+F
*Fellipe Henrique P. Soa
Soon after Fedora 31 branching I intend to retire java-packaging-howto
package and orphan byaccj and javapackages-tools packages. The reason
is that I intend to maintain these packages as part of modules.
I will continue to maintain non-modular packages through lifecycles of
Fedora 29-31, but star
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190722.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190723.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 3
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 28
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.35 MiB
Size of dropped packages
Hi,
there is no supported way how to change global arguments in DNF.
However, you can try in __init__ method of your plugin do something
like this:
class MyPlugin(dnf.Plugin):
def __init__(self, base, cli):
super(MyPlugin, self).__init__(base, cli)
cli.optparser.add_argument('
So,
Using dnf plugin, I can't do that, if I understand correctly... As I said
on my last email, I have these coded using yum, like these:
def init_hook(pc):
'''Initial Hook that configures the repositories'''
parser = pc.getOptParser()
if parser:
parser.add_option('', '--set-repos
Hello, Igor Gnatenko.
Tue, 23 Jul 2019 07:34:06 +0200 you wrote:
> * Define new architecture in RPM/libsolv (let's call it "haswell" or
> "x86_64modern")
I have a better idea: use modules to build special AVX/SSE4 enabled
versions of some packages.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycodi
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 5:47 AM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> > As I said already, my primary worry is where we would clash our needs
> > with those of GitLab commercial entity. For example, Kerberos
> > authentication or SAML SSO for groups, or push rule restrictions are
> >
Le 2019-07-23 12:48, Peter Robinson a écrit :
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:31 AM Nicolas Mailhot via devel
wrote:
Le 2019-07-23 07:02, drago01 a écrit :
> Please just take back this change and come back at April first if it
> was supposed to be a joke - if not then submit again in about 10
> ye
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 12:16:45 +0200
Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:08 PM Kevin Kofler
> wrote:
> >
> > Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > 1. Lower requirement to something like SSE4 and select other CPU
> > > features which are available in most of CPUs for last decade.
> >
> > Sorry,
Le 2019-07-23 12:01, Fellipe Henrique a écrit :
Hi
First, Thanks very much for you reply...
I need to add a "global" argument so I can change the layer of a
repository... For example:
$ dnf repolist --set-layer=mylayer
$ dnf install -y any_repo --set-layer=mylayer
On our setup we approximat
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 8:52 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/x86-64_micro-architecture_update
>
> = Detailed Description ==
>
> After preliminary discussions with CPU vendors, we propose AVX2 as the
> new baseline. AVX2 support was introduced into CPUs from 2013 to
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:31 AM Nicolas Mailhot via devel
wrote:
>
> Le 2019-07-23 07:02, drago01 a écrit :
>
> > Please just take back this change and come back at April first if it
> > was supposed to be a joke - if not then submit again in about 10
> > years.
>
> Fedora used to have the x86 re
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:08 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > 1. Lower requirement to something like SSE4 and select other CPU
> > features which are available in most of CPUs for last decade.
>
> Sorry, but -1 to SSE4 too. One of my machines supports only up to SSSE3, and
> ot
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:09 AM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Patrik Mattsson wrote:
> > I would take the lowest denominator of features for CPUs of atleast 3
> > years of age considering how long some CPUs are being used in virtualized
> > environments and at a lot of different cloud-providers (I've s
Hi Marek,
First, Thanks very much for you reply...
I need to add a "global" argument so I can change the layer of a
repository... For example:
$ dnf repolist --set-layer=mylayer
$ dnf install -y any_repo --set-layer=mylayer
So on my plug-in I can change layer in repository to do anything, for t
Le 2019-07-23 09:23, Mikolaj Izdebski a écrit :
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:20 AM Nicolas Mailhot via devel
wrote:
Huge Red Hat investments, in the Java ecosystem, that fail to
translate
into an healthy Fedora Java ecosystem. To the point that when IBM
wants
its Java guys to join there is absol
On 23/07/2019 10:40, Peter Robinson wrote:
After preliminary discussions with CPU vendors, we propose AVX2 as the
new baseline. AVX2 support was introduced into CPUs from 2013 to
2015. See
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Vector_Extensions#CPUs_with_AVX2
CPUs with AVX2].
This is not wh
On 7/22/19 9:51 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/x86-64_micro-architecture_update
Along with AVX2, it makes sense to enable certain other CPU features
which are not strictly implied by AVX2, such as CMPXCHG16B, FMA, and
earlier vector extensions such as SSE 4.2. Deta
> > After preliminary discussions with CPU vendors, we propose AVX2 as the
> > new baseline. AVX2 support was introduced into CPUs from 2013 to
> > 2015. See
> > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Vector_Extensions#CPUs_with_AVX2
> > CPUs with AVX2].
>
> This is not what I'd call a good idea
Le 2019-07-23 07:02, drago01 a écrit :
Please just take back this change and come back at April first if it
was supposed to be a joke - if not then submit again in about 10
years.
Fedora used to have the x86 repo for old hardware, and the x86_64 repo
for new hardware. Now that the tech cursor
Le 2019-07-23 08:32, Alexander Bokovoy a écrit :
On ma, 22 heinä 2019, Jeremy Cline wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 06:59:04PM +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ma, 22 heinä 2019, Jeremy Cline wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 05:37:10PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > Keycloak is not generally Fed
Patrik Mattsson wrote:
> I would take the lowest denominator of features for CPUs of atleast 3
> years of age considering how long some CPUs are being used in virtualized
> environments and at a lot of different cloud-providers (I've seen 5+ year
> old CPUs in at some smaller providers).
At least
Well, that would be too much. 2011-ish hardware is still in use. But there is
some truth behind this, may be baseline should be about 2008? SSE 4.2 as a
baseline makes more sence.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe se
Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> 1. Lower requirement to something like SSE4 and select other CPU
> features which are available in most of CPUs for last decade.
Sorry, but -1 to SSE4 too. One of my machines supports only up to SSSE3, and
other replies in this thread have also suggested SSSE3 as the most w
Hi,
directories /proc/ and /sys/ are owned by filesystem package. This worked in
past where we needed those directories to
exist so we can mount the procfs and sysfs.
However this cause issues in containers:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1548403
and during building where hacks are n
Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> As I said already, my primary worry is where we would clash our needs
> with those of GitLab commercial entity. For example, Kerberos
> authentication or SAML SSO for groups, or push rule restrictions are
> part of commercial offering but not available in the community ed
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:44 AM Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>
> Le mar. 23 juil. 2019 à 08:30, Igor Gnatenko
> a écrit :
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 4:31 AM Igor Gnatenko
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Florian,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 9:28 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > >
> > > > https://fed
Hi Ben
Considering there are new CPUs being sold by Intel today that doesn't even have
AVX2 (point in case: Pentium Gold G5620), this sounds to me like a move that is
happening way too soon.
I would take the lowest denominator of features for CPUs of atleast 3 years of
age considering how long
Given the nearly only negative replies to this proposal: can we please
just officially mark it as retracted/rejected and move on?
P.S.: all my Fedora machines would no longer be able to run Fedora >=
32, effectively ending my involvement in this community :(
Ben Cotton writes:
> https://fedora
On 7/22/19 8:51 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/x86-64_micro-architecture_update
After preliminary discussions with CPU vendors, we propose AVX2 as the
new baseline. AVX2 support was introduced into CPUs from 2013 to
2015. See
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advan
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
