Re: Next F31 push?

Sérgio Basto wrote: > AFAIK , the logic is request an freeze exception , or next push will be > just after F31 GA . > I'd like have one unfreeze and push all packages that are waiting to be > pushed to stable, when we have an NO-GO. > I already made this request in past and, in resume, the idea

Re: Next F31 push?

Hi, AFAIK , the logic is request an freeze exception , or next push will be just after F31 GA . I'd like have one unfreeze and push all packages that are waiting to be pushed to stable, when we have an NO-GO. I already made this request in past and, in resume, the idea was rejected with some

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2019-10-18 - 94% PASS

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/10/18/report-389-ds-base-1.4.1.8-3.fc30.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-e7cdb404e5 libapreq2-2.13-2.el6 13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-5393542b88 opendmarc-1.3.2-1.el6 12

[Bug 1762650] perl-Crypt-DH for EL 8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762650 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1761738] Please build perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder for EPEL 8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761738 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing: Age URL 11 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-04183e6fbf scapy-2.4.3-2.el8 8 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-1c488e885d python-ecdsa-0.13.3-1.el8 6

[Bug 1754282] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Compress-LZF

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1754282 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1762256] perl-Throwable for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762256 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1761856] perl-HTML-Template for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761856 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #5 from

[Bug 1761847] perl-Convert-PEM for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761847 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #2 from

[Bug 1761846] perl-Config-IniFiles for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761846 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1761851] perl-Crypt-URandom for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761851 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1761961] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Test-File-Contents

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761961 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1761849] perl-Crypt-DES_EDE3 for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761849 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from

[Bug 1761860] perl-String-Random for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761860 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1762261] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Module-Runtime-Conflicts

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762261 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1762245] perl-Test-Distribution for EL 8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762245 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1761854] perl-FCGI-ProcManager for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761854 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1761859] perl-Regexp-Assemble for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761859 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1762253] perl-Moo for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762253 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1762272] perl-Email-MIME for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762272 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #2 from

[Bug 1762510] Please build perl-Any-URI-Escape in normal EPEL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762510 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1762242] perl-Unicode-MapUTF8 for EL 8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762242 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1762023] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-List-SomeUtils

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762023 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1761845] perl-Cache-Memcached for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761845 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 1762246] perl-Unicode-Map8 for EL 8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762246 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

Next F31 push?

I've got an update I've requested stable on which is now at 15 days... I'm assuming the pause is due to beta freeze activities? https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-95287d801f Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

Adam Williamson wrote: > Of course if you just don't modularize FreeIPA at all you don't have > the kickstart problem, but then you *do* still have the 'we're stuck > shipping this one version of FreeIPA for the next seventy jillion > years' problem. That is purely a RHEL thing though. I do not

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

Stephen Gallagher wrote: > I think that's a little harsh (but probably fair given my tone above). > Can we agree that we're both on the same side: we want Fedora to be > excellent? I accept your apologies for your harsh tone (and I appreciate your much more constructive reply this time, thank

[Bug 1762936] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #2 from

[Bug 1762969] New: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Crypt-PasswdMD5

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762969 Bug ID: 1762969 Summary: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Crypt-PasswdMD5 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Crypt-PasswdMD5 Assignee:

[Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1762969 Referenced Bugs:

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: > 3. modularity allows choosing non-default versions, which is great for > a particular application, but conflicts with other apps, forcing us > to choose only one of them. This provides a working solution for at > least some people, so it's useful

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > This does not work for server components and is not generalizable. For > example, you cannot have multiple versions of Samba running on the same > system. You cannot have multiple versions of FreeIPA running on the same > system either. These server components have

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 15:04 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > Not without using their packaging system, their build system and > their > other design choices. Frankly, this is not a bad caveat. Keep in mind that we also had to change our build system for modularity. > Working out slots would

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

On 10/17/19 1:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:05:43PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: >> Realistically, I believe that default streams themselves are something we >> should avoid, if the cost is low, and it is. There are many users, >> probably the vast majority of users,

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 9:33 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:05:43PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > Realistically, I believe that default streams themselves are something we > > should avoid, if the cost is low, and it is. There are many users, > > probably the vast

Re: Building eBPF programs

On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:21:39 +0100 Tom Hughes wrote: > On 17/10/2019 21:39, Steve Grubb wrote: > > On Thursday, October 17, 2019 4:21:44 PM EDT Tom Hughes wrote: > >> On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: > >>> I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at > >>> eBPF in the >

Re: Building eBPF programs

On 17/10/2019 21:39, Steve Grubb wrote: On Thursday, October 17, 2019 4:21:44 PM EDT Tom Hughes wrote: On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at eBPF in the kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to allow this to

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 14:44 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 10/17/19 2:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 09:32 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > On Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:59:19 AM MST Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > > > The one thing we are using default modular

[Bug 1748209] Please add CPAN's XML::Feed to EPEL-6 and EPEL-7

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1748209 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|---

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

On 10/17/19 2:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 09:32 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: >> On Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:59:19 AM MST Alexander Bokovoy wrote: >>> The one thing we are using default modular stream in RHEL 8 for is to be >>> able to provide access to packages in

Re: Building eBPF programs

On Thursday, October 17, 2019 4:21:44 PM EDT Tom Hughes wrote: > On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: > > I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at eBPF in > > the > > kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to allow this > > to > > resolve. However, I

[Bug 1762911] perl-TheSchwartz-1.14 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762911 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version|

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 09:32 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > On Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:59:19 AM MST Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > The one thing we are using default modular stream in RHEL 8 for is to be > > able to provide access to packages in kickstart that were moved to > > modules in

Re: Building eBPF programs

On 17/10/2019 20:44, Steve Grubb wrote: I don't think __x86_64__ is defined as the program is aimed at eBPF in the kernel. In rawhide, we no longer have glibc-devel(x86-32) to allow this to resolve. However, I think that the assumption of not having __x86_64__ defined means we are targeting

[Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from

[Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1762930 | Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|1762928 | Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1762936 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762936] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 Bug ID: 1762936 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Text-Reform Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr

[Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762936 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762936] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Reform

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762936 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from

[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 --- Comment #2 from Paul Howarth --- Don't forget to request branches of perl-Text-Reform too... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing

[Bug 1762927] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Filesys-Notify-Simple

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762927 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[RFE] EPEL8 branch of |[RFE] EPEL8 branch of

[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from

[Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org Depends On|

[Bug 1762252] perl-Email-Simple for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762252 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1749231] perl-HTML-Format for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1749231 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1753543] perl-Font-AFM for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1753543 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762930] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762271 Depends On|

[Bug 1762271] perl-Mail-Message for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762271 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1762930 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762928] [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1762930 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762930] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762930 Bug ID: 1762930 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Text-Autoformat Product: Fedora EPEL Version: epel8 Status: NEW Component: perl-Text-Autoformat Assignee:

[Bug 1744690] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744690 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1744708 | Depends On|

[Bug 1762923] perl-Authen-Simple for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1744699] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Apache-LogFormat-Compiler

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744699 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1744709] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-FCGI-Client

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744709 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762927] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762927 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1744707] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-CGI-Compile

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744707 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1761854] perl-FCGI-ProcManager for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761854 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1744708] [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744708 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1744690 Depends On|1744690

[Bug 1762928] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762928 Bug ID: 1762928 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-TeX-Hyphen Product: Fedora EPEL Version: epel8 Status: NEW Component: perl-TeX-Hyphen Assignee:

[Bug 1762927] New: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762927 Bug ID: 1762927 Summary: [RFE] EPEL8 branch of perl-Plack Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Filesys-Notify-Simple Assignee:

Building eBPF programs

Hello, I am in the process of building a new version of suricata, and IDS program that watches network traffic. It has a new module that uses eBPF for high speed network packet categorization. When building, it uses the following command: /usr/bin/clang -Wall -Iinclude -O2 \

[Bug 1762923] New: perl-Authen-Simple for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762923 Bug ID: 1762923 Summary: perl-Authen-Simple for EL8 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Authen-Simple Assignee: emman...@seyman.fr

Logs from Open NeuroFedora team meeting at 1500 UTC on Thursday, 17th October.

Hello everyone! The logs for the NeuroFedora team meeting on 26th September are linked below: - HTML Logs: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2019-10-17/fedora-neuro.2019-10-17-15.00.log.html - HTML Minutes:

[Bug 1762918] New: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Email-Address-XS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762918 Bug ID: 1762918 Summary: [RFE] EPEL-8 branch for perl-Email-Address-XS Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Email-Address-XS Assignee:

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:05:43PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > Realistically, I believe that default streams themselves are something we > should avoid, if the cost is low, and it is. There are many users, > probably the vast majority of users, that don't use Modularity. It's great > to have

[Bug 1762911] New: perl-TheSchwartz-1.14 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762911 Bug ID: 1762911 Summary: perl-TheSchwartz-1.14 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-TheSchwartz Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 1761539] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761539 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1761775] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761775 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1762233] [RFE] Please build for EPEL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762233 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1744785] (RFE) EPEL8 branch of perl-Proc-Daemon

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744785 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs:

[Bug 1761447] Fusioninventory-agent dependency problems

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761447 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||emman...@seyman.fr Depends

[Bug 1744784] (RFE) EPEL8 branch of perl-Net-SNMP

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1744784 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1761447 Referenced Bugs:

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

On to, 17 loka 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote: Dependencies aren't arbitrary; if they were, there would be probably no need to waste our time in working on the whole build part. Whether that is useful to you or other subset of Fedora maintainers is not guaranteed. However, using modular streams allows

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 14:15, Randy Barlow wrote: > > Could we think of a solution that is simple so that packagers can more > easily understand how it works? The issue is how many different choices are you allowing and where you are allowing them to be made. A lot of the gentoo and nixos seem

[Bug 1762900] New: Bugzilla for EL8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762900 Bug ID: 1762900 Summary: Bugzilla for EL8 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: bugzilla Assignee: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br Reporter:

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

On 10/17/19 12:27 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: people are going to add things into their modules to make whatever software they need. If I find that I need libfoo2-2.34 in libreoffice and you need libfoo2-2.40 in evolution.. then only one of the two modules can be installed.You can either

Fedora 31 Final is No-Go

Release status of Fedora 31 Final is NO-GO. Due to open blocker bugs and the lack of a release candidate, Fedora 31 Final was declared "No-Go". We will reconvene at 1400 UTC (note the departure from the usual time) on Thursday, 24 October[1] to target a release date of Tuesday 29 October. For

[Test-Announce] Fedora 31 Final is No-Go

Release status of Fedora 31 Final is NO-GO. Due to open blocker bugs and the lack of a release candidate, Fedora 31 Final was declared "No-Go". We will reconvene at 1400 UTC (note the departure from the usual time) on Thursday, 24 October[1] to target a release date of Tuesday 29 October. For

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > On to, 17 loka 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote: >>Building against the distribution's version of libraries instead of some >>arbitrarily picked version is pretty much the whole point of non-modular >>packages. > Right, and building against carefully chosen collection of

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 13:43 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 17. 10. 19 13:38, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > Had there be default module streams for Java packages in buildroot, we > > would have no problem. > > Had there been no default modular streams but regular packages instead, we > would >

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 08:08 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > One of the (often un- or misinformed) major arguments people keep > using against Modularity is "it makes packaging harder!". One thing I've found to be a problem with modularity is that it's easy to be un- or misinformed. I spent a

[Bug 1761738] Please build perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder for EPEL 8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761738 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from

[Bug 1761738] Please build perl-ExtUtils-XSBuilder for EPEL 8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761738 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

- Original Message - > From: "Randy Barlow" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 1:18:08 PM > Subject: Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular > Buildroot > > On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 12:56 -0400, Randy Barlow

Re: Do F31 updates not obsolete each other during freeze?

Randy Barlow wrote: > I'm not really sure which way would be better, but I think I lean > towards thinking that maybe Bodhi really should wait until updates are > all the way stable before accepting new updates for the same packages. That would not be acceptable. Mohan Boddhu's RFE:

  1   2   >