The Fedora Packaging Committee has some open seats and is accepting
submissions from interested candidates to serve on the FPC.
The FPC would like to thank Orion Poplawski, and Jonathan Wakely for
their service.
This position involves not only reviewing Packaging Guideline drafts
submitted to
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2020-05-21 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. uitime):
= Day: Thursday ==
2020-05-21 09:00 PDT US/Pacific
2020-05-21
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837829
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-53b85179ad has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
13 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-aa8ce752c3
pure-ftpd-1.0.49-4.el8
12 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-03d5f14bbe
chromium-81.0.4044.138-1.el8
10
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837829
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-b4a3fbecea has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837829
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #7 from
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/05/21/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.2-20200520gitc350ddc.fc32.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834480
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In
On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 16:15 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 00:26 +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 11:43:10 PM CEST Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I often notice that my scratch build right after updating some packages
> > >
On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 00:26 +0200, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 11:43:10 PM CEST Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I often notice that my scratch build right after updating some packages
> > (or packaging them for the first time) would fail -- e.g. due to some
>
Hi
I'm building gdal-3.1.0 in a f33 side-tag, and I'll also rebuild all
dependencies:
bes
cloudcompare
dans-gdal-scripts
gazebo
GMT
grass
gtatool
liblas
mapnik
mapserver
merkaartor
ncl
nodejs-gdal
opencv
OpenSceneGraph
osgearth
postgis
python-fiona
python-rasterio
qgis
qlandkartegt
qmapshack
On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 11:43:10 PM CEST Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I often notice that my scratch build right after updating some packages
> (or packaging them for the first time) would fail -- e.g. due to some
> strict GCC checks -- but Koji would direct me to inspect
Hi,
I often notice that my scratch build right after updating some packages
(or packaging them for the first time) would fail -- e.g. due to some
strict GCC checks -- but Koji would direct me to inspect root.log, even
though there's no error there and the failure is logged in build.log
One
Hi,
On 5/19/20 2:21 PM, Igor Raits wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 15:36 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Aarch64_PointerAuthentication
== Summary ==
Arm Pointer Authentication (PAC) is a method of hardening code
Hi,
On 5/19/20 1:38 PM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
On 5/18/20 3:36 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
Arm Pointer Authentication (PAC) is a method of hardening code from
Return Oriented Programming (ROP) attacks. It uses a tag in a pointer
to sign and verify pointers. Branch Target Identification
On 20. 05. 20 21:38, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 19. 05. 20 v 14:03 Richard Shaw napsal(a):
Because Qt 5.13.x / PySide2 5.13.x is NOT compatible with Python 3.8. But instead of
asking ourselves, "should we push
in the VERY latest Python and hope it's ok?", we just patch the build system to
# Fedora Data Centre Move - What it means for you?
to: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
subject: Fedora Data Centre Move - What it means for you?
Good Morning,
As you may have heard in the past few months, most of the Fedora Infrastructure
which is currently hosted in a data-center in
# Fedora Data Centre Move - What it means for you?
to: devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
subject: Fedora Data Centre Move - What it means for you?
Good Morning,
As you may have heard in the past few months, most of the Fedora Infrastructure
which is currently hosted in a data-center in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 21:38 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 19. 05. 20 v 14:03 Richard Shaw napsal(a):
> > Because Qt 5.13.x / PySide2 5.13.x is NOT compatible with Python
> > 3.8. But instead of asking ourselves, "should we push
> > in the VERY
On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 15:39, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 19. 05. 20 v 14:03 Richard Shaw napsal(a):
> > Because Qt 5.13.x / PySide2 5.13.x is NOT compatible with Python 3.8.
> But instead of asking ourselves, "should we push
> > in the VERY latest Python and hope it's ok?", we just patch the
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 2:53 PM Carl George wrote:
> Howdy y'all,
>
> The glances package prints out a warning that the user should upgrade
> it via pip. This is wrong for obvious reasons. This issue was first
> reported in bugzilla on 2019-11-18 [0]. I opened a pull request to
> fix it
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:39 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 19. 05. 20 v 14:03 Richard Shaw napsal(a):
> > Because Qt 5.13.x / PySide2 5.13.x is NOT compatible with Python 3.8.
> But instead of asking ourselves, "should we push
> > in the VERY latest Python and hope it's ok?", we just patch the
Dne 19. 05. 20 v 14:03 Richard Shaw napsal(a):
> Because Qt 5.13.x / PySide2 5.13.x is NOT compatible with Python 3.8. But
> instead of asking ourselves, "should we push
> in the VERY latest Python and hope it's ok?", we just patch the build system
> to accept it anyway and hope for the best.
>
I think the issue here is that the most recent texlive package fixes landed
this morning, and the "rawhide" compose that mock would pull in doesn't
have all the fixes yet.
Tom
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:12 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:08 PM Tom Callaway wrote:
>
>> I'm
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:08 PM Tom Callaway wrote:
> I'm not sure what your failure looked like (maybe the rawhide packages
> used are older than the ones currently in the koji buildroot), but a koji
> scratch build from master succeeded without issue:
>
>
I'm not sure what your failure looked like (maybe the rawhide packages used
are older than the ones currently in the koji buildroot), but a koji
scratch build from master succeeded without issue:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=44738672
Tom
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:21 PM
It's probably not the same bug, that error is a fairly generic error
meaning "something has made texlive unhappy". I'm investigating.
Tom
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 1:29 PM Richard Shaw wrote:
> Thanks for the PR but it looks like I'm being bitten by:
>
>
Package gifted to feborges.
Thanks Felipe!
--
Michel
On 5/18/20 1:33 AM, Felipe Borges wrote:
Hi,
I maintain GNOME Boxes (which is part of the default workstation
installation) and GNOME Connections. Both written in Vala. Therefore
the maintenance of Vala in Fedora is important to me.
I can
Hi all,
We manage a fleet of Fedora end-user devices at work (laptops and
desktops), and currently don't automate firmware update deployment yet
(given the potential issue if, say, the user suspends their laptop halfway).
Sometimes there are updates that are critical (e.g. a security issue,
Thanks for the PR but it looks like I'm being bitten by:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578426
In the mock build, so how do I generate pdflatex.fmt within a mock chroot?
Thanks,
Richard
___
devel mailing list --
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:31:37 -0400,
Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:06 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
I'm seeing this when running fedora-review:
$ fedora-review -b 1838033
INFO: Processing bugzilla bug: 1838033
...
INFO: Installing built package(s)
warning: Found
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I think you might have cache of buildroot which was populated using BDB
backend, so I guess if you clean mock caches, the problem should go
away.
On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 15:04 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I'm seeing this when running
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838194
Bug ID: 1838194
Summary: perl-Test-Smoke-1.78 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Test-Smoke
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838154
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 09:03 +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 08:24:34PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:32 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > The most suspicious change between the two build envs that I can see is
> > > openssl. GOOD has
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838154
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Richard,
I've got a PR for you that adds your explicit tex BuildRequires so that
this works again:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/OpenColorIO/pull-request/1
Upstream TeXLive sometimes moves .sty files around, so in most cases, it is
easier to specify BuildRequires using the
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:06 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> I'm seeing this when running fedora-review:
>
> $ fedora-review -b 1838033
> INFO: Processing bugzilla bug: 1838033
> ...
> INFO: Installing built package(s)
> warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 12:22:06PM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> I took web-assets to prevent from braking many packages. If there is somebody
> interested in web applications (not my case), I can give the package to him.
Or her!
Zbyszek
___
devel mailing
I'm seeing this when running fedora-review:
$ fedora-review -b 1838033
INFO: Processing bugzilla bug: 1838033
...
INFO: Installing built package(s)
warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb
backend.
INFO: Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Java
warning:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838041
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838154
Bug ID: 1838154
Summary: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.072 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-PPIx-Regexp
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 05:22:42AM -0500, Ty Young wrote:
> I think I owe some in the Fedora project an apology.
Hi Ty. Thank you for this. When we're passionate about something, it's easy
to get frustrated and upset, and easy for that to get out of hand. It's much
harder to step back and
On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 7:56:35 AM MST Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 19. 05. 20 16:46, Christopher wrote:
>
> > Interesting that the survey shows that the most common response was that
> > people use it "not at all" and the overall response was negative, but
> > the reaction to that is, "improve the
On 4/28/20 11:31 AM, Clement Verna wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2020 at 18:41, Alexander Ploumistos
mailto:alex.ploumis...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Almost a week ago, I built cmpfit and fityk in side tags on F31, F32
and F33. While the builds for F33 moved directly to stable - as
expected - the
On 20. 05. 20 15:35, Christine Caulfield wrote:
Hi,
I thought I was doing the right thing - because of the libqb soname bump
I built it on a side-tag and got the maintainers of dependent packages
to rebuild their packages on that side-tag.
Now all the builds are in I go to Bodhi to make the
Hi,
I thought I was doing the right thing - because of the libqb soname bump
I built it on a side-tag and got the maintainers of dependent packages
to rebuild their packages on that side-tag.
Now all the builds are in I go to Bodhi to make the update - but it
tells me I can't do it because I
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:49 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> pangox-compat orphan, rathann 2 weeks ago
I've removed a dependency on this from a package I maintain; there are many
others that rely on this somewhere, and it's really old. Is anyone working on
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 9:08 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:52 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:39 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>> >
>> > In rawhide the ceph ceph-test subpackage is deriving a Requires: for
>> > $subject, and even with gmock and
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 2:51 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:39 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> >
> > In rawhide the ceph ceph-test subpackage is deriving a Requires: for
> > $subject, and even with gmock and gtest installed the requires is not
> > satisfied.
> >
> > And the
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:52 AM Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:39 AM Kaleb Keithley
> wrote:
> >
> > In rawhide the ceph ceph-test subpackage is deriving a Requires: for
> $subject, and even with gmock and gtest installed the requires is not
> satisfied.
> >
> > And the gtest and
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:39 AM Kaleb Keithley wrote:
>
> In rawhide the ceph ceph-test subpackage is deriving a Requires: for
> $subject, and even with gmock and gtest installed the requires is not
> satisfied.
>
> And the gtest and gmock rpms (somehow) do not provide them. (Is this a bug in
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 7:39 AM Richard Shaw wrote:
> Not sure if this problem is related, but the last time I build OpenImageIO
> it worked, I was performing a local mock build (with the local repo
> enabled) and ran into this:
>
Correction, OpenColorIO. My fingers always want to type
In rawhide the ceph ceph-test subpackage is deriving a Requires: for
$subject, and even with gmock and gtest installed the requires is not
satisfied.
And the gtest and gmock rpms (somehow) do not provide them. (Is this a bug
in the gtest and gmock rpms?)
(They do provide libgtest.so.1.10.0
Not sure if this problem is related, but the last time I build OpenImageIO
it worked, I was performing a local mock build (with the local repo
enabled) and ran into this:
cd /builddir/build/BUILD/OpenColorIO-1.1.1/build/docs/build-latex &&
/usr/bin/pdflatex OpenColorIO.tex
This is pdfTeX, Version
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 8:08 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 11:40:50AM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 11:28 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> > wrote:
> > > Next time FESCo should forbid gcc updates to unreleased versions in
> > > branched Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838041
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Test-TrailingSpace-0.0400-1.fc30.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=44727916
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838041
Bug ID: 1838041
Summary: perl-Test-TrailingSpace-0.0400 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Test-TrailingSpace
Keywords:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838041
--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Created attachment 1690213
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1690213=edit
[patch] Update to 0.0400 (#1838041)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
On 5/19/20 6:01 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
We're trying to track down a problem that only appears in koji and
copr, but I can't reproduce locally in mock on my rawhide VM. It's
related to file triggers and we're trying to debug with something this:
%transfiletriggerin -n texlive-kpathsea
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 8/8 (x86_64)
Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso
install_default@uefi:
Mount /run contents changed to 67.97498045% of previous size
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/596113#downloads
Current
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
ID: 601107 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/601107
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:43 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:50 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> > are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> > that the package should
On 11. 05. 20 1:56, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 08. 05. 20 16:24, Richard Shaw wrote:
There were a bunch of python2 packages that needed to be removed which
necessitated --allowerasing which I've never had to do before.
Do you still have that list? Maybe in `dnf history`? If so, we can make the
Hi,
I think I owe some in the Fedora project an apology.
I feel like some good people where caught in the crossfire who were
never intended to be with my words. I do not believe it to be true nor
was it intended to be taken as "all Linux distros and their software
maintainers are evil". I
I took web-assets to prevent from braking many packages. If there is somebody
interested in web applications (not my case), I can give the package to him.
-- Petr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837486
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768303
--- Comment #7 from vidbaz ---
Hi,
sorry for the spam, we were installing on Oracle Linux 7 and this package is
available only on ol7_optional_latest repo. We fixed the issue enabling this
Repo
[ol7_optional_latest]
name=Oracle Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768303
vidbaz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vidbaz-er...@hotmail.com
--- Comment #6
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> I guess my hope here is that perhaps we allow build failures hold up
> finishing the rest of a stack's build a bit longer. Let that pressure
> build to hopefully get some more eyes on really fixing the underlying
> issues.
I am of that mindset too.
Unfortunately, these
Daniel Mach wrote:
> Our goal (I speak for the people who *currently* work on Modularity
> project at Red Hat) is *not* pushing anyone to use Modularity. It's up
> to Fesco, SIGs, spin maintainers and individual package maintainers to
> make their choices.
But our point is that it should be up to
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:50 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
>
Christopher wrote:
> Interesting that the survey shows that the most common response was that
> people use it "not at all" and the overall response was negative, but the
> reaction to that is, "improve the docs" and "works as intended". Am I the
> only one who thinks that the people pushing
Hi, all,
I am looking for some background and info on this deprecation warning:
/usr/lib64/python3.8/site-packages/hawkey/__init__.py:348:
DeprecationWarning: The class hawkey.Repo is deprecated. Please use
dnf.repo.Repo instead. The class will be removed on 2019-12-31.
I have found this mail
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 08:43:01PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 20:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:32 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > The most suspicious change between the two build envs that I can see is
> > > openssl. GOOD has
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 09:03:39AM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
> What host system are you running that on?
x86_64 Fedora 31 with updates-testing enabled.
After mock finishes bootstrapping DNF, it installs buildrooot and just before
it, it enables the modules:
Complete!
Finish(bootstrap): dnf
On 20. 05. 20 10:32, Miro Hrončok wrote:
pungi has:
...
Writing index file Pungi.idx
(./Pungi.aux) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/ts1cmr.fd)
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/psnfss/t1ptm.fd)
! LaTeX Error: File `epstopdf-base.sty' not found.
Looking at
On 20. 05. 20 9:55, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 14. 05. 20 23:55, Tom Callaway wrote:
I've just kicked off new builds for texlive and texlive-base for TeXLive 2020
in rawhide. Hopefully, everything that depends on them will continue to work,
but if you notice any new issues generating docs (or any
On Wed, 20 May 2020 08:10:42 +0200
Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 04:05:02PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 May 2020 09:07:30 -0400
> > Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 19 May 2020 at 06:05, Paul Howarth
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 18 May 2020 22:29:54
On 14. 05. 20 23:55, Tom Callaway wrote:
I've just kicked off new builds for texlive and texlive-base for TeXLive 2020 in
rawhide. Hopefully, everything that depends on them will continue to work, but
if you notice any new issues generating docs (or any missing components or
broken
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 04:52:55PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> In fact it seems to be a bit more complex than that, because systemd
> doesn't actually list its dependency on libpcap:
>
> [adamw@adam libpcap (master)]$ rpm -q --requires systemd | grep pcap
> [adamw@adam libpcap (master)]$
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837829
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-c0d616ed91 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-c0d616ed91
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837829
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-b4a3fbecea has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-b4a3fbecea
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837829
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2020-53b85179ad has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-53b85179ad
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 08:43:01PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 20:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:32 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > The most suspicious change between the two build envs that I can see is
> > > openssl. GOOD has
||perl-Mozilla-CA-20200520-1.
||fc33
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ---
An enhancement release suitable for all Fedoras.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837829
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Dne 19. 05. 20 v 16:56 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 19. 05. 20 16:46, Christopher wrote:
Interesting that the survey shows that the most common response was
that people use it "not at all" and the overall response was negative,
but the reaction to that is, "improve the docs" and "works as
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 08:24:34PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:32 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > The most suspicious change between the two build envs that I can see is
> > openssl. GOOD has openssl-1.1.1g-1.fc33.x86_64 , and BAD has
> >
On 20. 05. 20 6:05, Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 5/19/20 5:16 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 15. 05. 20 22:36, Tom Callaway wrote:
I'm hoping that when texlive is able to fully install this issue will go
away. I just got a successful build for -21 that _should_ resolve all the
broken deps except for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837680
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On 19. 05. 20 14:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
If we integrate new Python versions later, this "trying hard" will just shift
from alphas and betas to .1 and .2.
One more important thing to note is that for example with Python 3.9, it was
input from Fedora that made a couple
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:10:42AM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> Now you can ask why enabling mariadb-devel:10.3 does not enable mariadb:10.3
> automatically. Especially when mariadb-devel:10.3 run-requires mariadb:10.3
> according to "dnf module info mariadb-devel:10.3" command. The answer is a bug
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 04:05:02PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On Tue, 19 May 2020 09:07:30 -0400
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 May 2020 at 06:05, Paul Howarth wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 18 May 2020 22:29:54 -0600
> > > Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 5/17/20 6:34
98 matches
Mail list logo
