[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2020-07-25 - 95% PASS

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2020/07/25/report-389-ds-base-1.4.4.4-20200724gitd5c9c4e.fc32.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

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

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 11 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-e44380bc7a php-horde-kronolith-4.2.29-1.el6 9 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-e54cfb4880 singularity-3.6.0-1.el6 9

[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2020-07-27 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting for Monday. I don't have anything urgent this week. Also I'm going to be on vacation. If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week, please do reply to this mail, but someone else will need to run the meeting :) Also not going

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 710 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-3c9292b62d condor-8.6.11-1.el7 449 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-bc0182548b bubblewrap-0.3.3-2.el7 159

[Bug 1708214] Upgrade perl-Net-DNS-SEC to 1.17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1708214 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 1691325] Upgrade perl-Net-DNS-SEC to 1.12

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691325 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version|

cmake has broken python

Bug report filed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860546 On 2020-07-23 11:02 p.m., Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: Hello team, It looks like something broke inside cmake when attempting to detect python: CMake Error at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindPackageHandleStandardArgs.cmake:164

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 04:55:31PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:55 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 17:51, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:40 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:37:05PM -0600, Jeff

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

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing: Age URL 9 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-12d0e14fab cacti-1.2.13-1.el8 cacti-spine-1.2.13-1.el8 9 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-1c906e59bb mbedtls-2.16.7-1.el8 9

[EPEL-devel] First draft of will-it-install

Hi, As discussed in the EPEL Steering Committee meeting, I made a python script, will-it-install.py out of a different script I had just made.[1] It looks like it's working pretty good for both rawhide and centos 8 (with EPEL8). To run, Download the whole directory structure [2], edit package.list

[Bug 1283764] Use of uninitialized value in numeric eq (==) at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/File/Tail.pm line 391

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283764 --- Comment #19 from Harald Reindl --- big cinema, 5 years later still unfixed -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list --

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:55 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 17:51, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:40 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:37:05PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > Hmm, what's interesting here is that it's

[Bug 1835354] perl-Email-MIME-ContentType: rubygem-mail: Out of memory issue through nested MIME parts [fedora-all]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1835354 PnT Account Manager changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|tcall...@redhat.com |spo...@gmail.com -- You are

[Bug 1835359] perl-Email-MIME: rubygem-mail: Out of memory issue through nested MIME parts [fedora-all]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1835359 PnT Account Manager changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|tcall...@redhat.com |spo...@gmail.com -- You are

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:55 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 17:51, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:40 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:37:05PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > Hmm, what's interesting here is that it's

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 17:51, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:40 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:37:05PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > Hmm, what's interesting here is that it's binutils-2.34, so it's not > > > the update that Nick was doing to do today.

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:40 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:37:05PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > Hmm, what's interesting here is that it's binutils-2.34, so it's not > > the update that Nick was doing to do today. I've seen a couple > > folks trip over this today and

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:40 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:37:05PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > Hmm, what's interesting here is that it's binutils-2.34, so it's not > > the update that Nick was doing to do today. I've seen a couple > > folks trip over this today and

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:37:05PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > Hmm, what's interesting here is that it's binutils-2.34, so it's not > the update that Nick was doing to do today. I've seen a couple > folks trip over this today and just saw it in a couple of my builds. I believe it's the version that

Re: ar (binutils) segfaulting in Rawhide - known bug?

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 3:30 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Just upgraded a development machine to: > > binutils-2.34.0-10.fc33.x86_64 > gcc-10.1.1-2.fc33.x86_64 > glibc-2.31.9000-21.fc33.x86_64 > > and a very simple C compile (non-LTO) is now segfaulting: [snip] > I can't find any BZ for this.

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 15:00 -0600, Jerry James wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 2:49 PM Eric Sandeen wrote: > > Hm, is this related? (libtool segfault building xfsprogs) > > > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9149/47779149/build.log > > > > /bin/sh ../libtool --quiet --tag=CC

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 2:49 PM Eric Sandeen wrote: > Hm, is this related? (libtool segfault building xfsprogs) > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9149/47779149/build.log > > /bin/sh ../libtool --quiet --tag=CC --mode=link gcc -Wl,-z,relro > -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-z,now

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On 7/24/20 1:31 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm starting to see various very strange kinds of build failures in > rawhide, that seem to have started with either of these updates (or a > combination of them): > > - annobin 9.21-1.fc33 → 9.22-1.fc33 > - binutils 2.34.0-6.fc33 →

Re: The case of LTO when produced enlarged binaries

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:30 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 14:27 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:24 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 13:29 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 19:12 +, Artem Tim wrote: > > > > > Hi. In

Re: The case of LTO when produced enlarged binaries

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 14:27 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:24 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 13:29 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 19:12 +, Artem Tim wrote: > > > > Hi. In rare cases

Re: The case of LTO when produced enlarged binaries

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:24 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 13:29 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 19:12 +, Artem Tim wrote: > > > Hi. In rare cases building packages with LTO producing binaries or > > > libraries which have bigger size then if they have built

Re: The case of LTO when produced enlarged binaries

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 13:29 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 19:12 +, Artem Tim wrote: > > Hi. In rare cases building packages with LTO producing binaries or > > libraries which have bigger size then if they have built without > >

Re: [HEADS-UP] OpenJDK 11 is now the default Java in rawhide

* Adam Williamson [2020-07-24 00:52]: > On July 23, 2020 6:17:04 p.m. PDT, Deepak Bhole wrote: > >* Adam Williamson [2020-07-23 20:57]: > >> On Tue, 2020-07-21 at 12:02 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: [ ... ] > > > >I could of-course misunderstanding the issue but is there a reason that > >you

[389-devel] please review: PR 51218 - remove more unused code

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51218 -- 389 Directory Server Development Team ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: z3 soname bump

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 1:35 PM Jeff Law wrote: > Just a note on z3. > > I've been trying to track down what I think is an uninstantiated template > issue > that's exposed by LTO. I've been chasing it on/off over the last day or two > without success. So if you get a build failure that looks

Re: z3 soname bump

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 13:15 -0600, Jerry James wrote: > I will soon push a change to the z3 package, in Rawhide only, which > will result in an soname bump. The actual contents of libz3 will not > change, however. The only Fedora consumer outside of the z3 package > itself is cppcheck, which

Re: The case of LTO when produced enlarged binaries

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 19:12 +, Artem Tim wrote: > Hi. In rare cases building packages with LTO producing binaries or libraries > which have bigger size then if they have built without LTO. For example > 'kitty' package: > > * with LTO: > - koji task

Re: pagure pull-request email workflow

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 02:19:59PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Tue, 2020-07-21 at 13:53 +0100, Tom Hughes via devel wrote: > > On 21/07/2020 13:12, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > > I normally just edit .git/config and add to the origin remote > > > > an extra fetch: > > > > > > > >

z3 soname bump

I will soon push a change to the z3 package, in Rawhide only, which will result in an soname bump. The actual contents of libz3 will not change, however. The only Fedora consumer outside of the z3 package itself is cppcheck, which currently fails to build due to the recent cmake change. If the

The case of LTO when produced enlarged binaries

Hi. In rare cases building packages with LTO producing binaries or libraries which have bigger size then if they have built without LTO. For example 'kitty' package: * with LTO: - koji task https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47762998 1.79 MB glfw-wayland.so 1.99 MB

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 20:52 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > The LTO break Ruby on various platforms. > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47582573 > > vs > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47621733 > > (Note these are my experimental builds testing single

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

The LTO break Ruby on various platforms. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47582573 vs https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47621733 (Note these are my experimental builds testing single test case). The only difference is redhat-rpm-config 162-1.fc33 =>

[389-devel] please review: PR 51217 - remove unused or unnecessary database plugin functions

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51217 -- 389 Directory Server Development Team ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

rust-ipnetwork license change

The license for rust-ipnetwork changed to "MIT or Apache-2.0" upstream [1]. This is reflected in the PR to distgit [2] to update to the latest version. Dusty [1] https://github.com/achanda/ipnetwork/commit/fa128680b51fbcf9c37db99f011c91204c4a3b0d [2]

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

Jeff Law wrote on Fri, Jul 24, 2020: > > Looks like somebody already did that and attached the .ii file to the RHBZ. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1859588 > > Unfortunately neither Marek nor I can reproduce with the compilers we've > tested. > Is it possible the OOM killer is

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL repos packaged for Fedora (for repoquery)

On 24. 07. 20 19:05, Carl George wrote: Is there a better way to achieve the results with less risk? What I do for this is run podman containers. I create local images of centos+epel, then use a helper script to run them with a podman volume mounted at/var/cache/{yum,dnf}. With my script I

[EPEL-devel] Re: EPEL repos packaged for Fedora (for repoquery)

> Is there a better way to achieve the results with less > risk? What I do for this is run podman containers. I create local images of centos+epel, then use a helper script to run them with a podman volume mounted at /var/cache/{yum,dnf}. With my script I can run repoquery commands prefixed by

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:59 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:48 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:44 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > > One error I've seen in libreoffice is a gcc / annobin

[389-devel] please review: PR 51216 - Fix issues with setting SSL min and max versions (default vs supported versions)

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51216 -- 389 Directory Server Development Team ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

On 24. 07. 20 18:06, Neal Gompa wrote: On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 12:05 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 24. 07. 20 16:19, Vít Ondruch wrote: In this context, I'd be more than happy if the documentation discouraged use of the default streams. Something along these lines: "Modularity have default

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 12:05 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 24. 07. 20 16:19, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > In this context, I'd be more than happy if the documentation discouraged > > use of the default streams. Something along these lines: "Modularity > > have default stream feature, but use it with

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

On 24. 07. 20 16:19, Vít Ondruch wrote: In this context, I'd be more than happy if the documentation discouraged use of the default streams. Something along these lines: "Modularity have default stream feature, but use it with caution only if you know what you do and what is the impact." In

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:48 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:44 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > One error I've seen in libreoffice is a gcc / annobin segfault: > > > > > > > > [build CXX] vcl/unx/gtk3/gtk3gtkinst.cxx > > >

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 17:44 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > One error I've seen in libreoffice is a gcc / annobin segfault: > > > > > > [build CXX] vcl/unx/gtk3/gtk3gtkinst.cxx > > > *** WARNING *** there are active plugins, do not report

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 5:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > One error I've seen in libreoffice is a gcc / annobin segfault: > > > > [build CXX] vcl/unx/gtk3/gtk3gtkinst.cxx > > *** WARNING *** there are active plugins, do not report this as a bug > > unless you can reproduce it without enabling any

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:16:16AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > Unfortunately, MBS is maintained by a different team: the team that > maintains Koji. I am unsure about what they're planning to do, but I > hope they're going to do *something*. To add history here, MBS was written by and

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:17 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > Unfortunately, MBS is maintained by a different team: the team that > maintains Koji. I am unsure about what they're planning to do, but I > hope they're going to do *something*. > With my Council hat on, I'd like to see that team represented

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:10 AM Mat Booth wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 13:26, Petr Pisar wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote: > > > There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. > > > > > > The Objective summarizes the work that is

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 16:10, Mat Booth wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 13:26, Petr Pisar wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote: > > > There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. > > > > > > The Objective summarizes the work that is in

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 10:31 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm starting to see various very strange kinds of build failures in > rawhide, that seem to have started with either of these updates (or a > combination of them): > > - annobin 9.21-1.fc33 → 9.22-1.fc33 > - binutils

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 13:26, Petr Pisar wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote: > > There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. > > > > The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as > > highlights our plans for Fedora

Re: Dropping elfutils-libelf-devel-static and elfutils-devel-static subpackages

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 4:56 PM Mark Wielaard wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, 2020-07-23 at 09:59 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 1:25 AM Mark Wielaard > > > I committed the removal of the two static subpackages and added an > > > Obsoletes: elfutils-devel-static%{depsuffix}

Re: Dropping elfutils-libelf-devel-static and elfutils-devel-static subpackages

* Mark Wielaard: > BTW. Can Obsoletes ever be removed? We have an Obsoletes: libelf <= > 0.8.2-2 on elfutils-libelf since the original cvsdist import of 2004 > because there used to be a different libelf implementation (with a dead > upstream these days). Can I remove that? Or is it better to

Re: Dropping elfutils-libelf-devel-static and elfutils-devel-static subpackages

Hi, On Thu, 2020-07-23 at 09:59 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 1:25 AM Mark Wielaard > > I committed the removal of the two static subpackages and added an > > Obsoletes: elfutils-devel-static%{depsuffix} < 0.180-5 to elfutils- > > devel and an Obsoletes:

Re: Policy for Modules in Fedora and Fedora ELN - Fedora 33 Self-Contained Change proposal

Just FTR, I don't think I am going to reveal too much saying that for RHEL9, the sentiment is (at least in the context of Ruby, Node.js and Python) that we are very likely not going to use default streams. Plain old RPMs do mostly the same job. In this context, I'd be more than happy if the

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

Dne 24. 07. 20 v 14:25 Petr Pisar napsal(a): > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote: >> There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. >> >> The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as >> highlights our plans for Fedora 34. >>

perl-Math-Expression-Evaluator license corrected

perl-Math-Expression-Evaluator license was correted from "GPL+ or Artistic" to "(GPL+ or Artistic) and Public Domain". -- Petr signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Re: PSA: dnf autoremove cleans fedora-repos-modular

On 11. 07. 20 1:59, John M. Harris Jr wrote: On Friday, July 10, 2020 2:53:30 PM MST Miro Hrončok wrote: On 10. 07. 20 23:35, John M. Harris Jr wrote: DNF should perform "dnf mark install fedora-repos-rawhide-modular" action on a system upgrade, because we want that package to be prensented

Orphaned perl-Boost-Geometry-Utils, perl-Data-Rmap, perl-Math-Expression-Evaluator

Hello, I've orphaned: perl-Boost-Geometry-Utils perl-Data-Rmap perl-Math-Expression-Evaluator The packages used to be needed by slic3r, but apparently no longer are, they are leafs. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ devel

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote: > There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. > > The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as > highlights our plans for Fedora 34. > > We're planning to fix the current modularity in

Re: Modularity Improvements Objective

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 7:44 AM Daniel Mach wrote: > > Hello everyone, > There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. > > The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as > highlights our plans for Fedora 34. > > We're planning to fix the current

Modularity Improvements Objective

Hello everyone, There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1]. The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34. We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or

[Bug 1860353] New: perl-Mail-DKIM-1.20200724 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860353 Bug ID: 1860353 Summary: perl-Mail-DKIM-1.20200724 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Mail-DKIM Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Re: Bodhi 5.4.0 in production

On 09. 07. 20 21:08, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: Il 09/07/20 15:12, Miro Hrončok ha scritto: Finally I got to testing this. The bugzilla was added to the update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-c1be13ded8 But it was not closed:

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:31:11AM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > Other failures I've seen end up with linker failures, line these, from > postgresql: > > ld: undefined reference to `postgresql_subtrans__checkpoint__start_semaphore' > . --

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:23 AM Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi, > > On 7/24/20 10:31 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm starting to see various very strange kinds of build failures in > > rawhide, that seem to have started with either of these updates (or a > > combination of them):

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

Hi, On 7/24/20 10:31 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: Hi all, I'm starting to see various very strange kinds of build failures in rawhide, that seem to have started with either of these updates (or a combination of them): - annobin 9.21-1.fc33 → 9.22-1.fc33 - binutils 2.34.0-6.fc33 → 2.34.0-7.fc33

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:45 AM Stephan Bergmann wrote: > > Does somebody have a clue what's going on here? It's currently > > blocking rawhide composes because libreoffice fails to build / > > install. > > (The LibreOffice build failure is tracked at >

Re: Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

On 24/07/2020 10:31, Fabio Valentini wrote: Other errors look like this one from switchboard-plug-onlineaccounts: src/libonline-accounts.so.p/Authentification/Server.c: In function ‘online_accounts_server_on_bus_acquired’: src/libonline-accounts.so.p/Authentification/Server.c:498:2: error:

Very strange compiler/linker related build failures in rawhide

Hi all, I'm starting to see various very strange kinds of build failures in rawhide, that seem to have started with either of these updates (or a combination of them): - annobin 9.21-1.fc33 → 9.22-1.fc33 - binutils 2.34.0-6.fc33 → 2.34.0-7.fc33 - elfutils 0.179-2.fc33 → 0.180-2.fc33 - glibc

Re: cmake-3.18.0-2.fc33 (or 3.18.0-1.fc33.1) in rawhide is broken!

Le 20/07/2020 à 21:34, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski a écrit : > This doesn't help to fix this: > > %build > mkdir -p build > cd build > %cmake3 \ > .. > %make_build > > Help? Have you try "%cmake3 -S .. -B ." This should override the default "-S ." As the previous version require the

[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum] PR #1: Don't remove buildroot in %install

olysonek commented on the pull-request: `Don't remove buildroot in %install` that you are following: `` No worries. Thanks. `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel

[regression]Blender gets broken python detection with cmake

Hello team, It looks like something broke inside cmake when attempting to detect python: CMake Error at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindPackageHandleStandardArgs.cmake:164 (message): Could NOT find PythonLibsUnix (missing: PYTHON_LIBRARY PYTHON_LIBPATH PYTHON_INCLUDE_DIR