On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 6:17 AM John Reiser wrote:
> On 2020-09-01 at 12:13 UTC, Kamil Paral wrote:
> [[snip]]
> > I'd like to ... hugely speed up the installation instead
> [[snip]]
>
> Zstd is faster than xz at de-compression, but a much larger speed
> improvement
> would be to parallel
Hi,
Strange... Let me bring this upstream to see whether this is
flexiblas' or openblas' fault. In the meanwhile, exporting
FLEXIBLAS=netlib before the tests makes use of the reference
implementation, so everything should be slower but safer. And if this
starts happening in the wild, we can change
I'm looking at cleaning up some parts of the QEMU spec and we have
conditionals in there testing for s390 arch (aka 32-bit). IIRC it
was previously a secondary arch, at least back in the Fedora 22-ish
timeframe. I'm not seeing it listed in the alternative arch list
currently though:
https://fedo
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 10:00:11 +0100
Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> I'm looking at cleaning up some parts of the QEMU spec and we have
> conditionals in there testing for s390 arch (aka 32-bit). IIRC it
> was previously a secondary arch, at least back in the Fedora 22-ish
> timeframe. I'm not seeing it
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20200903.0):
ID: 654635 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproj
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 10:57:13 +0200
Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Strange... Let me bring this upstream to see whether this is
> flexiblas' or openblas' fault. In the meanwhile, exporting
> FLEXIBLAS=netlib before the tests makes use of the reference
> implementation, so everything should be slower b
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 11:16, Susi Lehtola
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 10:57:13 +0200
> Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Strange... Let me bring this upstream to see whether this is
> > flexiblas' or openblas' fault. In the meanwhile, exporting
> > FLEXIBLAS=netlib before the tests makes use of
On Friday, 04 September 2020 at 11:00, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> I'm looking at cleaning up some parts of the QEMU spec and we have
> conditionals in there testing for s390 arch (aka 32-bit). IIRC it
> was previously a secondary arch, at least back in the Fedora 22-ish
> timeframe. I'm not seeing
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 7/7 (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 devel-le...@lists.fedorap
Good Morning Everyone,
I wanted to share with you some information regarding the current
state and future of Communishift. The infrastructure team presented on
this project back in 2019 during Nest [1] [2], and since then, we have
deployed it, started using it and had to shut it down for
the colo-
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney wrote:
>
> Good Morning Everyone,
>
> I wanted to share with you some information regarding the current
> state and future of Communishift. The infrastructure team presented on
> this project back in 2019 during Nest [1] [2], and since then, we have
> dep
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200902.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200904.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 8
Added packages: 23
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 295
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.51 GiB
Size of dropped packages
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:59, clime wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> >
> > Good Morning Everyone,
> >
> > I wanted to share with you some information regarding the current
> > state and future of Communishift. The infrastructure team presented on
> > this project back
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:10 AM clime wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:59, clime wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > >
> > > Good Morning Everyone,
> > >
> > > I wanted to share with you some information regarding the current
> > > state and future of Communish
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 11/181 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20200902.n.1):
ID:
On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 11:13:19AM +0100, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> However, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) [3] and the California
> Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) [4] basically makes the Fedora Infrastructure team
> (and thus Red Hat) responsible for the content hosted by any services run
On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 07:16:02AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:10 AM clime wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:59, clime wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > > >
> > > > However, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) [3] and
On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 01:47:58PM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 07:16:02AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:10 AM clime wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:59, clime wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> >
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:48 AM Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 07:16:02AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:10 AM clime wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:59, clime wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > > > >
>
On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 02:08:02PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> > I don't really expect an answer. From my experience, it's impossible
> > to get straight, yes/no, binary answer from lawyers.
>
> Thus the slow process :(
> The goal of the email was to inform about the current situation
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 12:17 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:10 AM clime wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:59, clime wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Good Morning Everyone,
> > > >
> > > > I wanted to share with you so
OLD: Fedora-33-20200903.n.0
NEW: Fedora-33-20200904.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
Hello everyone,
Please join us at the next Open NeuroFedora team meeting next week on
Monday at 1300UTC in #fedora-neuro on IRC (Freenode). The meeting is
a public meeting, and open for everyone to attend.
https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#fedora-neuro
The channel is bridged to Telegram, s
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 9/181 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-33-20200903.n.0):
ID: 655448 Test: x86_64 universal support_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/655448
ID: 655510 Test: x86_64 universal install_iscsi
URL: https:
Good Morning folks,
As you likely remember, a little while ago now, was announced the decision to
move dist-git to a gitlab instance. This decision was the results of different
factors which included a wish for Red Hat to have a consistent tooling and
experience across the different distribution i
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:57 pm, Kamil Paral wrote:
Overall I find the criterion reasonable and useful and I'm +1 to
incorporating it. Its current phrasing seems fine to me.
So how does the process of adding the new criterion work? I guess we
should leave the weekend for additional comment, i
Thomas Moertel writes:
> Hi Robbie,
>
> I'm sorry to say that I can no longer maintain emacs-magit. Please
> remove me as a maintainer.
Appreciate the response, and your past work!
Thanks,
--Robbie
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel
On Fri, 2020-09-04 at 12:12 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:57 pm, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > Overall I find the criterion reasonable and useful and I'm +1 to
> > incorporating it. Its current phrasing seems fine to me.
>
> So how does the process of adding the new criter
On Fri, 2020-09-04 at 11:16 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-09-04 at 12:12 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:57 pm, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > > Overall I find the criterion reasonable and useful and I'm +1 to
> > > incorporating it. Its current phrasing seems
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd aarch64
Iot dvd x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 2/16 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20200903.0):
ID: 655569 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/655569
ID: 655575 Test: x86_64 IoT-
Hi,
I would like to claim ownership of the retired package bygfoot. Since it has
been retired for more than 8 weeks, I've submitted a new review request here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1875972.
-Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@l
The Go/No-Go meeting is Thursday!
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. libreport — abrt-server errors when processing zstd compressed core
dumps produced by systemd-246~rc1-1.fc33 — POST
ACTION: msuchy to get retrace server back in service
2. sddm — login st
Hello folks,
I'm seeing this error that causes a test failure on F32 for a noarch
python package. It builds in mock on my x86_64 here, but on koji it gets
a ppc64le builder and fails with this error. It's built fine on F33 and
rawhide. Would anyone know what may be causing this?
This is the build
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 4:03 PM Ankur Sinha wrote:
> I'm seeing this error that causes a test failure on F32 for a noarch
> python package. It builds in mock on my x86_64 here, but on koji it gets
> a ppc64le builder and fails with this error. It's built fine on F33 and
> rawhide. Would anyone know
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 18:03, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> I'm seeing this error that causes a test failure on F32 for a noarch
> python package. It builds in mock on my x86_64 here, but on koji it gets
> a ppc64le builder and fails with this error. It's built fine on F33 and
> rawhide.
Il 19/07/20 19:41, Kevin Fenzi ha scritto:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 05:34:13PM +0200, Germano Massullo wrote:
>> Is it necessary to have in #fedora IRC channel, fedbot spamming 48 times
>> per day about Fedora respins update?
>>
>> [16:51] *** F32-20200715 updated lives available:
>> https://tiny
On Friday, September 4, 2020 8:27:55 AM MST Aoife Moloney wrote:
> Good Morning folks,
>
> As you likely remember, a little while ago now, was announced the decision
> to move dist-git to a gitlab instance. This decision was the results of
> different factors which included a wish for Red Hat to h
37 matches
Mail list logo
