Problem with s390x koji builder

What's wrong with s390x koji builder? I always see this error: Child return code was: -11 EXCEPTION: [Error()] Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 93, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File "/usr/lib/python3.9/sit

Re: Problem with s390x koji builder

I also got the same error: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60083125 El mié, 20 ene 2021 a las 9:35, Vascom () escribió: > What's wrong with s390x koji builder? > > I always see this error: > > Child return code was: -11 > EXCEPTION: [Error()] > Traceback (most recent call las

merging packages - is fedora fedora guideline right?

Hi guys, I am confused about the official guidelines for merging of packages in Fedora. From my POV, when I merge some packages and the functionality is preserved, the Obsoletes and Provides should be set and kept for 2 release cycles. So there is not problem with dependencies, etc. However, I've

Re: merging packages - is fedora fedora guideline right?

On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 03:48, Petr Stodulka wrote: > > Hi guys, > I am confused about the official guidelines for merging of packages in Fedora. > From my POV, when I merge some packages and the functionality is preserved, > the Obsoletes and Provides should be set and kept for 2 release cycles.

Re: merging packages - is fedora fedora guideline right?

Thank you Elliot! Now it's clear. On 20. 01. 21 10:02, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote: On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 03:48, Petr Stodulka wrote: Hi guys, I am confused about the official guidelines for merging of packages in Fedora. From my POV, when I merge some packages and the functionality is

/usr/include/c++/11/string_view:98:21: error: static assertion failed

Hi, when compiling cxxtools-3.0 on rawhide it fails with the following error messages [2]: settingswriter.cpp:42:26: required from here /usr/include/c++/11/string_view:98:21: error: static assertion failed 98 | static_assert(is_trivial_v<_CharT> && is_standard_layout_v<_CharT>);

Re: Obsoletes/Provides question

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 03:23:04AM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 03:18:41PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 04:12:59PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> > On 19. 01. 21 16:06, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >

Re: Problem with s390x koji builder

* Juan Orti Alcaine: > I also got the same error: > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60083125 I can reproduce it locally. It's a crash in rpmbuild: Thread 1 "rpmbuild" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x03fffde89e60 in packageBinaries._omp_fn.0 () at pack.c:

/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

Many Pythons started to fail in Fedora on x86_64 and aarch64 with: + /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto /usr/bin/strip /usr/bin/strip: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python3.9-3.9.1-1.fc34.x86_64/usr/lib64/python3.9/config-3.9d-x86_64-linux-gnu/st5slPIv: symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' require

Re: Problem with s390x koji builder

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:18:16AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > So it's a null pointer dereference. > > > 745 * (largest first) to help achieve an optimal load distribution. > 746 */ > 747 rpmRC packageBinaries(rpmSpec spec, const char *cookie, int cheating) > 748 { > 749

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 20/01/21 11:31 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: Many Pythons started to fail in Fedora on x86_64 and aarch64 with: + /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto /usr/bin/strip /usr/bin/strip: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python3.9-3.9.1-1.fc34.x86_64/usr/lib64/python3.9/config-3.9d-x86_64-linux-gnu/st5slPIv: s

Re: Problem with s390x koji builder

Forwarded to . -- Petr ___ 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

Re: /usr/include/c++/11/string_view:98:21: error: static assertion failed

On 20/01/21 09:51 -, Martin Gansser wrote: Hi, when compiling cxxtools-3.0 on rawhide it fails with the following error messages [2]: settingswriter.cpp:42:26: required from here /usr/include/c++/11/string_view:98:21: error: static assertion failed 98 | static_assert(is_trivial_v

Crash, maybe, in packaging scripts on Koji/s390

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9457/60089457/build.log (from https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60089433) ends with ... Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ocaml-extlib-1.7.8-1.fc34.s390x Child return code was: -11

Re: Crash, maybe, in packaging scripts on Koji/s390

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:52:35AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9457/60089457/build.log > (from https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60089433) > > ends with ... > > Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files >

Re: /usr/include/c++/11/string_view:98:21: error: static assertion failed

On 20/01/21 10:47 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 20/01/21 09:51 -, Martin Gansser wrote: Hi, when compiling cxxtools-3.0 on rawhide it fails with the following error messages [2]: settingswriter.cpp:42:26: required from here /usr/include/c++/11/string_view:98:21: error: static asserti

Re: Problem with s390x koji builder

* Jakub Jelinek: > It is definitely not valid OpenMP, because it is racy (that if (rc) part > with tasks writing that var). > It would need to use atomic accesses to rc, like: > #pragma omp atomic write > rc = pkg->rc; > instead of #pragma omp critical and > rpmRC testrc;

Re: /usr/include/c++/11/string_view:98:21: error: static assertion failed

ok, i think i will contac upstream to fix it. Regards Martin ___ 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

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 20. 01. 21 11:31, Miro Hrončok wrote: Many Pythons started to fail in Fedora on x86_64 and aarch64 with: + /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto /usr/bin/strip /usr/bin/strip: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python3.9-3.9.1-1.fc34.x86_64/usr/lib64/python3.9/config-3.9d-x86_64-linux-gnu/st5slPIv: symb

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in February

I'd like sugar-view-slides and sugar-visualmatch to be exempted as I'm working on both. -- Ibiam Chihurumnaya ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 9:57 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > Dear maintainers. > > Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following > packag

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in February

On 20. 01. 21 14:15, Chihurumnaya Ibiam wrote: I'd like sugar-view-slides and sugar-visualmatch to be exempted as I'm working on both. When do you expect to have it done? E.g. is it during the Fedora 34 release cycle? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in February

Yes I expect to have it done during the Fedora 34 release cycle. -- Ibiam Chihurumnaya ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:18 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 20. 01. 21 14:15, Chihurumnaya Ibiam wrote: > > I'd like sugar-view-slides and sugar-visualmatch to be exempted as I'm

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Enable spec file preprocessing (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tuesday, January 19, 2021 8:50:38 PM CET Dan Čermák wrote: > Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski writes: > > > On Monday, 18 January 2021 at 23:29, Dan Čermák wrote: > >> clime writes: > > [...] > >> > But when you said "workaround", I was thinking that you actually saw > >> > the correct solution

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in February

On 20. 01. 21 14:23, Chihurumnaya Ibiam wrote: Yes I expect to have it done during the Fedora 34 release cycle. OK, I won't bother FESCo with an exception request and will simply postpone the two retirements. Note that they will still be included in reports. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777

Re: Fedora 34 Change: SOF as default audio driver for Intel LPE hardware (Self-Contained Change proposal)

Hi, On 1/18/21 6:44 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 03:49:58PM +, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 3:20 PM Ben Cotton wrote: >>> >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SofDefaultForIntelLpe >>> >>> >>> == Summary == >>> Intel LPE audio hard

Re: Obsoletes/Provides question

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:23 AM Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 03:18:41PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 04:12:59PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> > On 19. 01. 21 16:06, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> > >(2)

Re: Fedora 34 Change: fbrnch (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 1:38 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > > Add the [https://github.com/juhp/fbrnch fbrnch] packager tool to Fedora. > > Sounds good ;) > > > ** Submit and complete package review(s). > > Links? > Thanks - I will try to get those posted soon. Or for

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 20.01.2021 11:31, Miro Hrončok wrote: Right before the mass rebuild. Is this known? Fedora 34 will be built again with broken, full of regressions GCC compiler (just like Fedora 32). -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ dev

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 1/20/21 8:47 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 20.01.2021 11:31, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> Right before the mass rebuild. Is this known? > > Fedora 34 will be built again with broken, full of regressions GCC > compiler (just like Fedora 32). Fix for this is already approved upstream and li

Review swap

MuseScore 3.6 is out, and adds a dependency on another font. Who would like to swap reviews? I need this one: steinberg-petaluma-fonts: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918394 Let me know what I can review for you. Regards, -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ _

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 20.01.2021 17:03, Jeff Law wrote: Fix for this is already approved upstream and likely going into a new spin of gcc. Today I got two new GCC regressions in the same package. Reported to RHBZ. -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Scale ZRAM to Full Memory Size (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 05:58:45PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Someone on Fedora Discussion¹ noticed this number and wonders if it's meant > > to be 8192. Not that it probably matters very much, but, you know, nice > > round numbers and all. > > Yep, it was. I'll fix the wiki. O

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 20. 01. 21 17:03, Jeff Law wrote: On 1/20/21 8:47 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 20.01.2021 11:31, Miro Hrončok wrote: Right before the mass rebuild. Is this known? Fedora 34 will be built again with broken, full of regressions GCC compiler (just like Fedora 32). Fix for this is

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 1/20/21 9:17 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 20. 01. 21 17:03, Jeff Law wrote: >> >> >> On 1/20/21 8:47 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: >>> On 20.01.2021 11:31, Miro Hrončok wrote: Right before the mass rebuild. Is this known? >>> >>> Fedora 34 will be built again with broken, full of re

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 1/20/21 9:08 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 20.01.2021 17:03, Jeff Law wrote: >> Fix for this is already approved upstream and likely going into a new >> spin of gcc. > > Today I got two new GCC regressions in the same package. Reported to > RHBZ. THen it's a safe bet we'll fix them.

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 20. 01. 21 17:21, Jeff Law wrote: On 1/20/21 9:17 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 20. 01. 21 17:03, Jeff Law wrote: On 1/20/21 8:47 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 20.01.2021 11:31, Miro Hrončok wrote: Right before the mass rebuild. Is this known? Fedora 34 will be built again with

Re: Fedora 34 Mass Rebuild

On 1/15/21 11:31 AM, Mohan Boddu wrote: Hi all, Per the Fedora 34 schedule[1] we will start a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 on Jan 20th 2021. We will run a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 for the changes listed in: https://pagure.io/releng/issues?status=Open&tags=mass+rebuild Mass rebuild will be done

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

On 1/20/21 9:29 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 20. 01. 21 17:21, Jeff Law wrote: >> >> >> On 1/20/21 9:17 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: >>> On 20. 01. 21 17:03, Jeff Law wrote: On 1/20/21 8:47 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 20.01.2021 11:31, Miro Hrončok wrote: >> Right b

Re: Review swap

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:13 AM Jerry James wrote: > MuseScore 3.6 is out, and adds a dependency on another font. Who > would like to swap reviews? I need this one: > I'll review it. I don't need any reviews done in return at this moment. -Jared _

Re: Fedora 34 Mass Rebuild

On 20. 01. 21 17:35, Tom Stellard wrote: On 1/15/21 11:31 AM, Mohan Boddu wrote: Hi all, Per the Fedora 34 schedule[1] we will start a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 on Jan 20th 2021. We will run a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 for the changes listed in: https://pagure.io/releng/issues?status=Open&ta

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in February

Looks like VirtualGL was rebuilt: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=14293 ~spot On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 3:57 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > Dear maintainers. > > Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following > packages > will be retired from Fedora 34 ap

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in February

On 20. 01. 21 17:50, Tom Callaway wrote: Looks like VirtualGL was rebuilt: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=14293 Yes, known. It will be no longer listed in the report next week. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phon

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2021-01-20)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 = #fedora-meeting-2: FESCO (2021-01-20) = Meeting started by sgallagh at 15:00:19 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-01

SCons-4.1.0

Hi all. scons-4.1.0 rpm [1] is ready to be pushed in Rawhide branch; not before next 7 days i will build it. Release note of SCons-4.1.0 [2]. Packages which require SCons: boswars-0:2.7-24.svn160110.fc33.src compat-tolua++-0:1.0.93-14.fc33.src galera-0:26.4.6-1.fc34.src glob2-0:0.9.4.4-53.fc3

Re: Fedora 34 Mass Rebuild

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 08:35:54AM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 1/15/21 11:31 AM, Mohan Boddu wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Per the Fedora 34 schedule[1] we will start a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 > > on Jan 20th 2021. We will run a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 for the > > changes listed in: > > >

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Scale ZRAM to Full Memory Size (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On 1/20/21 8:14 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 05:58:45PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Someone on Fedora Discussion¹ noticed this number and wonders if it's meant to be 8192. Not that it probably matters very much, but, you know, nice round numbers and all. Yep,

Re: Fedora 34 Mass Rebuild

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:36 AM Tom Stellard wrote: > > On 1/15/21 11:31 AM, Mohan Boddu wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Per the Fedora 34 schedule[1] we will start a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 > > on Jan 20th 2021. We will run a mass rebuild for Fedora 34 for the > > changes listed in: > > > > https:

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Scale ZRAM to Full Memory Size (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:59:52AM -0800, Samuel Sieb wrote: > That's about changing settings. When restarting the zram service, > it has to remove the swap device which forces all the swapped pages > back into RAM. This might not be successful if you don't have > enough RAM, so if you are using

Re: Review swap

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 9:40 AM Jared K. Smith wrote: > I'll review it. I don't need any reviews done in return at this moment. Thank you, Jared! Please let me know when you do need a review. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing

Request for contributions: Demos of Features or other videos for virtual FOSDEM 2021 booth

Hi, there will be a virtual booth at FOSDEM 2021 and this allows to show some videos. This allows to present the latest features in Fedora or other interesting items. I skimmed over the Features for 33 and 34 and the following topics seemed to be good for a video: - IoT edition - i3 spin - overvi

Re: Crash, maybe, in packaging scripts on Koji/s390

On 1/20/21 3:53 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:52:35AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9457/60089457/build.log >> (from https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60089433) >> >> ends with ... >> >> Checking f

Re: Crash, maybe, in packaging scripts on Koji/s390

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 02:38:18PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 1/20/21 3:53 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:52:35AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9457/60089457/build.log > >> (from https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koj

Re: /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-lto fails with symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present

Miro Hrončok wrote: > symbol `.gnu.debuglto_.debug_line_str' required but not present This is causing a whole chain of breakage in Rawhide: The above bug prevents building binutils, which prevents fixing: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1916925 which in turn prevents rebuilding qt5-qt

Self Introduction: Matthew Almond

Hi everyone, Some background on me: I've been working with Linux since 1995 in a variety of capacities. I'm fascinated by file systems, configuration and system management technologies. I'm the author of RPMCoW[1]. This was recently accepted for Fedora 34. I aim to provide the new features first

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Signed RPM Contents (late System-Wide Change)

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents > I'd like to point out that after many requests, I have updated the change page for this significantly, with more details as to the goals (and non-goals) of this feature, and answers to many other questions asked. Please have anothe

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Signed RPM Contents (late System-Wide Change)

On 21. 01. 21 0:29, Patrick マルタインアンドレアス Uiterwijk wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents I'd like to point out that after many requests, I have updated the change page for this significantly, with more details as to the goals (and non-goals) of this feature, and an

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Signed RPM Contents (late System-Wide Change)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 7:10 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 21. 01. 21 0:29, Patrick マルタインアンドレアス Uiterwijk wrote: > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents > >> > > > > I'd like to point out that after many requests, I have updated the change > > page for this significantly,

Re: Self Introduction: Matthew Almond

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:27:28PM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote: > I'm the author of RPMCoW[1]. This was recently accepted for Fedora 34. Welcome, and thanks for pushing interesting new ideas into Fedora! -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader

Re: Fedora 34 Change: Signed RPM Contents (late System-Wide Change)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:29:55PM -, Patrick マルタインアンドレアス Uiterwijk wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents > I'd like to point out that after many requests, I have updated the change > page for this significantly, with more details as to the goals (and > non-goa

Re: [ELN] How to handle RHEL-specific changes when it fails in ELN?

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 6:49 AM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 12:22 AM Josh Stone wrote: > > > > On 1/16/21 3:21 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 4:54 PM Kevin Kofler via devel > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Miro Hrončok wrote: > > >>> See also: > > >>>

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2021-01-21 17:00 UTC)

 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2021-01-21 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net.  Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Thursday == 2021-01-21 09:00 PST US/Pacific 2021-01-21 1

Backwards-incompatible RPM format change in Fedora 34?

With rpm-4.15.1-3.fc32.1.x86_64, I get this error: $ rpm -qip https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/aarch64/debug/tree/Packages/m/ModemManager-debugsource-1.14.10-1.fc34.aarch64.rpm error: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.6iU66n: signature hdr data: BAD, no. of bytes(88084)