Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 21:06:44 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 8:57 PM Bruno Wolff III wrote: I don't really understand what you're saying here. Unless your update is blocked by something else that is not "stable" yet *and* you don't (or cannot) use a buildroot overrid

fcitx5-qt was missing from a QT5 update

Hi Jan Grulich, Seems that fcitx5-qt was missing from from a recent qt5 update [1]. I have noticed that and rebuilt it in your side-tag [2]. I think we should add that build into your bodhi update to avoid any conflict in stable repo, but I don't have the permission to do so, could you (or any pr

Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.1 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check! All required tests passed Failed openQA tests: 5/216 (x86_64), 19/161 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0): ID: 1194260 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso

Re: Problem compiling tellico in F37 (linker stage)

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote on 2022/03/24 17:52: On 23/03/2022 20:10, José Abílio Matos wrote: This fails in x86* and arm64 and succeeds in ppc64le and x390x: I have the same issue with ghostwriter package (Koschei scratch build): https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8462258

Re: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

On Fri, 2022-03-25 at 02:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: > > In point of fact, no. Nobody can. It needs either more positive karma > > or two more days in testing, under the policy. As I said, the automated > > test failure is irrelevant to this. > > Actually, this

Re: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

Adam Williamson wrote: > In point of fact, no. Nobody can. It needs either more positive karma > or two more days in testing, under the policy. As I said, the automated > test failure is irrelevant to this. Actually, this is not a critical path package (or the minimum timeout would be 2 weeks, no

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220324.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 52 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 1.11 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes: There are two separate steps here: "daemon-reload" and "restart testsystemd.service". Systemd is complaining about "daemon-reload" missing. It isn't internally cognizant of the fact that testsystemd.service should be restarted, that is managed by the rpm scri

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

> On Mar 24, 2022, at 2:44 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 3:35 PM Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > On 3/24/22 15:46, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:2

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 3:35 PM Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > On 3/24/22 15:46, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan davd...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw > wrote: > > > > >

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

On 3/24/22 15:46, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan > wrote: > > Hi, > > > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw > wrote: > > > > I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assume

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 09:27:31AM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: ...snip... > > Package (co)maintainers Status > Change > > atomic-reactorcverna, infra-sig

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 8:57 PM Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:58:17 -0700, > Adam Williamson wrote: > >On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:52 +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote: > >> > >> > If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry. > >> It's actually quite simple: T

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 14:28 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 1:36 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > > The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC4 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live > > on Tuesday, 29 March 2022. > > > > Fedora 36 obviously :) > > Anyway, I just tried to install it in Virtua

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:58:17 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:52 +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote: > If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry. It's actually quite simple: There are dozens if not hundreds of unpushed updates pending due to the releas

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:40 PM David Duncan wrote: > Hi, > > > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was enough > just to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap when > it should be using zswap?

Re: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 20:23 +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote: > Am 24.03.22 um 18:53 schrieb Adam Williamson: > > > > It's been stuck for five days, not a week. After a week it will be > > > > It's a crit update with security implications and needs that push to > stable, when the basis tests have be

Re: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 8:00 AM wrote: > > Dear all, > > You are kindly invited to the meeting: >ELN SIG on 2022-03-25 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern >At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat > > The meeting will be about: * ELN Extras * 32-bit x86 support _

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

Hi, > On Mar 24, 2022, at 12:28 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > I may try increasing the virtual disk size as I assumed 8GB was enough just > to play around, but why is it trying to allocate space for swap when it > should be using zswap? > Are you sure that it is a function of the Virtualbox i

Re: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

Am 24.03.22 um 18:53 schrieb Adam Williamson: It's been stuck for five days, not a week. After a week it will be It's a crit update with security implications and needs that push to stable, when the basis tests have been finished ( 6 days ago btw ) . I know it had one automated test failed,

Fedora-36-20220324.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 7/229 (x86_64), 10/161 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220323.n.0): ID: 1193652 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gnome_text_editor URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1193652 ID: 1193670 Test: x86_64 Wo

Fedora-IoT-36-20220324.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220320.0): ID: 1194014 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1194014 Passed openQA tests: 14/15 (aarch64), 15/15 (x86_64)

[Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta is GO

The Fedora Linux 35 Beta RC4 compose[1] is GO and will be shipped live on Tuesday, 29 March 2022. For more information please check the Go/No-Go meeting minutes[2] or log[3]. Thank you to everyone who has and still is working on this release! The Final Freeze begins on Tuesday 5 April. [1] https

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:52 +0100, Ralf Corsépius wrote: > > > If it was the latter, I couldn't find it in your message. Sorry. > It's actually quite simple: There are dozens if not hundreds of unpushed > updates pending due to the release freeze, which will be released at the > very moment the

Re: CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 18:46 +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote: > hi all, > > the critpath update for httpd-2.4.53.fc34 is stuck in updates-testing. > bodhi reports a pending test for this package. > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-21264ec6db > > I can confirm, that i rolled out

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

Am 24.03.22 um 18:07 schrieb Fabio Valentini: On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 5:58 PM Ralf Corsépius wrote: (...) Oh noes, the list isn't really getting shorter ... It's Fedora's old release management flaw ;) As usual at these times of the release cycle, Fedora 36 is in deep freeze, i.e. packag

CVE 9.8 rated httpd update stuck in updates-testing for a week

hi all, the critpath update for httpd-2.4.53.fc34 is stuck in updates-testing. bodhi reports a pending test for this package. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-21264ec6db I can confirm, that i rolled out this update on my web->cluster<- and pages do still work. httpd test s

Fedora 36 compose report: 20220324.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-36-20220323.n.0 NEW: Fedora-36-20220324.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 3 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 6 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 5:58 PM Ralf Corsépius wrote: (...) > > Oh noes, the list isn't really getting shorter ... > > It's Fedora's old release management flaw ;) > > As usual at these times of the release cycle, Fedora 36 is in deep > freeze, i.e. package updates are not getting pushed, which

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

Am 24.03.22 um 17:51 schrieb Fabio Valentini: On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 2:32 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: Hi all, Yes, it's that time of the year again. Looks like it's not *that* bad this time round, but the fact that this keeps happening probably means some of our processes are broken ... (or,

Re: Package downgrades on upgrade from F35 to F36 + categorized list

On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 2:32 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > Hi all, > > Yes, it's that time of the year again. Looks like it's not *that* bad > this time round, but the fact that this keeps happening probably means > some of our processes are broken ... (or, since some usernames are > attached to m

Re: fedpkg request-branch doesn't work as expected

V Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:24:35AM -0600, Orion Poplawski napsal(a): > When I do: > > [orion@vmrawhide-rufous zabbix (rawhide *+)]$ fedpkg request-branch > --no-auto-module --sl rawhide:2027-06-01 -- 6.0 > > It generates a request for a branch named "rawhide". I'm following: [...] > Is this a bug

Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 08:06:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2022-03-22 at 11:55 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On the first part: yes, there's a long, slow sunset, but I think > > realistically we're going to see business-side attention drop significantly, > > and we'll have corres

Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

On 3/22/22 11:55, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 07:17:16AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> If you mean try having a conversation with the community before >> something goes into effect... that's what this thread is. Depending >> on how you count, at least a year in advance if not 3.

Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 08:06:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > There is one thing I worry about here - and maybe we need to take this > up internally within Red Hat, but whatever - I strongly believe that > *at a minimum*, going to > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=NNN should show y

Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 3 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 9/231 (x86_64), 14/161 (aarch64) New failures (sam

[Test-Announce] Fedora Linux 36 Beta Go/No-Go meeting today

I have returned from PTO, so you're getting this reminder ~2 hours prior to the meeting instead of the usual "the day before." But in any case, the Fedora Linux 36 Beta Go/No-Go[1] meeting is scheduled for Thursday 24 March at 1700 UTC in #fedora-meeting. At this time, we will determine the status

Re: RPM build: unpackaged file .pyi

On 24. 03. 22 13:19, Ben Beasley wrote: This is a “stub file” for type checking. It looks like upstream is trying to follow https://peps.python.org/pep-0484 rather than the later https://peps.python.org/pep-0561/. However, the way they are installing the stub file with data_files in setup.py is

Re: RPM build: unpackaged file .pyi

This is a “stub file” for type checking. It looks like upstream is trying to follow https://peps.python.org/pep-0484 rather than the later https://peps.python.org/pep-0561/. However, the way they are installing the stub file with data_files in setup.py is resulting in it getting dumped in %_pre

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220324.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220323.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220324.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 1 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 30 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 133.57 KiB Size of dropped packages:0

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : ELN SIG

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: ELN SIG on 2022-03-25 from 12:00:00 to 13:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat The meeting will be about: Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10133/ ___ devel maili

RPM build: unpackaged file .pyi

Hello there, After bumping upstream version in "python-apsw", I have noticed that a new Python .pyi file was created in the new version, so the package build process started to fail: error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/apsw.pyi https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/

Fedora-Cloud-34-20220324.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20220323.0): ID: 1192852 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Has amcnabb left Fedora?

Hello, this is part of https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/ I write here to figure out if Andrew McNabb is still interested in maintaining their Fedora packages. And, in case Andrew no longer uses this email address, if anybody knows how to

Fedora-Cloud-35-20220324.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220323.0): ID: 1192836 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Re: Problem compiling tellico in F37 (linker stage)

On 23/03/2022 20:10, José Abílio Matos wrote: This fails in x86* and arm64 and succeeds in ppc64le and x390x: I have the same issue with ghostwriter package (Koschei scratch build): https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84622587 Previous build on F37 was successful: https://koji

Re: mingw-gcc-12.0.1 and mingw-binutils-2.38 coming to rawhide

On 14.03.22 23:50, Sandro Mani wrote: Hi As per [1] I'll be landing mingw-gcc-12.0.1 and mingw-binutils-2.38 towards the end of the week. I've completed test-builds here [2]. Looks like there is an ABI incompatibility (std::__once_functor went away), I'll need to rebuild all dependent mingw

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 08:38:39AM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022, 00:12 Sam Varshavchik wrote: > > [mrsam@jack tmp]$ systemctl status testsystemd | cat > > Warning: The unit file, source configuration file or drop-ins of > > testsystemd.service changed on disk. Run 'systemct

Re: Please use side tags for backwards-incompatible bumps of major packages, not buildroot overrides

V Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 05:40:28PM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a): > So, now that we have side-tags to perform this kind of builds, does the > buildroot override existence still make sense? Is there any use case > that still requires BR overrides and cannot be done with side-tags? > I use

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 05:55:19PM +0100, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 07:12:23PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > > %install > > mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/systemd/system > > cat >$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/systemd/system/testsystemd.service < > [Unit] > > Description=test

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022, 00:12 Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes: > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 08:27:35AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > >> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes: > >> > >>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 06:22:08PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > The only thing

Re: No daemon-reload or restart with %systemd_postun_with_restart

 > On 24 Mar 2022, at 01:07, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes: > >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 07:12:23PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote: >>> Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden writes: On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 08:27:35AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Ewoud Kohl van Wijn