Fedora eln compose report: 20250809.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-eln-20250808.n.0 NEW: Fedora-eln-20250809.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 2 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 75 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 443.64 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size

Re: /.autorelabel does not work on all f42 systems

On 8/8/25 2:32 PM, Jason Montleon wrote: I don't know how to retrieve any other logs. Those journalctl lines are truncated though; you can rerun the commands with --no-pager to see if they provide anything interesting as to what condition was unmet. There are at least a few possibilities, and

Re: Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 5:03 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 4:50 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 16:29:32 +0200 > > Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:56 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > > > > > a F-42 mock build on my s390x machine run fine

Re: /.autorelabel does not work on all f42 systems

I don't know how to retrieve any other logs. Those journalctl lines are truncated though; you can rerun the commands with --no-pager to see if they provide anything interesting as to what condition was unmet. There are at least a few possibilities, and it might at least narrow down what's going

Re: SFML maintainer is non responsive

Looking at the spec, this seems a like a standard CMake-built package. As I already maintain CSFML, I'm willing to lend a hand in this. -- ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorapro

orphaning acpica-tools

I've been maintaining this package for a long time. It's pretty stable, and most bugs get fixed in the Linux kernel first (it's essentially the same code as the ACPI subsystem). But, life moves on. I just don't have the time, nor the same level of interest as I used to have, so it's time to have

SFML maintainer is non responsive

Hi, I noticed this has been untouched for almost a year (new major version available): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2312363 It seems it's owned by the multimedia SIG, so maybe someone from there is on here and can comment. If we want to fork it off to a SFML2 package for transit

Re: Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 4:50 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 16:29:32 +0200 > Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:56 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > > > a F-42 mock build on my s390x machine run fine, so I suspect it's a > > > parallelism issue ... I mean g-ir-scanner sta

Re: Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 16:29:32 +0200 Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:56 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > a F-42 mock build on my s390x machine run fine, so I suspect it's a > > parallelism issue ... I mean g-ir-scanner starting before the glycin > > library exists. > > Aha, I think I

Re: Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:56 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > a F-42 mock build on my s390x machine run fine, so I suspect it's a > parallelism issue ... I mean g-ir-scanner starting before the glycin > library exists. Aha, I think I see where this issue is coming from, though I don't see *how* it can happ

Re: Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 15:16:54 +0200 Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:09 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 14:58:49 +0200 > > Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I had seen this issue intermittently before, but now it is preventing > > > builds of gly

Re: Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:09 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 14:58:49 +0200 > Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I had seen this issue intermittently before, but now it is preventing > > builds of glycin (update to 1.2.3 and fixes for missing dependencies) > > on Fedora 42. Un

Re: Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 14:58:49 +0200 Fabio Valentini wrote: > Hi all, > > I had seen this issue intermittently before, but now it is preventing > builds of glycin (update to 1.2.3 and fixes for missing dependencies) > on Fedora 42. Until recently, retrying builds made it pass after a few > tries, b

Help needed: g-ir-scanner failing with strange linker issues on f42 / s390x only

Hi all, I had seen this issue intermittently before, but now it is preventing builds of glycin (update to 1.2.3 and fixes for missing dependencies) on Fedora 42. Until recently, retrying builds made it pass after a few tries, but now the issue happens on every build - and I have no idea what's goi

Re: Filesystem Hierarchy Standard in fedora

Luca Boccassi wrote: > I'll start the work to move the file-hierarchy manpage to the uapi-group > website. This is now published at https://uapi-group.org/specifications/specs/linux_file_system_hierarchy/ and has also been polished to make it more generic -- ___

Re: /.autorelabel does not work on all f42 systems

> On 7 Aug 2025, at 20:03, Jason Montleon wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 2:13 PM Barry Scott wrote: >> >> A user on the Fedora users list reported that selinux relabelling >> was not working. >> >> I can reproduce the problem in a F42 KDE aarch64 VM. >> But it works fine on my x86_64 desk

Re: /.autorelabel does not work on all f42 systems

> On 7 Aug 2025, at 20:03, Jason Montleon wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 2:13 PM Barry Scott > wrote: >> >> A user on the Fedora users list reported that selinux relabelling >> was not working. >> >> I can reproduce the problem in a F42 KDE aarch64 VM. >> Bu

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20250808.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20250807.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20250808.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 3 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 220 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 4.51 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B