On 2025-09-09 11:04 a.m., Richard Shaw wrote:
Looking deeper into luxcorerender...
It looks like upstream has reorganized significantly, now it's tagged as
"wheels" in the release. All but one of the patches fails to apply.
Upsteream changes mean massive update of spec file. Unfortunatel
On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 3:39 PM Justin Forbes wrote:
> If someone can go
> through the effort to grab a patched Proton, they can load a kernel
> module.
>
Hmm, can a user-space program load a kernel module during runtime,
without root privileges? I assume it can't.
The issue I see here is that m
OLD: Fedora-eln-20250909.n.0
NEW: Fedora-eln-20250910.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 50
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 1.03 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of
Hi Peter,
I still can't find the bug report for this, so I opened a new one:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2394283
Thx for reporting, I credited you in the bug report.
Best,
Osama
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.o
On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 13:04, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 14:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Could we instead make all that part of fedora-release? generic-release
> > is mostly a clone of fedora-release, with a lot of outdated stuff.
> > What would be required
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 3:52 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 09:27:54PM +0200, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:35 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 13:04, Adam Williamson
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, 20
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:35 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 13:04, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 14:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> > Could we instead make all that part of fedora-release? generic-release
>> > is mostly a clone of f
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 09:27:54PM +0200, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:35 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 13:04, Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 14:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >> > Could we instead mak
Filed a bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2394213
--
___
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
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 6:29 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 09. 09. 25 11:59, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> > OpenSSL upstream has started development of the version OpenSSL 4.0
> > It will imply soname bump, removing ENGINE support, etc. As OpenSSL uses
> > time-
> > based re
=
# #meeting:fedoraproject.org: fesco
=
Meeting started by @fale:fale.io at 2025-09-09 17:00:01
Meeting summary
---
* TOPIC: Init Process (@fale:fale.io, 17:00:12)
* TOPIC: #3469 Exception request for updating Dog
OK it looks like sloppy mode was added and made default around this time,
though I'm not understanding how to match the tags in the git repo with the
versions I'm seeing in Fedora.
commit a695250ec7db21359689e50733c6581a8d211215
Date: Wed Jul 4 17:21:37 2018 +0800
Introduce tri-state ho
I think --hostonly-mode sloppy became the default in 107, whereas it was using
strict in 105.
At least size wise, a strict mode initramfs with 107 matches up size wise with
105 default.
I haven't looked at the code to see if the default did change. But it seems to
me this should require a ch
Looking deeper into luxcorerender...
It looks like upstream has reorganized significantly, now it's tagged as
"wheels" in the release. All but one of the patches fails to apply.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe s
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 02:50:32PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 10:00 AM Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
>
> > OpenSSL upstream has started development of the version OpenSSL 4.0
> > It will imply soname bump, removing ENGINE support, etc.
>
> I seem to recall someone stating
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025, at 1:19 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Run lsinitrd on them and diff the output?
$ diff -u lsinitrd-dracut105-modulessorted.txt
lsinitrd-dracut107-modulessorted.txt
--- lsinitrd-dracut105-modulessorted.txt2025-09-09 13:47:01.963719665
-0400
+++ lsinitrd-dracut107-mo
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:50 PM Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>
> On 9/9/25 12:07 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > Is anyone else seeing a big jump in initramfs files? Is it expected?
>
> Yes. Looks like the blame is nvidia-gpu-firmware. Several new firmware files
> have
> been added and they are large fi
Hi folks,
generic-release is FTI (bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2388040)
and it also seems to have been non-functional for ~7 months
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2373032).
What is the plan here? It either needs to be updated and fixed, or
we need to stop using it.
Zbyszek
--
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:08 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> I just noticed this ~168% size increase in initramfs files on Fedora 42 (they
> are Fedora 43 kernels, shouldn't matter).
>
> 35M -rw---. 1 root root 35M Jul 8 19:33
> initramfs-6.16.0-0.rc5.65.fc43.x86_64.img
> 59M -rw---. 1 roo
Dear Florian,
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:11 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> > That said, I am not sure they are changing all symbol versions in the
> > new .so.4 file, perhaps they should reset all symbols versions to
> > 4.0.0?
>
> Yeah, if they don't do that, it's going to be really awkward.
>
> Ho
I've just started a new topic over on Fedora Discussions[1] around how
we might modernize our builds and updates to simplify and automate
more of the process. Please review and comment over on Fedora
Discussions. I'm posting this just as a pointer in that direction.
Do not reply to this email, ple
On 09/09/2025 18:07, Chris Murphy wrote:
Is anyone else seeing a big jump in initramfs files? Is it expected?
I've certainly had a number of systems start to run into space
problems with /boot in the last week or so.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
--
_
* Simo Sorce:
> On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 16:37 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Dmitry Belyavskiy:
>>
>> > OpenSSL upstream has started development of the version OpenSSL 4.0 It
>> > will imply soname bump, removing ENGINE support, etc. As OpenSSL uses
>> > time-based release planning, the release
For the record:
1. This change is for F45, if I didn't miscalculate with dates.
2. This change is inevitable and the expected outcome of this discussion is
to ensure the steps that would simplify the transition to OpenSSL 4.0.
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 6:43 PM Allison King via devel-announce <
devel
On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 14:46 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Could we instead make all that part of fedora-release? generic-release
> is mostly a clone of fedora-release, with a lot of outdated stuff.
> What would be required to use one of the subpackages of fedora-release
> (possibly a
Wiki: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenSSL40
Discussion Thread:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f45-change-proposal-openssl40-systemwide/163965
**This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.**
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process,
proposals ar
On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 16:37 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Dmitry Belyavskiy:
>
> > OpenSSL upstream has started development of the version OpenSSL 4.0 It
> > will imply soname bump, removing ENGINE support, etc. As OpenSSL uses
> > time-based release planning, the release would happen in April
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 10:00 AM Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
> OpenSSL upstream has started development of the version OpenSSL 4.0
> It will imply soname bump, removing ENGINE support, etc.
I seem to recall someone stating that currently
Fedora itself uses the engine support for some
infrastructure
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 4:21 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 04:07:43PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 09. 09. 25 16:03, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > generic-release is FTI
> >
> > This happens after each branching. I fixed that in the past, but at a
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 04:20:30PM +0200, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 4:08 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 09. 09. 25 16:03, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > generic-release is FTI
> >
> > This happens after each branching. I fixed that in the past, but at a point
> > I
>
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 04:07:43PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 09. 09. 25 16:03, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > generic-release is FTI
>
> This happens after each branching. I fixed that in the past, but at a point
> I decided not to care: there were no users screaming, CI systems brea
On 09. 09. 25 16:03, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
generic-release is FTI
This happens after each branching. I fixed that in the past, but at a point I
decided not to care: there were no users screaming, CI systems breaking...
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
Fedora Matrix: mhron
The 3.0 series has been released for nearly a year so it's about time to
update to it, and 3.1 is coming soon-ish. I would really prefer not to have
to create a 2.5 compatibility package.
The following packages are affected:
blender
embree
luxcorerender
oidn
olive
openshadinglanguage
usd
I'm work
On 09. 09. 25 11:59, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
Dear colleagues,
OpenSSL upstream has started development of the version OpenSSL 4.0
It will imply soname bump, removing ENGINE support, etc. As OpenSSL uses time-
based release planning, the release would happen in April 2026.
It's too early to w
OLD: Fedora-43-20250908.n.0
NEW: Fedora-43-20250909.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
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
Dear colleagues,
OpenSSL upstream has started development of the version OpenSSL 4.0
It will imply soname bump, removing ENGINE support, etc. As OpenSSL uses
time-based release planning, the release would happen in April 2026.
It's too early to write a System-wide proposal change as of now - if I
36 matches
Mail list logo
