Re: blocked for tag f39-updates-candidate

Ah thanks so much! This is my first time unretiring something :) ___ 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/proj

blocked for tag f39-updates-candidate

I recently requested to unretire rocm-smi, but after it was completed I tried to rebuild and I get this: BuildError: package rocm-smi is blocked for tag f39-updates-candidate See: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=103328747 So I'm not sure if a) it was not unretired correctly,

Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)

+1 Yes this has been mentioned many times on the thread. You can't say the user has consented but also have it opt-out. Saying that opt-in data isn't useful because most users won't opt-in is implying the desire of a dark pattern to encourage more data collection. ___

Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)

Agreed 100%. Dark patterning or similar isn't the way to go. If telemetry is included, it should be opt-in with very clear explanation of why opt-ing in is important and beneficial. Opt-out and "by consent" are mutually exclusive in most circumstances. ___

Re: F40 Change: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide)

Unfortunately this might just be what happens. I know that I would personally always opt out on principle, and would vote for opt-in or dropping the proposal. I am under the impression that most Fedora users are in the same boat as me. ___ devel mailin

Re: Anyone want to review swap? (rocm-opencl)

Thanks Luya! I've landed rocm-opencl in rawhide, with epel8/9 and Fedora 36 pending :) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedor

Anyone want to review swap? (rocm-opencl)

I'm looking to see if anyone wants to review swap with me: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2090823 Thanks! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code

Re: Interest in a ROCm SIG?

Fantastic idea, I've just created a new page. I'll update it as I have time: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/HC ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of

Interest in a ROCm SIG?

A few people contact me directly trying to run things like PyTorch, which requires large amounts of ROCm to get working (most of which Fedora does not have yet). I feel like a SIG, or at least some wiki page would help organize things a bit for those who want to tackle it but are unaware of the

Re: ROCm-OpenCL package

Thanks Felix, An open concern that I have been discussing with the ROCm guys is that HIP (used for things like pytorch) requires rocm-opencl source code to compile. It seems they want to go with the llvm-project approach in the longterm, having opencl, hip, and the common static lib "ROCclr" as

Re: ROCm-OpenCL package

I'm up for a review swap if there's no takers. ___ 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/code-of-conduc

ROCm-OpenCL package

For anyone interested I made a review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2090823 I'm not 100% sure what to do with some of the debug related rpmlint errors. Any help would be much appreciated. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedo

Re: NVIDIA Open-Source GPU Kernel Modules: How does that affect Fedora Linux?

As far as I know, RedHat is working with Nvidia to get this upstream and working with nouveau. I'm sure there's a bunch of challenges around that though, so I don't expect much over the next few quarters.___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproj

Re: A way to prepare custom source tarballs from .spec file to improve CI experience

+1 to using an rpm macro to avoid adding an external script, if spectool can work with it. Something like: %global source0_generate_script ( \ curl ... \ rm -rf ... \ tar ... ) I'm not sure if that syntax is correct.___ devel mailing list -- devel@li

Re: Revisiting ROCm packaging

> Nice work! Thanks :) > The only x86 32-bit use I can think of would be wine if it supports ROCm. Yeah I looked into it, and it looks like rocm-runtime fails on 32bit due to some assumptions for 64bit in the code. I don't think there's too much value to 32bit, so it's not really worth trying

Revisiting ROCm packaging

I made a thread late last year inquirying about interest in ROCm packaging; in that time I've introduced a few packages amd updated a few existing packages to the latest version. Right now, Fedora is just short of making good use of ROCm, as it needs a frontend like OpenCL or HIP. I have a COPR

Re: FESCo wants to know what you use i686 packages for

It seems like my needs are pretty common: Steam, Wine, misc games (OpenGL, SDL, maybe vulkan, XWayland). ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?

Quick update, I've made some new package reviews: ROCm-Device-Libs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2044664 ROCm-CompilerSupport: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045955 ROCm-Device-Libs is needed to update "rocm-runtime" and for ROCm-CompilerSupport. ROCm-CompilerSupport

Re: ROCm-Device-Libs packaging question

I created a new review request, hopefully that encourages some conversation on the topic :) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2044664 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fed

ROCm-Device-Libs packaging question

In order to update "rocm-runtime" to the latest, it requires a new package "ROCm-Device-Libs" as a build requirement. The issue is that the project installs files into /usr/amdgcn, which seems incorrect to me based on the FHS and Fedora guidelines. Here's the upstream for reference: https://gith

Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?

Yes, this can't be updated until someone packages ROCM-Device-Libs unfortunately. If anyone volunteers, I'm happy to help review. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?

> On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 05:07:10PM -0000, Jeremy Newton wrote: > > I think that'd be awesome -- and those internal clean-ups are really > appreciated. Having the infrastructure there is nice, but I'm also curious: > are there any application-level tools that are i

Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?

Yeah I think the technical leads are mostly on board with following FHS as close as possible, which is an obvious plus for Fedora. I think the biggest issue is the scale of the problem, and it almost feel likes they need to work component by component, but [2] will definitely be fixed for all c

Any interest in ROCm packaging?

Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD. To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my interest and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to keep it that way. There has been a recent effort to step up Debian packaging of ROCm

Re: Firefox related unbundle?

Indeed, but they should add the provides: bundled(cubeb) in the spec Anyway, I made a review request for anyone interested: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1826034 I plan to make a pull request to Firefox later if I can get it to unbundle.

Re: Firefox related unbundle?

Good to know, thanks! ___ 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/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https

Firefox related unbundle?

I package dolphin-emu, which bundled libcubeb in the latest version. I've built it in rawhide and I'm trying to systematically unbundle things. Looks like cubeb is apart of the Firefox source tree (./meda/libcubeb/). Should I email gecko-bugs-nob...@fedoraproject.org or make a bug report? It look

Re: Some preliminary Fedora 25 stats — and future release scheduling

I feel like the batched update makes a lot of sense, providing the same amount of QA/testing time is still provided and some rules are set on what can and cannot be pushed in that update. E.g., since GTK now has a LTS model, I would assume major release updates would only ever be pushed to rawhi

Re: C++ build errors

Thanks! I'll take a look into the port guide. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

C++ build errors

Anyone have any idea what causes these errors? Trying to update a package and it failed during a local test build in mock (f25): In file included from /usr/include/c++/6.2.1/stdlib.h:36:0, from expr.ypp:5: /usr/include/c++/6.2.1/cstdlib:124:11: error: '::div_t' has not been decla

Re: No arch broken dependency issue

So does exclusive arch actually block the unsupported arches come f26? The emails are annoying but I'm more concerned that things will be broken when branch from rawhide happens. On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Sunday, November 13, 2016 4:28:26 PM CET Jerem

No arch broken dependency issue

Hi, I was wondering if any of the RPM guru's know how to fix an issue I'm having. I keep getting this email: >orthorobot has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: >On ppc64le: >orthorobot-1.1-4.fc26.noarch requires love >Please resolve this as soon as possible. This is because it's noa

Re: Fedora 25 Beta status is GO, release on Oct 11, 2016

At risk of asking a redundant question, I'm assuming Wayland is still a go? IIRC the contingency deadline was the beta. I ask because it does not appear to be a part of the changeset, yet this FEDCo ticket seems to suggest otherwise: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1615

Re: Including tlp in Fedora Workstation by default

>>* Do you think that the average user with a clicking sound card or disk *>>* corruption when suspending would be able to make the link to this new *>>* package?* > Even better ... the integrated mouse pointer on my external ThinkPad USB > keyboard stops working if USB suspend is enabled for this