in, esp. if it's not part of your job to keep it
> alive.
Yeah.
We also need Django 1.8 in epel7 for mailman3/hyperkitty.
It's using python34 for that. I don't know if very many applications
that support django 1.8 also support python3 or not.
kevin
pgpBCvwS0uE0
.x security issues?
* Is the upgrade from 1.x to 2.x transparent for the user? ie, would
they have to do any manual steps to move config? or is that all done
by the application?
* Is the "user experence" different between 1.x and 2.x?
k
On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:54:44 -0700
Karsten Wade wrote:
> On 10/15/2016 10:43 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 07:54:25 + (UTC)
> > john tatt wrote:
> >
> >> HiSo almost one year ago, some people asked for a 32bits EPEL 7
> >> repo, as
t's going to be tricky. There's no RHEL for 32bit, so
we would need to use CentOS, but then what do we do at the times rhel
updates and CentOS hasn't yet? Perhaps we build against CentOS CI...
kevin
pgpkELYihB3aX.pgp
Description: O
On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 08:54:27 -0400
Neal Gompa wrote:
...snip...
> That's a lot of work for an update that's going to die off literally
> within days... I suggest just pushing forward with nodejs 6.x.
I agree. Just push 6.x ;)
kevin
pgp8RlMTIS5w0.pgp
Description: OpenPGP d
mended course of action? ocaml-findlib is a
> dependency for another package we are attempting to get into EPEL, so
> I would have to excludearch for that one too.
Yep. Either excludearch them all or create limited arch packages. There
aren't any other options I
t and trying to generate
> business from that. Which is fine, but he sends email to random people
> and now even mailing lists.
I'm sorry this spam got through. It's already been deleted from the
archives and the account blocked.
kevin
pgpY8jC8LDNB_.pgp
Descriptio
Yeah, but likely not shipped by RHEL. ;(
So, we could do limited arch packages here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#Limited_Arch_Packages
but it's a pretty big pain. It's either that or just exclude ppc. ;(
kevin
pgpOw5_cqhAZN.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
foobar-1.0-1.noarch.rpm it would mean anything that builds
against python-foobar in epel would break (it would be not found). End
users would be ok, but buildroots could be broken by it.
So we are kinda in a lerch here... I think the best way is just new
packag
On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 15:04:58 -0600
Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 21:59:55 -0600
> > Dave Johansen wrote:
> >
> > > I agree that how to handle SCLs can get really mess really fast,
> &
bootstrap build of Mono in Epel7, and
> exception to the Epel Update Policy? Please let me know if I should
> attend the meeting on coming Wednesday, 18:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting.
> I would then try to be there.
If you like we can, but also we can just see if anyone thinks that is
t.2C_.2Fetc.2Fopt.2C_and_.2Fvar.2Fopt
"Currently, we have allocated /opt/fedora/scls, /etc/opt/fedora/scls,
and /var/opt/fedora/scls for use by Software Collections. "
Perhaps you could explain exactly what you want to propose here again?
Just epel6? or 7 as well? Do you have co-maintaine
to handle SCLs is a long term
> issue that will take some serious work, but coming up with some simple
> policies that allow it to be used in EPEL is something that should be
> well within the realm of the possible.
Perhaps. :)
kevin
pgp7wkQ0JUQXN.pgp
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:43:31 -0600
Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 14:21:24 +0100
> > Karanbir Singh wrote:
> >
> > > On 22/08/16 18:30, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >
install time.
I'm not opposed to devtoolset, but I don't think we want to allow
runtime scls without actual scl guidelines.
kevin
pgpaA3DqsuudX.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
er did, so as of right
now you should not conflict in any subpackage.
kevin
pgpihbERTP0pe.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 13:46:07 -0400
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I have to be out due to a family emergency. Can some one take over
> running the meeting this week?
I can do it (and hopefully not get distracted right before meeting
time).
kevin
pgpjtsROwE4sp.pgp
Description: OpenPGP d
ike to propose that we enable the Developer Toolset repo in EPEL
> and allow packages to depend on it. Thoughts?
So, this is a SCL of newer tools right?
Does this result in a runtime dependency? Or just a build time one?
ie, will everyone using packages built with this have to install
the highest version of koji without the dependancy is
> koji-1.10.1-6.el6.
Check updates-testing?
according to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340704
this is already fixed in those updates.
kevin
pgp2n3EVJ9zWR.pgp
Description:
m util-linux to fail in mock
> build.
>
> Could somebody with access fix this issue asap?
>
Good catch.
PR filed:
https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/pull-request/30
kevin
pgp0PDGF4_l7F.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
ep
On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:48:15 +0100
Dave Love wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi writes:
> > I don't know (I work for Red Hat, but am not directly involved with
> > internal builds), but I am highly skeptical of the claim.
>
> Likewise (currently).
>
> > That said, why
testing, so perhaps they
have some proof of this?
kevin
pgpV6PxkXGzSj.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
a torque6 package that is the new
version, and if desired a torque-numa that has the 4.x and numa.
Getting those versions to parallel install can be a pain, but then
people get the choice of which they want to use.
Alternatively we have copr... it's not as visible for people looking
for so
raproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ#Does_EPEL_replace_packages_provided_within_Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_or_layered_products.3F
So, thats not a channel that EPEL strives to avoid conflicts with.
We could consider how to better avoid conflicts with that channel, but
I'm not sure there's any easy w
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/releases/
We hope those will meet users needs while making things much easier on
our mirroring network.
Thanks,
kevin
pgpb2JZrGA_R6.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-announce mailing list
epel-annou
k)
correctly uses yum for epel releases, not dnf.
> As for now, the need for a newer libsolv implies that Red Hat needs to
> bump it up in the base, since they pulled it into there with RHEL 7.2.
Sure, or the dnf update removed that needs this newer libsolv for now.
kevin
pg
On Tue, 3 May 2016 01:16:37 +0930
Gerald Sim wrote:
> Hi Kevin
>
> Yes, I know the version specific gpg keys are available, not being a
> pain but they won't exactly match $releasever , since
>
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/RPM-GPG-KEY-EPEL-6
> https://dl.
On Sun, 1 May 2016 10:11:29 +0930
Gerald Sim wrote:
> Hi Kevin
>
> Awesome I can see this now
> http://fedora.mirror.serversaustralia.com.au/epel//
>
> So much m ore balanced.
>
> Now with GPG keys, unless there is a "master" public key to be shared
>
ll try and take a look at your package later in the week, but not
sure when I will find time for it. ;( If someone else wishes to do so
before then, please do.
kevin
pgp0Rh0iuDqEG.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=epel-debug-7&arch=$basearch
> can be
> https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=epel-debug-$releasever&arch=$basearch
> on both RHEL 6, or 7
Ah, just adding that link is trivial to do, so I just did it. ;)
It should sync out to mirror
;t use releasever in the epel release repo files.
Whats your use case here? You want to use the same repo file for epel
in both rhel6 and rhel7 without installing epel-release?
kevin
pgpVapL2rLkVq.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-
you have more than 1 thing in a single SCL?
etc etc etc
I'm sorry things didn't work out for SCL's in Fedora, it sounded like
they were actually getting close. Perhaps you can find some folks from
the SCL side interested in reviving things?
kevin
pgpkzgtjiaG
there are el5 builds in koji that work fine. ;)
Builders in koji are f23, so could be some difference between that and
rhel7.
kevin
pgpd9EIam6KlX.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.or
etc and get them approved by FPC.
kevin
pgpkg2jY7WDnY.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
with EPSCo discuss at next
> meeting?
I guess my opinion would be to retire in EPEL6 and slowly upgrade in
epel7 with announcements to epel-announce about it.
kevin
pgpwh1kliOKx1.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel
or 7.3 if that is
> sooner) with either -a- happening or a python27 is packaged AND a
> django 1.8 AND the packages requiring 1.4 are updated to 1.8.
Yeah, a time limit might be nice, but not sure how long all the various
projects need + how long it will take to bring up a python27 +
lugin and xfce4-mixer are replaced with xfce4-power-manager
and xfce4-pulseaudio-plugin.
kevin
pgpmWWtcrUFXa.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
appfinder xfce-polkit
xfburn tumbler thunar-volman thunar-vfs thunar-media-tags-plugin
thunar-archive-plugin Thunar ristretto parole orage libxfce4util
libxfce4ui gtk-xfce-engine garcon exo
(or remove plugins you don't want).
kevin
pgpjQLPSoE9xE.pgp
Description:
find out.
I guess the only issue I see with it is that it could cause confusion.
ie, someone wants to remove python-foo and there's an epel provided
python2-foo that they don't understand why it's there.
Otherwise, it should work...
kevin
pgpVkZya0J65g.pgp
D
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 09:36:37 + (UTC)
john tatt wrote:
> Hi
> it seems to come without windows manager. Had to uninstall.
Odd, xfwm4 is there and seems fine.
How did you install?
kevin
pgpUFE1PbqG_K.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital sig
ting
> it not to be like that is Cnut's tidal problem.
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves
An additional issue with SCL's is that we have no guidelines on them.
While I suppose EPEL could add them with it's own guidelines, I would
be against that g
t was one of the items.. why is the website so old and
> dead. I told them your story about trying to fix it up and finding
> parts reverted over and over again. Someone recommended : Just start
> from scratch and kill the old stuff. Which I think was part of
On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:11:28 -0800
Joe Julian wrote:
> On February 18, 2016 11:56:54 AM PST, Kevin Fenzi
> wrote:
> >On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:24:58 -0700
> >Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> >...snip...
> >
> >> 2. Packages in EPEL will never rep
ain
>if an archive method is setup, then those older versions would just
>be in something like /pub/archives/epel/epel-6.8/ or some similar
>setup]
Yeah, I think we have always said we only support the current release,
but good to spell it out.
> Those are my starting po
> I don't think anything above is new to people who have been
> contributing to EPEL in the last ~10 years. A lot of the problems are
> ones that were brought up in the beginning as we tried to square the
> circle of differing use cases. However, I wanted to catalogue them
> here
opefully they will see this soon...
kevin
pgpgixZ_RYJgA.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
he i686 builds into koji so they just appear next
to the rest).
kevin
pgp6TF4ZDkrxl.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
ybooks as well if
you can place them somewhere.
I worked pretty extensively with upstream to make sure all the fedora
infrastructure playbooks worked fine with 2.0. We fixed a number of
corner case bugs before the release. I'm sure there's still bugs, but
the ansible folks have been
equested macros. This should all be much
> easier with the rebuild infrastructure I have in place now. I can
> also move on to trying to help out EPEL5 as well. I'd really like to
> put this phase of the work to bed as soon as is feasible.
Sounds great to me, and thanks for work
.
Thanks,
kevin
pgpuhYDRFuA3E.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-announce mailing list
epel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
this.
>
> See also:
> https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/rhscl/devtoolset-3/
Nope. SCL's are not used or supported in the EPEL buildsystem.
kevin
pgpImNvVJw8EI.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 09:13:12 -0700
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 05:00:03 + (UTC)
> den...@ausil.us wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > You are kindly invited to the meeting:
> >EPSCo weekly meeting on 2016-01-08 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 UT
;
>
>
> Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/2542/
So, for new meeting times, so far 4 folks have replied to the
whenisgood:
myself, smooge, orion and bstinson.
I'll try and ask Dennis to answer and if someone could see if evolution
and/or any others want to answer too that would
will quickly become a hindrance to us in those
> > efforts as well.
>
> +1 from me for adopting newer package versions as baseline in the
> python3X stacks.
+1 from me too.
Also, now that 35 is out, do we want to switch epel7 to python35 before
we go
rpms What should I do to let koji
> know where to get LibRaw-devel?
That channel is not one that EPEL builds against.
I guess it was in RHEL but has since been dropped?
So, I guess a re-review and readding it to epel7 is likely your best
path forward?
kevin
pgpgpnFaY8ddg.pgp
Descrip
4i
Can everyone please fill out any times that work for them?
If we can find a time later this week we can meet then.
Smooge and I will both be out next week traveling, so it will be the
week after if we can't find anything quickly.
kevin
pgpbybNl0iTK0.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital si
[*] had been designed for?
Possibly. However, there's no completed guidelines for SCL's in Fedora
and thus also EPEL, so they cannot be used by Fedora or EPEL.
kevin
pgpvDy77pAZ68.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-dev
/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/issues
kevin
pgppi9rq75XtU.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
;
>
>
> Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/2542/
So, we haven't been meeting too much lately with everyone traveling,
etc.
Also, Starting in january, FESCo is going to be meeting on Fridays at
this slot. :)
So, how about we pick another day/time and see if we can get m
ck with
> > the EPEL devel list.
>
> list of channels in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7 is the
> only one documented, I've never seen proposal to include RHEL OSP
> channels as "base OS" or did I miss it??
They were included there by mistake when I was trying to fix another
issue. ;(
Should be cleared up now... can you check again?
kevin
pgpllsA52_keB.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
So, I ran some repoclosures today... I think something is still not
quite right as I was seeing some broken deps in base rhel repos, which
I would think would not be the case. ;(
Anyhow, attached it 'epel' which is just rhel + epel and 'epel-testing'
which is rhel + epel +
s, then take what we have learned from that and do
i686.
kevin
pgp38P80yHWVf.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
will be 7.2 imported to
> > Koji, so we don't end up with broken builldroots?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Alan
> >
> > [*] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249138
>
> Kevin just imported 7.2.
Right. We usually sync and enable the new releases t
uire manual end user changes? ie, config files,
or database formats or anything?
* Is the 2.4 stream still supported by upstream?
* If not are there security or other serious bugs that would make
moving to 2.8 desireable?
kevin
pgpXoPAQGQPd2.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
urn this subset to a DVD for their own use.
We provide a handy way to answer this sort of question:
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/DIRECTORY_SIZES.txt
...
15G /pub/epel/7/x86_64
8.7G/pub/epel/7/x86_64/debug
...
kevin
pgpjRUfyhReUI.pgp
Desc
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 20:58:21 +0200
Haïkel wrote:
> 2015-09-21 19:46 GMT+02:00 Kevin Fenzi :
> > Which tickets do you mean here? They are only rebuilding some
> > packages, but not others or?
>
> Any tickets filed against EPEL, for instance, if a bug or CVE is fixed
> ag
t; CentOS contributors to make it up their standards.
>
> Would that work for you?
I think there would be a large amount of technical and public relations
work needed to get anything like this off the ground.
If the problem is that CBS only has a subset of epel builds, perh
lders (where and controlled by
whom) and how to handle failures, etc.
Perhaps we could discuss outstanding questions in the next meeting
(friday at 18UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net)
kevin
pgp3jInCZzFxi.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
the exact channels EPEL uses and tries not to conflict with.
There's no workstation ones at all currently.
kevin
pgpAoG_iYjvnz.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://ad
k the reviews would be that big a deal for
interested folks.
kevin
pgpf9rR0R1OTF.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
not in rhel, just python-foo branched from fedora
and we can try and share specs to build things.
kevin
pgpFww_JaPz2r.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
esn't require vi at all (only readline).
>
> failed: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9841268
> successful: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9841595
Seems to be:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1222529
ie, anything that pulls in kernel as a dep ne
k your request or
reject it. If there's no response in 1 week it will be processed.
kevin
pgp5BVAWw9uDF.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
On Tue, 05 May 2015 23:28:47 -0700
ToddAndMargo wrote:
> Hi Kevin and EPEL,
>
> Is there any sign of EPEL 7 support for Wine 32 yet? The
> lack of Wine 32 is keeping me on SL 6.6 and it is starting
> to drive me nuts!
I have 0 idea. ;) I don't maintain wine
quot; one is gone. Then, epel stuff can build against
that version on both ppc64 and x86_64 and ppc64 users can get that
version from EPEL.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#Limited_Arch_Packages
kevin
pgplDM1uzZb8t.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_
he python3 stuff. I will try and do my
part later today or this weekend (make a epel-rpm-macros package).
Aside that not sure whats cooking. Perhaps have meeting keywords on
tickets people want to discuss.
kevin
pgpZgA1l0VFng.pgp
Description: O
hey are a way for people to
see who is doing what and contibute.
kevin
pgpWlul74SkaS.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 09:29:59 -0600
Ken Dreyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > ok. I think I have it fixed.
> >
> > Can you retry your builds ?
>
>
> Thanks, it worked!
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?task
On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 17:08:50 -0600
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 15:19:35 -0600
> Ken Dreyer wrote:
>
> > I attempted two new builds, and each failed on ppc64 with the same
> > libxml2-devel error :(
> >
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo
eeper problem. ;(
I am working on it. will post once it's solved.
kevin
pgp0gCXdkQ5Kl.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
root and fires
off newrepo tasks to update it).
There should have been a newrepo for el6 this morning a bit ago tho, so
please do retry your build.
kevin
pgpgj7eQ6FP9e.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
ht be this in your spec:
#%global gcc_vr 4.8.2-16.2.el7_0
# is not a comment in a spec file. The %global is still expanded.
Replace % with # or something to make it not do so.
kevin
pgpeWj0VmHEFW.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:00:35 -0700
Dave Johansen wrote:
> Is that really true? The Qt 5 package in EPEL 6 has been updated
> several times and I don't recall ever seeing an
> email/announcement/etc.
Were the upgrades incompatible? You have to manually intervene?
kevin
pgp
some cases
where there's not much choice (like when the version shipped has
serious security or data loss bugs and a upgrade to a new version is
the only answer), but in those cases theres announcements to the
epel-announce list and lots of time in testing
If I'm right, please revert your commit ASAP, so the packages which
> directly or indirectly depend on python-urllib3 are installable.
This should be sorted out now and the package should be back.
The package was retired prematurely...
kevi
er of ways and it'll enable us
> to mimic the deployment of things like virt builders in a single
> contiguous manner across all architectures to enable more simplified
> standardised manner to ease burden and increase automation from an
> infra PoV
Thats good.
kevin
pgpYYHCO98
brda%2FEPEL7_Python3&diff=405180&oldid=404782
>
> I'd appreciate comments, I hope I made it clearer and more
> explanatory.
Overall I like it. I suspect we will run into things and need to fine
tune it, but thats normal and good. ;)
kevin
pgpQg8wK6RaJI.
two?)
> - open bugs for packages that haven't been rebuilt during the
> previous week and get them fixed ASAP
I'd say just doing the mass rebuild by a provenpackager or the like
would be easier than filing bugs and waiting.
Also, we need to coordinate the update with them in it...
#x27;t help if you
want to depend on bugs in bugzilla.
kevin
pgpGwlqZcVaRY.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
;latest tagged' build from the tag. So, if the
newer one has different subpackages that will get used and the old one
is completely gone.
kevin
pgpUr5qrvSQLJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
.x86_64
> > DEBUG util.py:389: Error: No Package found for python-reportlab
> > DEBUG util.py:500: Child return code was: 1
> >
> > Any ideas?
The package wasn't blocked correctly.
It was just completely blocked, but when a package moves into RHEL, we
need to block it
gt;
> Looks like the branch request for epel7 was not processed correctly.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910793#c33
I've fixed this acl up. Please try now.
kevin
pgpt0WNuvUyKK.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
ep
e new build as part of a new update. Either with 'fedpkg
update' or using the web interface.
kevin
pgpKDkfFC6_UW.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
On Tue, 11 Nov 2014 14:00:18 -0600
Rex Dieter wrote:
> OK (attached).
The macros.epel file is missing?
kevin
pgpwyHWUBWXXS.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
ht
or more than a year and you are missing a
> large bunch of important CentOS updates.
Yeah.
kevin
pgpf66oUlrxUK.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
pending nss* updates for you?
Would it be possible for you to update to 6.6 or 6.5?
kevin
pgpDa61Lyr8Hb.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:58:14 -0600
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I have had a conflict come up for the Friday meeting at 1600 UTC.
> Would it be possible to move the meeting to 1700 or 1800 UTC?
Either of those times would be fine with me.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP sig
ut I would appreciate if people
> on comment on this.
So, IMHO the big thing to take into account: Is the new version
incompatible with the old one? Will users have to adjust code or
scripts, or are the old arguments, etc still all good?
Additionally, Are the bugs things that might cause datal
things are looking up"
So, hopefully he will answer email/bugzilla queries soon.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
it in testing a while (weeks? month?)
4) Announce again loudly
5) push it out.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
201 - 300 of 378 matches
Mail list logo
