Re: increasing the size of boot partition

Chris Murphy venit, vidit, dixit 2025-10-15 04:43:36: > > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025, at 1:14 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Mon, 2025-10-13 at 23:37 -0400, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 13, 2025, at 2:19 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > >>> The difference is that Windows and Mac have a single file

Re: increasing the size of boot partition

Samuel Sieb venit, vidit, dixit 2025-10-10 09:05:01: > On 10/9/25 11:46 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 09/10/2025 23:31, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> If Fedora wants to move forward with full BLS spec (as written or as > >> intended) then I think it's a flag day. I'm not sure we want to do

Re: Leptonica broken in rawhide

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2025-09-22 22:24:02: > On 22/09/2025 22:14, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Apparently, leptonica-devel FTI now. > > Looks like the problem is generated lept.pc: > Requires.private: ZLIB PNG JPEG TIFF libwebp libwebpmux > >

Re: [F43] OpenH264 or NoOpenH264?

Fabio Valentini venit, vidit, dixit 2025-09-11 16:21:48: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 1:53 PM Marcin Juszkiewicz > wrote: > > > > As Fedora 43 gets into Beta I wanted to upgrade my system. > > > > Problem 3: package chromium-139.0.7258.138-1.fc43.aarch64 from fedora > > requires libopenh264.so.8()

Re: Help on Fedora EPEL 10 build failure

Hi there This takes possible RHEL/EPEL friction to a new level. We're used to packages which are built for RHEL but shipped partially only (libs without devel). "Moving" a package from EPEL to RHEL, i.e. shipping it in RHEL and thus forcing it out of EPEL, and then dumping some of the arches is re

Re: py3_* macros deprecation and generated setup.py

Miro Hrončok venit, vidit, dixit 2025-08-19 17:09:13: > On 19. 08. 25 16:33, Carlos Rodriguez-Fernandez wrote: > > So, basically, don't use the following macros but write the BuildRequires? > > > >%generate_buildrequires > >%pyproject_buildrequires > > No, you MUST use them. But ideally u

Re: Rebuilds needed for swig?!

Am Mi., 6. Aug. 2025 um 12:32 Uhr schrieb Jitka Plesnikova : > > > > On 8/5/25 21:00, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > this is half a question and half a remark. python-PyMuPDF started to > > FTBFS recently with a weird error message: > > &

Rebuilds needed for swig?!

Hi there, this is half a question and half a remark. python-PyMuPDF started to FTBFS recently with a weird error message: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/build/21026539 python-PyMuPDF uses swig generated python bindings from the package mupdf. After staring at the error and koschei's list of c

Re: Please don't commit significant changes and leave them to be built by the mass rebuild

Kevin Fenzi venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-29 19:04:31: > I think this is all too big a hammer. > > There's lots of cases where people make small changes and don't think > it's worth doing a new build, but expect it will get picked up in the > next one. > > So, perhaps a more targeted approach might

Re: Unannounced fuse3 soname bump

Fabio Valentini venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-29 20:57:05: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 11:22 AM Michael J Gruber > wrote: > > > > Due to alphabetical ordering, freerdp was rebuilt against the old fuse3 > > before fuse3 was rebuilt and introduced the soname change which brok

Re: Unannounced fuse3 soname bump

Adam Williamson venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-28 09:11:29: > On Sun, 2025-07-27 at 14:56 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > It had been prevented previously via bodhi gating: > > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-3b916dde28 > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025

Re: flowblade problem using pyproject_* macros

Martin Gansser venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-15 11:04:08: > Hi, > > after using the pyproject_* macros for flowblade [1], the compilation fails > with the following error message: > > Executing(%generate_buildrequires): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.FtJ5fH > + umask 022 > + cd /builddir/build/BUILD/

Re: variety problem using pyproject_* macros

Martin Gansser venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-14 14:42:04: > Hi, > after using the pyproject_* macros for variety, I can no longer install the > package, I get the following error message: > > $ sudo rpm -Uvh /home/martin/fedora-scm/variety/results_variety/0. > 8.13/3.fc43/variety-0.8.13-3.fc43.noa

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

Miro Hrončok venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-11 00:19:38: > On 18. 06. 25 22:22, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > This example and most that I know use a BR on python3-devel and > > %pyproject_buildrequires, whereas the guidelines tell you to use *one* > > of them. The result with bot

Re: Windows Secure Boot certificate expiration (June 2026)

Neal Gompa venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-09 03:22:40: > On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 8:45 PM Mateus Rodrigues Costa > wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > As you guys know Secure Boot is supported by Fedora Linux and it > > relies on the Microsoft signing keys. > > Well, recently I was looking at this month'

Re: Post datacenter move steps?

Peter Robinson venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-08 10:03:20: > On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 at 08:22, Zdenek Dohnal wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > thank you for all the work you did/are doing atm with datacenter move! > > I'm looking forward to faster infrastructure for my builds and tests :) . > > > > Unfortuna

Re: Post datacenter move steps?

Zdenek Dohnal venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-08 09:22:06: > Hi all, > > thank you for all the work you did/are doing atm with datacenter move! > I'm looking forward to faster infrastructure for my builds and tests :) . > > Unfortunately (as with every big change) discrepancies are appearing and >

soname bump: mupdf 1.26.3 coming to rawhide

Hi there mupdf 1.26.3 is the latest version from the release branch. I had put off the switch to the 1.26.x series for various reasons, the last being the dc move. But I have been using mupdf 1.26.x copr build for a while now so that I'm confident bringing it to rawhide now and F42 as a follow-up

Re: Datacenter move update - 2025-07-03 01:00UTC

Jelle van der Waa venit, vidit, dixit 2025-07-04 10:04:42: > Hi, > > On 03/07/2025 22:18, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > Leigh Scott wrote: > >> Why isn't fedora infra using Anubis to block LLM scrappers? > > > > Why should they? Anubis is a scourge that wastes massive energy for all > > legit

Re: F43 Change Proposal: Deprecate RPM Macros for setup.py-based Python Builds (self-contained)

Aoife Moloney venit, vidit, dixit 2025-06-07 14:49:21: > Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateSetuppyMacros > Discussion thread - > https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-deprecate-rpm-macros-for-setup-py-based-python-builds-self-contained/155251 > The discus

Re: aspell and epel

Parag Nemade venit, vidit, dixit 2025-06-17 04:39:32: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 1:27 AM wrote: > > > loool, ok... > > > > I can update my SPECs from aspell to hunspell, but I see hunspell-fr > > isn't in EPEL. > > Maybe I can ask to branch them (hunspell + hunspell-fr)? > > > > > Both packages ar

Re: Remove openh264?

Chris Adams venit, vidit, dixit 2025-05-29 21:27:08: > Once upon a time, Michael J Gruber said: > > Chris Adams venit, vidit, dixit 2025-05-29 20:42:29: > > > Once upon a time, Chuck Anderson said: > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 08:18:08PM +0200, Vitaly Za

Re: Remove openh264?

Chris Adams venit, vidit, dixit 2025-05-29 20:42:29: > Once upon a time, Chuck Anderson said: > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 08:18:08PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > > - installed package ffmpeg-libs-7.1.1-6.fc41.x86_64 requires > > > libopenh264.so.7()(64bit), but none of the providers

Re: Remove openh264?

Leigh Scott venit, vidit, dixit 2025-05-29 16:59:11: > Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > On Wed, May 28 2025 at 04:51:33 PM -05:00:00, Chris Adams > > li...@cmadams.net wrote: > > > This package is for playing one particular encoding of videos (and > > > only > > > certain profiles of that encoding fr

Re: Fedora Council statement on Proven Packager situation

Matthew Miller venit, vidit, dixit 2025-05-22 17:15:12: > The Fedora Council overturns FESCo's decision [3284] to remove Proven > Packager rights from a contributor. > > FESCo didn't have a specific policy for dealing with a request to remove > Proven Packager rights. In addition, the FESCo proces

Re: Discussion about dropping qemu builds on i686

Chris Adams venit, vidit, dixit 2025-04-15 19:23:36: > Once upon a time, Daniel P. Berrangé said: > > Ultimately as a Fedora maintainer I came here to make OSS software great. > > When we get to the point that proprietary software needs are imposing a > > burden on Fedora maintainers that diverts

Re: A few notes upgrading F41 to F42

Rajeesh K V venit, vidit, dixit 2025-04-14 06:19:33: > > During the upgrade I've noticed this message output in the console: > > /usr/sbin cannot be merged, /usr/sbin/arptables points to > > /etc/alternatives/arptables > > I assume it's related to > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bi

Re: packaging: prefer git archives to upstream archives for Source

Michael Catanzaro venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-31 23:37:42: > On Mon, Mar 31 2025 at 08:09:49 PM +00:00:00, Zbigniew > Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > OK, I guess I need to work on my English. You're the second person who > > read the abovequoted part in the exact opposite way to what I > > intende

Re: packaging: prefer git archives to upstream archives for Source

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-31 12:53:54: > tl;dr: change the Packaging Guidelines to recommend the raw "git > archive" or equivalent over the upstream tarball produced using > "make dist". > > This is inspired by the discussion in "Reproducible Builds" mailing list, > i

Re: packaging: prefer git archives to upstream archives for Source

Ralf Corsépius venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-31 13:14:16: > > > Am 31.03.25 um 12:53 PM schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > tl;dr: change the Packaging Guidelines to recommend the raw "git > > archive" or equivalent over the upstream tarball produced using > > "make dist". > I could not disagr

Re: Un-deprecate Aspell

Adam Williamson venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-25 17:07:25: > On Tue, 2025-03-25 at 15:34 +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Am Di., 25. März 2025 um 15:20 Uhr schrieb Miro Hrončok > > : > > > > > > On 25. 03. 25 15:16, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > >

Re: Un-deprecate Aspell

Am Di., 25. März 2025 um 15:20 Uhr schrieb Miro Hrončok : > > On 25. 03. 25 15:16, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 10:07 AM Benson Muite > > wrote: > >> > >> Aspell was deprecated with the reason that it is no longer under active > >> development: > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

Re: Non-standard options removal from %cmake

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-12 12:43:05: > Hello. > > Non-standard options removal[1] from %cmake macros broke various > packages in Rawhide[2]. > > Some projects still use LIB_SUFFIX and LIB_INSTALL_DIR. They are all > FTBFS now. > > This change was done without prope

Re: Builds and updates missing from Fedora 42 compared to Fedora 41

Fabio Valentini venit, vidit, dixit 2025-03-11 17:01:15: > Hi all, > > It's this time of the year again. Looks like there's quite a few > updates that were submitted to Fedora 41 but not to Fedora 42 and / or > Rawhide. > > Some seem to be either caused by confusion about the ongoing freeze, > bu

Re: Dependency generation in Fedora/COS10 vs RHEL9/COS9

Am Do., 6. März 2025 um 14:49 Uhr schrieb Michael Schwendt : > > On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 14:31:17 +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mjg/mupdf-git/ > > Any particular reason why the shared libs are not executable? > They ought to be.

Dependency generation in Fedora/COS10 vs RHEL9/COS9

Hi there recently, my mupdf test builds in COPR started to show problems: the libs package does not seem to get proper provides (on the so) any more, in particular not those which the devel package expects. The problem occurs only in RHEL9/COS9, not in any Fedora nor in COS10. (All things EL/COS

Re: tntnet test-suite fails on rawhide due gcc version

Am Do., 27. Feb. 2025 um 13:36 Uhr schrieb Martin Gansser : > > is currently being pursued upstream in the ticket > https://github.com/maekitalo/tntnet/issues/73. Yep, PR against cxxtools is there. FTR: It was a case of _GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS which caught a real bug, upstream fixed it now. I guess

soname bump: mupdf 1.25.4 coming to f41

Hi there mupdf 1.25.4 is the latest version from the release branch. It collects several bugfixes but bumps soname as is typical with the way upstreams versions this. We (Ankur Sinha and me) have been going through updates of the girara/zathura/mupdf ecosystem for rawhide and F42 already, all upd

Re: Proposal: Allow all packagers to push empty commits to any package

Am Do., 20. Feb. 2025 um 13:28 Uhr schrieb Richard W.M. Jones : > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 01:17:02PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Hello. > > > > With the recent discussions about provenpackagers in Fedora, I > > recently got an idea. > > > > One of the common needs for provenpackagers is to sim

Heads up: python-notmuch to be removed

Hi there notmuch (the mail indexer) so far comes with two sets of python bindings: - python3-notmuch aka legacy bindings - python3-notmuch2 cffi bindings The legacy bindings had been deprecated since notmuch 0.30 (2020-07-10). In Fedora, notmuch currently is at version 0.38 (all active branches)

Re: Issue with RPM - Unexpected filesystem(unmerged-sbin-symlinks) Requirement

Am Di., 11. Feb. 2025 um 17:29 Uhr schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek : > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:08:36PM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote: > > V Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:54:36PM +0200, Dimitris Soumis napsal(a): > > > After a recent change in the build system (which I am not aware of), I > > > noticed

Re: Python distro deps for builds using venv

Am Di., 11. Feb. 2025 um 15:29 Uhr schrieb Peter Robinson : > > Hi python folks, > > I have a package [1] (you can toggle the with_python var at the top) that now > builds the python bindings in an isolated venv+pip environment, and hence > fails, [2]. > > It seems, at least in the way upstream c

soname bump: mupdf 1.25.4 coming to f42

Hi there mupdf 1.25.4 is the latest version from the release branch. It collects several bugfixes but bumps soname as is typical with the way upstreams versions. this. I built mupdf in a side-tag and will rebuild dependencies myself or via PRs. Michael f42-build-side-105383 --

soname bump: mupdf 1.25.4 coming to rawhide

Hi there mupdf 1.25.4 is the latest version from the release branch. It collects several bugfixes but bumps soname as is typical with the way upstreams versions. this. I built mupdf in a side-tag and will rebuild dependencies myself or via PRs. Michael f43-build-side-105275 --

Re: FTBFS after mass rebuild (not during!)

Am Mo., 3. Feb. 2025 um 22:40 Uhr schrieb Jerry James : > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 2:22 PM Michael J Gruber > wrote: > > So, over at upstream they raised the suspicion that some parts of what > > I'm linking are compiled with different flags. To recap: I get > >

Re: FTBFS after mass rebuild (not during!)

01-25 15:25:59: > > Do you have more details about why the test crashes? I have a similar case > > [1] (i.e. mass rebuild fine, then FTBFS), and the only relevant dependency > > change was glibc. It's also in the report Koschei gives for your package, > > so I

Re: FTBFS after mass rebuild (not during!)

? I have a similar case > [1] (i.e. mass rebuild fine, then FTBFS), and the only relevant dependency > change was glibc. It's also in the report Koschei gives for your package, > so I'm inclined to think it's a similar thing. > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.

FTBFS after mass rebuild (not during!)

Hi there, I have a FTBFS that I can't wrap my head around. Maybe some of you have experienced similar weirdness after the mass rebuild. python-PyMuPDF-1.25.1-2.fc42 FTBFS in rawhide according to koschei [1] and koji scratch [2]. Indeed, the build itself succeeds but a test fails because a thread

Re: Proposal for vendoring/bundling golang packages by default

Mikel Olasagasti venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-20 08:02:18: > Hi, > > Go-SIG has raised a ticket with FESCo [1] to propose a significant > shift in Fedora's packaging approach for Go dependencies: moving to > vendoring/bundling by default. This would represent a major departure > from our current gu

Re: FTB due to 'too many arguments to function'

Mattia Verga venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-19 18:28:04: > Il 19/01/25 18:23, Michael J Gruber ha scritto: > > Mattia Verga via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-19 18:19:24: > >> I see several of my packages are FTB in the running mass rebuild due to > >> something like

Re: FTB due to 'too many arguments to function'

Mattia Verga via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-19 18:19:24: > I see several of my packages are FTB in the running mass rebuild due to > something like: > > error: too many arguments to function ‘DoInterlace’; expected 0, have 1 > > Is that due to GCC 15, or is due to some "hardening" setting

Re: Idea proposal for next mass rebuilds

Artur Frenszek-Iwicki venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-18 11:23:22: > While I agree with the general idea of building things in order > of requirements, one problem that I can see with this approach is: > what happens when a higher-tier package fails to build? > > With the current, alphabetical approac

Re: forwarding aliases (was: Non-responsive maintainer sham1)

Kevin Fenzi venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-16 23:30:34: > Note: we are talking about @fedoraproject.org aliases here. > mailing lists already mitigate this as you note. Indeed. One might wonder what fpo aliases are good for - after all, you have to have a mailbox to forward your alias to, and sendin

Re: Need assistance to build Blender

Got it to build (see dist-git/PR), but please make sure the result works ;) Cheers Michael Luya Tshimbalanga venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-13 18:19:07: > Whoops, > > > here is, https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=127824831 > > On 2025-01-13 00:17, Mich

Re: Need assistance to build Blender

Luya Tshimbalanga venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-12 22:30:03: > > On 2025-01-12 10:58, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Sun, 2025-01-12 at 10:15 -0800, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > >> > >> Hello team, > >> > >> Blender failed to build due to an issue related to Python rules > >> changes and an addition

Re: Non-responsive maintainer ngompa

Daniel P. Berrangé venit, vidit, dixit 2025-01-08 10:27:33: > On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 09:01:33AM -, Hong Xu wrote: > > This email follows week 0.step 3 in the nonresponsive > > maintainer page: > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/#stesp >

Re: Retiring GlusterFS in Fedora 42. First Notice

Am Sa., 4. Jan. 2025 um 03:30 Uhr schrieb Samuel Sieb : > > On 1/3/25 6:08 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 5:20 PM Samuel Sieb wrote: > >> > >> On 1/3/25 4:39 AM, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 4:44 PM Kaleb Keithley >>> > wr

soname bump: mupdf 1.25.2 coming to rawhide

Hi there after a spur of changes to the 1.25.x branch, mupdf 1.25.2 appears to be a good minor release to bring to Fedora rawhide(*). It comes with several fixes compared to the 1.24.x series (plus enhancements). I built mupdf in a side-tag and will rebuild dependencies myself or via PRs (includi

Re: Promoting co-maintainer to main maintainer for orphaned packages?

Daniel P. Berrangé venit, vidit, dixit 2024-12-18 10:53:00: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 10:43:33AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > I would object! We've been there prior we arrived to the current workflow. > > And the typical situation was that such package was moved from one > > non-responsive maintai

Re: Revocation of provenpackager access from pbrobinson

Daniel P. Berrangé venit, vidit, dixit 2024-12-16 11:17:35: > On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 04:49:32PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: [snip] > [snip] > > > I do think we need a bit less ownership and a bit more shared > > responsibility with packaging. For packages which I maintain, I'm > > happy for

npth 1.8 in rawhide (soname bump)

Hi there npth 1.8 came to rawhide yesterday, together with a rebuild of its only dependent package (gnupg2). I had checked everything before (in copr, locally) and coordinated the side tag build but pushed the update as soon as the last build landed and forgot to send out an advance notice. Sorry

Re: HEADS UP: tesseract-5.5.0 coming to rawhide

Am Di., 12. Nov. 2024 um 08:32 Uhr schrieb Sandro Mani : > > Hi > > I'll be building tesseract-5.5 in the f42-build-side-100090 side tag, and > also rebuilding the following dependencies: > > ffmpeg > gimagereader > mupdf > opencv > python-PyMuPDF > R-tesseract > skanpage > zathura-pdf-mupdf > cro

Re: Moving away from the term "karma" in Bodhi

Am Di., 12. Nov. 2024 um 09:23 Uhr schrieb drago01 : > > > > On Sunday, November 10, 2024, Mattia Verga via devel > wrote: >> >> I have started to move away Bodhi from using the term "karma" to rate >> updates. I know this word has become familiar to all Fedora users, but >> there were several re

Re: Fedora 42: The Answer to Life, The Universe and Everything

Am Mo., 4. Nov. 2024 um 17:33 Uhr schrieb Neal Gompa : > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 11:26 AM Daniel P. Berrangé > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 10:52:18AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > I posted this discussion on Fedora Discussion[1] last week, but I'd > > > like to forward this di

Re: 0-Day: Fedora needs urgent Firefox update 131.0.2 ( current: 131.0.0 )

Hi there, Am Do., 10. Okt. 2024 um 11:19 Uhr schrieb Marius Schwarz : > > Hi, > > I checked Koji and there seems no build in process to fix this 0-Day > exploitation in firefix > > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2024-51/ > ... They've been built and submitted for stable ye

Re: Rebuilding tesseract dependents in F42 for soversion change

Am Di., 1. Okt. 2024 um 00:07 Uhr schrieb Sandro Mani : > > > On 30.09.24 23:35, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 2:49 PM Michel Lind wrote: > >> Dear all, ... > >> Unfortunately I omitted to mention that tesseract dependencies have to > >> be rebuilt - so we have to move slightly fas

Re: Using /usr/etc/services as a fallback for /etc/services (and other NSS files)

Am Fr., 27. Sept. 2024 um 11:33 Uhr schrieb Florian Weimer : > > Do you see any problems if glibc starts using /usr/etc/services if > /etc/services does not exist? Same for /usr/etc/protocols, /usr/etc/rpc > and so on. It's already used on openSUSE, apparently. > > And alternative proposal was to

Re: Rebuilding tesseract dependents in F42 for soversion change

Am Mi., 25. Sept. 2024 um 20:49 Uhr schrieb Michel Lind : > > Dear all, > > This PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tesseract/pull-request/6 > was recently merged and built: > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-41b92bf172 > > It backports a PR that's merged upstream to change

Re: how to create a rpm-autospec based package

Martin Gansser venit, vidit, dixit 2024-09-05 13:20:16: > First i converting the specfile with: > > [martin@fc40 SPECS]$ rpmautospec convert pyliblo3.spec > Converted to %autorelease and %autochangelog. > > and then I create the src.rpm file with > > [martin@fc40 SPECS]$ rpmbuild -bs pyliblo3.s

Re: how to create a rpm-autospec based package

Hello, Martin Gansser venit, vidit, dixit 2024-09-05 11:41:04: > Hello, > > I have created a new package pyliblo3.spec [1] and would like to know how to > create a rpm-autospec` based package from it. welcome to the club :) > If I use the following command > > [martin@fc40 SPECS]$ rpmautospec

Re: Early adopting EPEL 10 in Fedora Copr?

Pavel Raiskup venit, vidit, dixit 2024-08-19 08:24:44: > Hello Michael, > > On pátek 16. srpna 2024 11:31:15, SELČ Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Pavel Raiskup venit, vidit, dixit 2024-08-16 11:06:21: > > > On čtvrtek 15. srpna 2024 17:02:30, SELČ Michael J Gruber wrote:

Re: Early adopting EPEL 10 in Fedora Copr?

Pavel Raiskup venit, vidit, dixit 2024-08-16 11:06:21: > On čtvrtek 15. srpna 2024 17:02:30, SELČ Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Neal Gompa venit, vidit, dixit 2024-08-15 16:14:30: > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 9:45 AM Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > > > > > > > T

Re: Early adopting EPEL 10 in Fedora Copr?

Neal Gompa venit, vidit, dixit 2024-08-15 16:14:30: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 9:45 AM Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > > > The epel-8-* and epel-9-* chroots in Fedora Copr are aliases > > to the "rhel+epel-*" chroots from `mock-core-configs` package. We'd > > like to have the same approach for `epel-10`

Re: Fedora Mass Rebuild 41 has completed

Am Di., 30. Juli 2024 um 12:47 Uhr schrieb Alexander Ploumistos : > > One month ago, input-remapper was rebuilt for Python 3.13: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2480729 > > The build was successful, even though in the build log there are some > "Logging errors" and the proba

Re: Fedora Mass Rebuild 41 has completed

Am Mo., 29. Juli 2024 um 20:11 Uhr schrieb Tomi Lähteenmäki : > > On ma, heinä 22 2024 at 12.43.30 -07:00:00, Kevin Fenzi > wrote: > > The mass rebuild was done in a side tag (f41-rebuild) and moved over to f41. > Failures can be seen > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f41-failur

soname bump: mupdf 1.24.6 coming to rawhide and f40

Hi there mupdf 1.24.x release branch received a series of bugfix releases which bumped soname. With 1.24.6 it appears to be about time to bring it to rawhide and F40 (from 1.24.2). I built mupdf in a side-tag, will rebuild dependencies myself or via PRs (qpdfview). Michael f41-build-side-92323

Re: Fedora & AI Survey Now Live Until July 16th

Aoife Moloney venit, vidit, dixit 2024-07-01 22:21:37: > I disagree a little on the results to be meaningless just because the tone > or phrasing is positive, particularly with the topic of AI because it is > far too easy to list all the negatives associated with AI, and doing that > doesn't move

Re: Strange error building on Rawhide

So you're runnning rpmbuild in a toolbox, right? Can you reproduce this with mock? [ I think we bottom post here in general, but I kept with your choice. Feel free to reorder ... ] Ron Olson venit, vidit, dixit 2024-06-26 17:35:11: > Dunno if it should matter, but this is: Fedora Linux 41 (Toolb

Re: 2FA policy for provenpackagers is now active

Guinevere Larsen venit, vidit, dixit 2024-06-24 13:53:37: > On 6/24/24 5:08 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 24. 06. 24 v 9:48 dop. Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a): > >> IMO, having the token stored in your password manager means going > >> from 2FA to 1FA effectively ;-) if someone gets access

Re: heads up: julia has a bunch of incorrect Provides (bug 2291191)

Fabio Valentini venit, vidit, dixit 2024-06-14 16:25:56: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 11:57 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2024-06-10 at 20:57 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 8:52 PM Fabio Valentini > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 8:49 P

Re: HEADS UP: tesseract-5.4.0 coming to rawhide

Am Sa., 8. Juni 2024 um 09:45 Uhr schrieb Sandro Mani : > > Hi > > I'll be building tesseract-5.4.0 for rawhide in the f41-build-side-90853 side > tag. I'll also be rebuilding the following dependent packages: > > crow-translate > ffmpeg > gimagereader > mupdf > opencv > R-tesseract > skanpage Pl

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 41 Python 3.13 rebuilds to start in a side tag (hopefully) next week

Karolina Surma venit, vidit, dixit 2024-06-06 14:17:10: > Hi, > > On 6/6/24 12:41, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Hi there, > > I'm somewhat confused by the two different coprs > > > > @python/python3.13-b1 > > @python/python3.13 > > > > W

Re: [HEADS UP] Fedora 41 Python 3.13 rebuilds to start in a side tag (hopefully) next week

Hi there, Karolina Surma venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-31 10:55:16: > Hello, > > To deliver Python 3.13 with Fedora Linux 41, we will run a coordinated > rebuild in a side tag. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.13 > > Python 3.13.0b2 is scheduled for Tuesday, Jun 4th 2024. > We

Re: F41 Change Proposal: Anaconda as native Wayland application (System Wide)

Ian Laurie via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2024-06-05 01:47:47: > On 6/4/24 6:34 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > What exactly is not working for you when you run a GNOME Wayland > > session inside a VirtualBox guest ? > > Hi Hans, > > Sadly in my case I suffer the full range of problems, blocky massiv

Re: soname bump: mupdf 1.24.2 coming to rawhide and F40

Am Mi., 29. Mai 2024 um 15:01 Uhr schrieb Ankur Sinha : > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 14:04:20 GMT, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Hi there > > Hi Michael, > > > mupdf 1.24.x release branch received another mostly bugfix release > > which bumped soname nonetheless. F

soname bump: mupdf 1.24.2 coming to rawhide and F40

Hi there mupdf 1.24.x release branch received another mostly bugfix release which bumped soname nonetheless. Fixes are confirmed good to go for rawhide and F40. I built mupdf in a side-tag, will rebuild dependencies myself or via PRs (qpdfview). Note: Since this necessitates a rebuild of zathura

Re: Firefox 126.0 with DBus service

Martin Stransky venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-17 13:41:27: > On 5/17/24 11:37, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Martin Stransky venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-17 11:30:01: > >> On 5/17/24 11:14, Michael J Gruber wrote: > >>> Martin Stransky venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-17 11:

Re: Firefox 126.0 with DBus service

Martin Stransky venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-17 11:30:01: > On 5/17/24 11:14, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > Martin Stransky venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-17 11:04:47: > >> On 5/17/24 10:47, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > >>> On 17/05/2024 10:38, Martin Stransky wro

Re: Firefox 126.0 with DBus service

Martin Stransky venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-17 11:04:47: > On 5/17/24 10:47, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 17/05/2024 10:38, Martin Stransky wrote: > >> Hm, does really KDE Plasma access Firefox profile and searches it for > >> anything? That's interesting. Can you point me to any info ab

Re: Debugging fun (wrt C modernization change)

Kevin Kofler via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-16 22:39:00: > Panu Matilainen wrote: > > Patch and source numbers start from zero, that goes for automatically > > numbered patches too. So there's an off by one in the application, and > > the latter %autopatch which is supposed to apply patches

Re: Firefox 126.0 with DBus service

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-15 12:55:10: > On 15/05/2024 10:52, Ian McInerney via devel wrote: > > What if I don't use GNOME search? I don't use the GNOME desktop, so I don't > > want to have a random Firefox process running on my machine that is doing > > absolutely noth

Re: how to do minor bump using %autorelease?

Kevin Kofler via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-28 23:55:37: > Julian Sikorski wrote: > > I need to rebuild mame on F40 only for qt-6.7. On rawhide, > > mame-0.265-1.fc41 is already built against it so I only need to build > > mame-0.265-1.fc40.1. Can it be done using %autorelease? > > No, whic

Re: Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

Jan Kolarik venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-26 08:56:48: > Hi Kevin, > > Personally, I think this is a beta requirement. > > > > IIUC the Fedora 41 Beta requirement is to successfully upgrade the system > from Fedora 40, as mentioned here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_upgrade_dnf_cur

Re: Feedback wanted: Testing side-tag for switching dnf5 in Rawhide

Jan Kolarik venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-25 07:42:10: > Hello everyone, > > We've prepared a side-tag for testing Rawhide with dnf5 as the default > package manager. Instructions for installing the packages from the side-tag > can be found at the following link [1]. > > Please provide feedback in

Re: Orphaned packages looking for new maintainers

Michel Lind venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-12 21:59:42: > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 07:59:46AM -0700, Carlos Rodriguez-Fernandez wrote: > > Regarding libteam, the author of the package is the maintainer, email in > > bugzilla is different than the one on the project. I wonder if Jiro just > > missed the

soname bump: mupdf 1.24.1 coming to rawhide and F40

Hi there, 1.24.0 was followed by a mostly bugfix minor release 1.24.1, which bumped soname, though. I have been using this locally (first on F39, then on F40 beta) for a while now so that I'm confident we can bring it to both rawhide and F40. (Also, upstream has slowed down since...). I built mup

Re: convert everything to rpmautospec?

Remi Collet venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-09 10:23:57: > Le 08/04/2024 à 18:43, Michael J Gruber a écrit : > > > How absurd! > > That is rude, and ONLY your PoV. > > > To summarize, there is no agreement on a unique > workflow, and having one to become the o

Re: convert everything to rpmautospec?

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-07 17:15:16: > Hi everyone, > > I'm revisting the topic of rpmautospec because I was doing some work > on various packages, and it's annoying that some packages are using > rpmautospec and others are not. > > All my packages have been conver

Re: "fedpkg local" builds fail for rust packages

Fabio Valentini venit, vidit, dixit 2024-04-04 22:41:19: > On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 9:42 PM pfed--- via devel > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 09:51:31AM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > > The short answer is: No, "fedpkg local" is not expected to work for > > > > > Rust packages, and p

Re: soname bump: mupdf 1.24.0 coming to rawhide

Am Fr., 22. März 2024 um 11:21 Uhr schrieb Michael J Gruber : > > Hi there, > > We recently switched mupdf to shared builds because part of the > ecosystem relies on this, and because we finally could get upstream to > version the libs. As a consequence, major mupdf updates

  1   2   3   4   >