December 2021 - devel - Fedora Mailing-Lists

Fedora-Cloud-34-20211227.0 compose check report

by Fedora compose checker

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211226.0): ID: 1091496 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091496 ID: 1091507 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091507 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose

2 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

Fedora-Cloud-35-20211227.0 compose check report

by Fedora compose checker

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20211226.0): ID: 1091480 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091480 ID: 1091491 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091491 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose

2 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

Fix for python-tzlocal FTBFS

by Barry Scott

I have added a patch for the spec file for python-tzlocal.spec that allows the 4.1 release to build. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1993583 I can raise a PR if that helps, but I have not done that before so pointers to the work flow would be welcomed. I need the 4.1 version for one of my copr projects. Barry

2 years, 4 months

5
6
0 / 0

Orphaning perl-Net-HL7

by Bill Pemberton

I'm orphaning the package perl-Net-HL7 as I've not used it a long time. Upstream is pretty much static, it hasn't seen an update in a long time.

2 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

Non-responsive maintainer - rlandmann

by Andrew Bauer

In accordance with the Fedora non-responsive maintainer policy, I am attempting to contact Rüdiger Landmann a.k.a. rlandmann. Does anyone know how to contact this package maintainer? This is in reference to perl-XML-TreeBuilder: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1977273 Non-responsive bug has been filed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035651 Output from fedora-active-user: Last login in FAS: rlandmann 2020-12-16 Last action on koji: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 tag_package_owners entry created by mohanboddu [still active] Last package update on bodhi: 2014-04-09 03:22:12 on package perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLinks-0.14-1.el6 Last actions performed according to fedmsg: - zonexpertconsulting(a)outlook.com filed a new bug RHBZ#2035651 'Non-responsive maintainer check for rlan...' on 2021-12-26 07:44:25 - zonexpertconsulting(a)outlook.com commented on RHBZ#2035651 'Non-responsive maintainer check for rlan...' on 2021-12-26 07:44:25 - xavier(a)bachelot.org updated 'flag.needinfo' on RHBZ#1977273 'perl-XML-TreeBuilder for EPEL8' on 2021-12-14 09:34:46 - xavier(a)bachelot.org updated 'flag.needinfo' on RHBZ#1977273 'perl-XML-TreeBuilder for EPEL8' on 2021-12-14 09:34:46 - zonexpertconsulting(a)outlook.com commented on RHBZ#1977273 'perl-XML-TreeBuilder for EPEL8' on 2021-12-14 09:20:22 - zonexpertconsulting(a)outlook.com updated 'cc' on RHBZ#1977273 'perl-XML-TreeBuilder for EPEL8' on 2021-12-14 09:20:22 - xavier(a)bachelot.org updated 'cc', 'component', 'product', and 'version' on RHBZ#1977273 'perl-XML-TreeBuilder for EPEL8' on 2021-12-10 06:25:28 - bcotton(a)redhat.com commented on RHBZ#1933817 'CVE-2020-11988 xmlgraphics-commons: SSRF...' on 2021-11-30 12:14:11 - bcotton(a)redhat.com updated 'bug_status' and 'resolution' on RHBZ#1933817 'CVE-2020-11988 xmlgraphics-commons: SSRF...' on 2021-11-30 12:14:11 - bcotton(a)redhat.com commented on RHBZ#1933817 'CVE-2020-11988 xmlgraphics-commons: SSRF...' on 2021-11-04 10:55:44

2 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

Fedora-Cloud-34-20211226.0 compose check report

by Fedora compose checker

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211225.0): ID: 1091455 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091455 ID: 1091466 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091466 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose

2 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

Fedora-Cloud-35-20211226.0 compose check report

by Fedora compose checker

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20211224.0): ID: 1091439 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091439 ID: 1091450 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1091450 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose

2 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

xorg-x11-server maintenance

by Fabio Valentini

Hi all, With the recent updates to use a standalone xwayland package, the "classic" xorg-x11-server package seems to have fallen into disrepair. It is multiple versions behind upstream (Fedora has 1.20.11, upstream has released 1.20.12, 1.20.13, 1.20.14, 21.1.0, 21.1.1, 21.1.2), and has open CVE issues attached to it. A BugZilla query for the xorg-x11-server package reveals a worrying state of things, with bugs not being touched in ages, and the xgl-maint account that is the "main admin" and bugzilla assignee for multiple xorg-related packages has a *deactivated BugZilla* account, so NEEDINFO requests etc. don't work (no idea what else doesn't work, I suppose maintainers won't get bug emails either, if their bugzilla account doesn't work ...). Does it count as "non-responsive maintainer", if the maintainer doesn't have an active BugZilla account? :) I know that Wayland is the default on many Fedora Editions / Spins, but some of us plebs still rely on X11 / X.org sessions and it would be great to have the X server package updated. For a security-sensitive component like the X server, this is a worrying state of things. Fabio

2 years, 4 months

4
4
0 / 0

Re: debug_package when using go_generate_buildrequires

by Robert-André Mauchin

On 12/6/21 12:42, Mikel Olasagasti wrote: > Hi all, > > I was updating some golang specs I've and switching them to use > go_generate_buildrequires. > > I realized that some specs that are using it fail to build if `%global > debug_package %{nil}` is not set. Same spec with all BuildRequires > defined works just fine. > > Example: > > - Full spec (go2rpm): > https://mikel.olasagasti.info/tmp/fedora/golang-github-alecaivazis-survey... > - go_generate_buildrequires spec: > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mikelolasagasti/github-cli/main/golang-... > > - Full spec build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=79642572 > - go_generate_buildrequires build: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=79642147 > > Is this expected? > Is adding `%global debug_package %{nil}` correct or good practice for > this scenario? > > Kind regards, > Mikel Olasagasti (mikelo2) Hello, Yes this is an issue I have noticed but I don't know where/what causes it. I know that if we have a %build section it will cause the debug info to be looked for. It does it too with %generate_buildrequires and I think it shouldn't, but I don't know if this is a behavior triggered by rpm itself or is it triggered somewhere else during the build process? CC Panu and Devel to weigh in. In the meantime, as long as you don't have a %build section and thus do not produce a binaries, you can use %global debug_package %{nil} Best regards, Robert-André

2 years, 4 months

5
5
0 / 0

Non-responsive maintainer hubbitus (Pavel Alexeev)

by Remi Collet

Hi, Pavel is non responsive for a while Already managed 4 years ago https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1758 I've been maintaining for a while - php-pecl-gmagick - php-pecl-imagick - php-pecl-xmldiff Do you I need to follow the full workflow, or a fesco ticket is enough ? Regards, Remi

2 years, 4 months

2
2
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel December 2021