Hi everyone,
I have just orphaned magic-wormhole (the original one written in
Python) and its dependencies. I no longer use it, I have no time to
fix the packages for new Python versions, and upstream is pretty much
dead since they started porting the project to Rust.
- python-magic-wormhole
- python-magic-wormhole-mailbox-server
- python-magic-wormhole-transit-relay
- python-txtorcon
- python-spake2
- python-hkdf
There is an alternative Go implementation of the "Wormhole Protocol"
(wormhole-william), for which eclipseo already submitted a review
request. It seems to be better maintained than the Python original, if
we want to have a Wormhole client in Fedora:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1922806
The official port of magic-wormhole to Rust also seems to be
progressing, we might want to package that one instead once it's
released:
https://github.com/magic-wormhole/magic-wormhole.rs
Fabio
Hi,
Phoronix recently release article[1] about Intel's Clear Linux with some
cool graphs showing nice performance gain compared to Xubuntu.
I didn't have time to dig in and look how it's performing against Fedora,
but I'd assume Fedora can be compared to Xubuntu in terms of compiler
settings.
I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't
tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel,
...). I think it could be interesting fo Fedora users to have this enabled
if there are not any disadvantages other than compile time, compile memory
usage and so on.
What do you think?
[1]
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-clr-opengl&num=1
--
Best regards / S pozdravem,
František Zatloukal
Project Coordinator
Red Hat
I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle the situation where a
project decides to use submodules in Git. The archive generated doesn't
incorporate the submodule files.
I've done some searching on this, and haven't really come up with much.
I've reviewed: Packaging:Github
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#G…>
; but that really doesn't address the submodule issue.
I looked through some packages that are currently in the Fedora repository
and found where a few folks have rebuilt the tarball and referenced that
version as the Source in the spec file; then they put in a comment stating:
The source of this package was pulled from upstreams' vcs. Use the
following
commands to generate the tarball:
...
- git clone
...
- git submodule init
- git submodule update
...
This approach is the best that I've found. Any other suggestions?
Thanks much!
Hi Folks,
We would like to replace power-profiles-daemon with tuned. There are
many power-related software that offer similar functions. Advanced
users may install several power management tools, for example, tuned
and power-profiles-daemon (ppd), and get confused about which tools
manage the system and cause unexpected behaviors for the system. By
integrating power-profiles-daemon with tuned, the user can get extra
features to finetune the system, and the basic feature provided by ppd
can be used according to the user's demand. It also can reduce the
efforts of the maintainer.
The impact of this plan would be gnome-control-center (power panel),
KDE, sysprof, and tuned (or some projects depending on ppd). We should
move the ppd API and features to tuned to provide the same features of
it. From the API aspect, we also can design a new API for the basic
feature, ppd provided but the software dependent on ppd should be
modified to use the new API. Although, for the long-term plan, a set
of new API is a good option. For the short-term plan, moving the
original one to tuned is good for those applications depending on ppd.
Moreover, the detailed change proposal can be found here.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/TunedReplacesPower-profiles-daemon
If you have any suggestions, please let us know.
Thank you. :)
--
BR,
Kate
We've been looking at the AppStream extractor issues in Fedora, and
we've come across a few broken applications. Broken apps are not
visible in the application installer. The apps include:
* albumart
* apitrace-gui
* appstream
* asylum
* audience
* bomber
* bovo
* calligra-braindump
* cervisia
* choqok
* classified-ads
* crrcsim
* cube
* curblaster
* dsi
* escape
* ettercap
* font-manager
* freedink-engine
* gap-core
* gnofract4d
* gvrng
* hgview
* hyperrogue
* kaddressbook
* key-mon
* kgraphviewer
* knotes
* konqueror
* LabPlot
* nextcloud-client (maybe fixed in distgit)
* openms
* openvibe
* owncloud-client
* pingus
* pioneer
* portecle
* qdigidoc
* qjackctl
* qsynth
* qtikz
* recoll
* renku
* rodent
* screengrab
* screenruler
* simple-ccsm
* slashem
* spectacle
* speed-dreams
* tennix
* tilp2
* tortoisehg
* trophy
* tzclock
* uzbl-defaults
* vdrift
* vegastrike
* wireshark-gtk
* xfce4-power-manager
* xfpanel-switch
* xskat
* yakuake
* zanshin
* zathura
The full list, along with what failed is available here:
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/screenshots/f26/failed.html
If you want any suggestions or advice, I'm happy to help. Most of the
failures are pretty self explanatory, e.g. "No <summary> in AppData"
or "icon was too small 24x24" -- our guidelines are here:
https://github.com/hughsie/appstream-glib/blob/master/README.md#guidelines-…
As a reminder, you can validate AppData files using: appstream-util
validate-relax file.appdata.xml
Thanks, and comments welcome. I can set up a script that sends email
to the package maintainer if this would be helpful, but I thought we
might be able to get the majority of these sorted with this email.
Richard.
In one week, 2023-08-29, I plan to update llhttp from 8.1.1 to 9.0.1 in
F40/Rawhide[1]. This update contains some breaking API changes and
breaks the ABI, bumping the SONAME version[2][3]. Most significantly,
the compile-time LLHTTP_STRICT_MODE option is replaced with three new
runtime flags.
The sole dependent package is python-aiohttp; I will rebuild it myself
in a side tag, using a patch for llhttp 9.x support backported from an
unreleased upstream commit[4].
I don’t plan to apply the python-aiohttp patch and the llhttp 9.0.1
update to F39 at this time, with the understanding that this will
constrain future python-aiohttp updates in F39: I would prefer to avoid
getting ahead of upstream. I might reconsider this if an upstream
release of python-aiohttp using llhttp 9.x happens by the end of the
beta freeze, or if someone convinces me that keeping llhttp at 8.1.1 is
the wrong approach. Input is welcome.
[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/llhttp/pull-request/15
[2] https://github.com/nodejs/llhttp/releases/tag/release%2Fv9.0.0
[3] https://github.com/nodejs/llhttp/releases/tag/release%2Fv9.0.1
[4] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-aiohttp/pull-request/27
Hi everyone,
I am Sun Haiyong, from China. I want to port Fedora for the LoongArch
architecture.
LoongArch is a RISC ISA released by Loongson Technology Corporation Limited,
and has supported a series of (Binutils, GCC, Linux, Glibc, LLVM, QEMU,
etc.)
core open source projects.
Currently, there are many linux distributions that can run on LoongArch
machines,
they are OpenEuler, OpenAnolis, UOS, Kylin.
I am good at cross-compiling operating systems and often build Linux systems
using something like LFS or CLFS.
I have built Linux distributions using rpm package management from scratch
several times since 2015 (some systems are not publicly available):
1 Fedora 21, 28, 32 based on MIPS64EL architecture;
2 CentOS 7 based on MIPS64EL architecture;
3 CentOS 7 based on Power8 architecture;
4 CentOS 8.3 based on LoongArch architecture;
5 OpenEuler 2109 based on LoongArch architecture.
And I have published a book on porting Fedora systems to new architectures.
I want to add LoongArch to the official Fedora support architecture, and
I've
been doing so for some time, here's some of what I've done so far:
To verify the feasibility of building a LoongArch architecture branch for
Fedora, I have used the software version from the rawhide git repository,
and have now compiled a large number of base packages and built a temporary
repository that can be accessed at https://mirrors.wsyu.edu.cn/fedora/
I have compiled and generated more than 45,000 installable rpm files (of
course there are a lot of perl, Python, rust and texlive files), and the
number is still expanding, the scope of the package is enough to build a
LiveCD system, for which I have built LXDE, MATE, WorkStation ( Gnome3) of
the LiveCD and the installation of the ISO, you can get in the following
address: https://github.com/fedora-remix-loongarch/releases-info
Of course, there are still a lot of problems with LoongArch's Fedora system,
for example, some software is not yet fully supported by the upstream
community, but I believe the power of the community can gradually improve
them, so I am sending out an email here to get more people to support this
new LoongArch architecture.
I have recruited some developers who are interested in this and they are:
Wu Xiaotian
Chen Huacai
Shi Pujin
Si Yanteng
Chen Feiyang
Of course, there are many other users who are interested in Fedora systems.
I'm currently a newbie in the Fedora community, so I need help from
community
developers, and would like someone to guide me on what to do next, such as
what would be a better time to submit necessary patches to packages in the
Fedora repository, how to develop in a collaborative manner, what other
systems to be used for management, etc. In short, any information would be
useful. Could I get help here? :)
Again, thanks for reading this email.
Best Regards
Sun Haiyong
The guidelines for sysusers packaging:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/UsersAndGroups/#_…
say:
"Create a <package-name>.sysusers file with the user definition and add
it to the specfile as a source...use the %sysusers_create_compat macro
to consume it in the %pre section:
%pre
%sysusers_create_compat %{SOURCE3}
"
but...what are you supposed to do if *upstream* ships the config files?
openQA recently added these to its upstream distribution, so it seems
wrong to replace the config files upstream ships with ones separately
packaged downstream. But if I don't package them as source files, how
can I set up the %pre macro? I tried this:
%pre
%sysusers_create_compat usr/lib/sysusers.d/geekotest.conf
where usr/lib/sysusers.d/geekotest.conf is the path to one of the
sysusers config file within the upstream source, but it doesn't seem to
work. The built package has no %pre script. However, that does work if
I eval it locally from an openQA source tree:
[adamw@xps13k openQA (master %)]$ rpm --eval "%sysusers_create_compat
usr/lib/sysusers.d/geekotest.conf"
# generated from geekotest.conf
getent group 'geekotest' >/dev/null || groupadd -r 'geekotest'
...etc...
so...help? Is there any way to make this work right? Thanks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net
Hi everyone.
TL;DR: Remove a patch we ship in Go that disables GOPROXY and GOSUMDB and
follow upstream defaults, or keep it?
Recently, I had a short conversation in a public forum about two Go
features that we modified in Fedora. GOPROXY and GOSUMDB. As I prepare the
Fedora 40 and Go 1.22 proposal, it is a great time to discuss it.
You can see the conversation here, I think they bring really good points
that we should consider:
https://mas.to/@zekjur/111359951465906642
So first, what are these variables?
-
GOPROXY sets the server for fetching module-related information and
dependencies.
-
GOSUMDB sets the checksum database URL to verify module downloads and
ensure their integrity during module resolution.
You can read them more in detail here:
-
https://go.dev/ref/mod#environment-variables
-
https://go.dev/ref/mod#authenticating
-
https://go.dev/ref/mod#module-proxy
There are four approaches as I see this:
1.
Keep it the way it is right now.
2.
Remove the patch and follow upstream.
3.
Create a way to ensure the users know that that option can be changed
and leave one of the two previous options as default (by creating two
packages, one with the default setting and another that applies the patch).
4.
Have a GOPROXY service by Fedora.
1 and 2 are the easiest and most logical ones. 3rd is complex, and I'm not
sure it brings any value. 4th would be ideal, but that means maintaining a
service with all its costs and time.