devel January 2024

devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

163 participants
253 discussions

%patchN deprecated?
by Michael J Gruber 12 Jul '25

12 Jul '25

Has `%patchN` been deprecated in favour of `%patch N`? I got a push by a proven packager to one of the packages which I maintain, commit subject and changelog entry "Fix deprecated patch rpm macro". It contains no explanation and no reference whatsoever. I didn't find any heads up notice, nor info in the packaging guidelines, but I didn't try too hard - because it's not my job. I mean: One person is doing that push. Is it too much to ask to get at least the slightest bit of reference or communication before or into a push which probably affects hundreds of people? If not out of courtesy then out of mere common sense of efficiency? On the technical side, I'd be interested why this is better (fewer macros?) and which releases can take it, and what are the recommendations for `PatchN:`-lines (with or without N), and why (or whether) the recommendation isn't to go for `%autosetup` or `%autopatch` - maybe all answered in the missing reference. P.S.: There is nothing to "fix" here either, only to "adapt" to the deprecation notice, but I'll take that one easy between non-native speakers, presumably.

7 9

dnf "no match for group package" on upgrade...
by Matthew Miller 02 Jun '25

02 Jun '25

I'm seeing a number of people confused by this message, usually followed by some actual transaction error. I _think_ this is happening because these packages are in comps but do not exist in the distro. Is this correct? I tried to search for it, but the error message is _very_ common in ... well, people who are asking about it because of what I said. (For example: https://unix.stackexchange.com/q/542877/2511) I found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1538346 but not much of a general resolution. It does note that one issue is arch-specific packages (which maybe just need "arch=..." in comps?). I think we should: 1. Have a schedule standarded task to remove any packages listed but non-existent after branch from rawhide. (I assume a Rel-Eng task?) 2. Have DNF make this message less scary. Maybe even move down to a debug message and not show it by default — I am not seeing a situation where they're useful to _most_ end-users. Anything I'm missing? -- Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader

5 5

Orphaned magic-wormhole + its python deps
by Fabio Valentini 21 Jan '25

21 Jan '25

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

4 6

Request for comment- tuned replacing power-profiles-daemon plan
by Kate Hsuan 31 Oct '24

31 Oct '24

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

6 11

Applications with AppData and not visible in the software center
by Richard Hughes 14 Oct '24

14 Oct '24

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.

8 14

Execute RPM dependency generators on the .spec file which ships them
by Vít Ondruch 27 Sep '24

27 Sep '24

I am still playing with idea of executing RPM dependency generators on the .spec file which ships them. I have created RPM RFE ticket quite a while ago here: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/782 So for no luck with having this implemented. However, I think there is reasonable way. It would be enough to have some generic attr file around. I have create small test package exploring this idea and you can find it in my Copr repo: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/vondruch/rpm-local-generator/ https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/vondruch/rpm-local-generato… On the same place, you can also find package leveraging this concept: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/vondruch/rpm-local-generato… Would somebody else benefit from this idea/package or can somebody spot some issue with it? Thx for feedback. Vít

5 13

Heads-up: llhttp 9.0.1 coming to Rawhide
by Ben Beasley 18 Aug '24

18 Aug '24

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

1 1

Porting Fedora for the LoongArch architecture.
by 孙海勇 17 Aug '24

17 Aug '24

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

12 18

sysusers scriptlets: what to do if upstream includes the config files?
by Adam Williamson 26 Jul '24

26 Jul '24

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

8 9

Enabling GOPROXY and GOSUMDB in Fedora
by Alejandro Saez Morollon 14 Jul '24

14 Jul '24

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.

10 12

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel January 2024