[Bug 2064953] New: Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8 and epel9

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064953

Bug ID: 2064953
           Summary: Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8 and epel9
           Product: Fedora EPEL
           Version: epel9
            Status: NEW
         Component: lua-bit32
          Assignee: [e-mail]
          Reporter: [e-mail]
        QA Contact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail],
                    [e-mail],
                    [e-mail]
  Target Milestone: ---
    Classification: Fedora

Needed by neovim on architectures without luajit

[Bug 2064953] Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8 and epel9

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064953

Michel Alexandre Salim  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value
             Blocks|                            |2062925

Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2062925
[Bug 2062925] [neovim] upgrade to 0.6.1 on EPEL 8

[Bug 2064953] Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8 and epel9

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064953

Michel Alexandre Salim  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #1 from Michel Alexandre Salim  ---
lua-bit32 on  rawhide
❯ fedpkg request-branch epel8
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/43047

lua-bit32 on  rawhide took 6s
❯ fedpkg request-branch epel9
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/43048

[Bug 2064953] Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064953

Michel Alexandre Salim  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|Branch and build lua-bit32  |Branch and build lua-bit32
                   |for epel8 and epel9         |for epel8

--- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim  ---
Split off EPEL9 to another bug as it needs compat-lua branched as well

[Bug 2064953] Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064953

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |MODIFIED

--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60091773e1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60091773e1

[Bug 2064953] Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064953

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|MODIFIED                    |ON_QA

--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60091773e1 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60091773e1

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.

[Bug 2064953] Branch and build lua-bit32 for epel8

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064953

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |ERRATA
             Status|ON_QA                       |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|                            |lua-bit32-5.3.5.1-1.el8
        Last Closed|                            |2022-03-31 00:40:34

--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60091773e1 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.