rel-eng August 2009

rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org

12 participants
156 discussions

#2135: Buildroot override for pl-5.7.11-1.fc11 and pl-5.6.64-2.fc10
by Fedora Release Engineering 21 Aug '09

21 Aug '09

#2135: Buildroot override for pl-5.7.11-1.fc11 and pl-5.6.64-2.fc10 ------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: mef | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | ------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- "pl" has a dependent package "ppl", so I need a buildroot override so that the dependency can be built against the latest version. Sorry for not following procedures earlier ... -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2135> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 0

Need help backing away from changes that break the Rawhide builds
by Elio Maldonado 20 Aug '09

20 Aug '09

Hi all, First of all, my apologies for breaking the build of several packages. I did some re-packaging of nss into three packages, nss, nss-util, and nss-softoken. Introduced the latter two and made nss (the remainder) depend on them and nss-softokn depend on nss-util. Unfortunately there are conflicts. Until I resolve these, which may take me a while, the prudent thing to do would be to revert my changes. Something like making nss-util and nss-softoken essentially empty or at least not buildable, and revert nss to its last stable Koji build. I don't know how to accomplish this in the most expeditious way. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Elio

2 1

#2133: Buildroot override for bigloo
by Fedora Release Engineering 20 Aug '09

20 Aug '09

#2133: Buildroot override for bigloo ---------------------+------------------------------------------------------ Reporter: salimma | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | ---------------------+------------------------------------------------------ $ bodhi -s testing bigloo bigloo-3.2b-1.fc10 enhancement testing 2009-08-10 bigloo-3.2b-1.fc11 enhancement testing 2009-08-10 2 updates found (2 shown) These need to be added to the override so I can rebuild scheme2js (last time bigloo-libs was updated, scheme2js does not exist so bigloo maintainer was not aware of any dependents). Thanks, -- Michel -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2133> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 0

#2132: Please include qemu-0.10.91-0.8.rc1 in Fedora 12 Alpha
by Fedora Release Engineering 20 Aug '09

20 Aug '09

#2132: Please include qemu-0.10.91-0.8.rc1 in Fedora 12 Alpha -----------------------------+---------------------------------------------- Reporter: rjones | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: Fedora 12 Alpha | Component: koji Keywords: | -----------------------------+---------------------------------------------- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1617421 This build contains a very small patch which fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516543 Without this, KVM is broken (segfaults) when you run it inside another virtual machine. With this patch it correctly falls back to using software emulation. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2132> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 1

[Fedora Release Engineering] #106: F9 Postmortem follow-up
by Fedora Release Engineering 20 Aug '09

20 Aug '09

#106: F9 Postmortem follow-up -------------------------------------------------+-------------------------- Reporter: John Poelstra <poelstra(a)redhat.com> | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji -------------------------------------------------+-------------------------- {{{ Here are some ideas that came out of an internal meeting for Fedora 10 1) Reduce the number of manual steps necessary to compose a release--Jesse should not have to stay up all night to get the release out the door a) enumerate current steps b) identify steps that can be reduced c) target steps to be reduced for Fedora 10 d) expand existing documentation so that more people can participate in compose process 2) Build system enhancements (plague) and make it less fragile 3) Finish pyjigdo so hand-editing of jigdo files isn't necessary 4) Finish signing server 5) Integrate delta packages as early as possible in cycle--complete integration with build system 6) Automated tree validation after compose (dgregor's checktree and treediff scripts as a short-term solution?) 7) More focus on secondary architectures working 8) More days of "installable rawhide" a) tooling? b) easy way to collect metrics? }}} -- Ticket URL: <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/106> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 1

#2131: Please tag it into dist-5E-epel
by Fedora Release Engineering 20 Aug '09

20 Aug '09

#2131: Please tag it into dist-5E-epel ------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: ksyz | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | ------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- perl-XML-Parser-Lite-Tree-0.09-1.el5 is still tagged in dist-5E-epel- testing-candidate despite bodhi thinks it's already pushed into stable. > Subject: perl-XML-Parser-Lite-Tree-0.09-1.el5 unsuccessfully moved > from dist-5E-epel-testing into dist-5E-epel-testing-candidate by > bodhi > Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:38:37 +0000 (UTC) > > Package: perl-XML-Parser-Lite-Tree > NVR: perl-XML-Parser-Lite-Tree-0.09-1.el5 > User: bodhi > Status: failed > Tag Operation: moved > From Tag: dist-5E-epel-testing > Into Tag: dist-5E-epel-testing-candidate > > perl-XML-Parser-Lite-Tree-0.09-1.el5 unsuccessfully moved from dist-5E- epel-testing into dist-5E-epel-testing-candidate by bodhi > Operation failed with the error: > koji.TagError: build perl-XML-Parser-Lite-Tree-0.09-1.el5 not in tag dist-5E-epel-testing -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2131> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 1

#2130: Buildroot override for perl-Class-Singleton-1.03-3.el4
by Fedora Release Engineering 19 Aug '09

19 Aug '09

#2130: Buildroot override for perl-Class-Singleton-1.03-3.el4 --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: robert | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- I would need a buildroot override for perl-Class-Singleton-1.03-3.el4 in order to get perl-DateTime-0.41-1.el4 successfully built. I've queried the perl-Class-Singleton-1.03-3.el4 already as an update for EL-4. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2130> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 0

F12 0-day release updates
by Josh Boyer 19 Aug '09

19 Aug '09

I'm thinking of taking a different approach with F12 0-day GA updates. Luke was kind enough to create a script that gave me the number of 0-day updates for F11, and break them down by type. We had 630 total 0-day updates. Of those: 12 were security 238 were bugfix 132 were enhancements 248 were new packages So approx 40% of the total 0-day updates were fixing some form of a bug if the update type classification used is accurate. Which means 60% of them were "WHEE NEW STUFF!" I know that our mirrors get pounded on release day already, so I'd like to propose that we only push bugfix and security updates for 0-day. We could phase the rest of them in over the course of the next week or so. Perhaps this isn't really worthwhile, as it might just be a tiny drop in the ocean of stuff the mirrors have to deal with. So I'd like to get some thoughts on this from the rest of you before I/we take any sort of proposal to FESCo for this. josh

4 7

#2120: I need a buildroot overwrite for opanal-soft in F10 and F11
by Fedora Release Engineering 18 Aug '09

18 Aug '09

#2120: I need a buildroot overwrite for opanal-soft in F10 and F11 -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: linuxdonald | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- I need a buildroot overwrite for opanal-soft in F10 and F11 -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2120> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 2

#2128: Tag request system-config-keyboard-1.3.0-4.fc12 for f12-alpha
by Fedora Release Engineering 18 Aug '09

18 Aug '09

#2128: Tag request system-config-keyboard-1.3.0-4.fc12 for f12-alpha ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: lkundrak | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Component: koji | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- {{{ This includes a tiny patch [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517542#c2] to create sysconfig/keyboard in the right place from anaconda. Fixes [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517542] I did not test it at all, the change seems trivial and obvious enough though. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2128> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 2

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
16
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

rel-eng August 2009