rel-eng November 2010

rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org

4 participants
86 discussions

#1107: auto-cleanup rawhide trees
by Fedora Release Engineering 29 Apr '15

29 Apr '15

#1107: auto-cleanup rawhide trees -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: notting | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: enhancement | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Rawhide tree expiry is manual at the moment, unless I missed something. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1107> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 8

#4071: Block pushes to origin/ in gitolite ACLs
by Fedora Release Engineering 24 Sep '14

24 Sep '14

#4071: Block pushes to origin/ in gitolite ACLs ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: jkeating | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: git Keywords: | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Common typo to create a new branch that starts with "origin/". We can stop that at the ACL level. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4071> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 5

#3903: change component owner in bugzilla
by Fedora Release Engineering 07 Sep '14

07 Sep '14

#3903: change component owner in bugzilla ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: mmaslano | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: other Keywords: | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Could you create perl-fedora-maint as bug owner for all my perl-* modules and perl component? I'm sharing bugs with my colleagues in RHEL and we'd like to have it also for Fedora. I suppose set up mailing list is also needed. This should be applied only for perl modules, where I am an owner of the package. Not only co-maintainer. The group perl-fedora-maint should include mmaslano, ppisar, psabata. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3903> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 15

#3624: fullfilelist changes
by Fedora Release Engineering 20 Jan '14

20 Jan '14

#3624: fullfilelist changes -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: mmcgrath | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: enhancement | Status: new Milestone: | Component: other Keywords: | -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- After each push, we need to run the following command: rsync -r . > fullfilelist This should overwrite the fullfilelist that's there and isn't very useful at the moment: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/fullfilelist We can't do this via a cron job, it has to go out after each push so it needs to be added to those scripts. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3624> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 3

#4084: gcc multiarch broken dep
by Fedora Release Engineering 06 Jan '14

06 Jan '14

#4084: gcc multiarch broken dep -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- Reporter: mschwendt | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: defect | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Keywords: | -----------------------+---------------------------------------------------- There is a discrepancy between what is pushed to stable dist repos and to updates-testing. With the latest "gcc" test-update, F-14 is affected, too (which means this is not specific to F-13). gcc-gfortran.i686 is available in x86_64 development/14 but not x86_64 updates/testing/14. The version-specific dependency in it is unresolvable deps if it isn't updated. What is the cause of it? Can it be fixed in the compose tools? Or is a self-"Obsoletes" (which is not arch-specific by default) in gcc-gfortran the only cure? http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/development/14/x86_64/os… {{{ [ ] gcc-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:51 14M [ ] gcc-c++-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:50 5.1M [X] gcc-gfortran-4.5.1-1.fc14.i686.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:56 4.4M [ ] gcc-gfortran-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:54 5.0M [ ] gcc-gnat-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:52 9.9M [ ] gcc-java-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:56 4.0M [ ] gcc-objc++-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:56 4.3M [ ] gcc-objc-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:57 3.9M [ ] libgcc-4.5.1-1.fc14.i686.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:53 61K [ ] libgcc-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:51 52K [ ] libgcj-4.5.1-1.fc14.i686.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:54 17M [ ] libgcj-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:55 19M [ ] libgcj-devel-4.5.1-1.fc14.i686.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:50 1.5M [ ] libgcj-devel-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:51 1.5M [ ] libgcj-src-4.5.1-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm 13-Aug-2010 14:51 12M }}} http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/development/14/x86_64/os… {{{ [ ] gcc-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:36 14M [ ] gcc-c++-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:39 5.1M [ ] gcc-gfortran-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:42 5.0M [ ] gcc-gnat-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:31 9.9M [ ] gcc-java-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:29 4.0M [ ] gcc-objc++-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:35 4.3M [ ] gcc-objc-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:34 3.9M [ ] libgcc-4.5.1-3.fc14.i686.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:33 62K [ ] libgcc-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:33 52K [ ] libgcj-4.5.1-3.fc14.i686.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:29 17M [ ] libgcj-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:35 19M [ ] libgcj-devel-4.5.1-3.fc14.i686.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:29 1.5M [ ] libgcj-devel-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:37 1.5M [ ] libgcj-src-4.5.1-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 07-Sep-2010 12:41 12M }}} -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4084> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 9

#3761: add gpg signature for .treeinfo file and/or add CHECKSUM file for unsigned content of images
by Fedora Release Engineering 06 Jan '14

06 Jan '14

#3761: add gpg signature for .treeinfo file and/or add CHECKSUM file for unsigned content of images ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: jkeating | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: other Keywords: meeting | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Description of problem: Currently the only way to verify the contents of .treeinfo or the installer images is to download the .iso and the regarding -CHECKSUM file and check it. But e.g. preupgrade does not download the .iso but the *.img files, the kernel and the .treeinfo directly from a mirror. Therefore it is also not possible to easily verify these files. I guess the preupgrade way of updating is somehow popular, therefore it should be possible to do this securely. I filed a bug against preupgrade for not verifying anything and not announcing this here: bug 509338 -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3761> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 2

#4267: collectd in EPEL
by Fedora Release Engineering 30 Nov '13

30 Nov '13

#4267: collectd in EPEL ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Reporter: mmcgrath | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: mash Keywords: | ----------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Can we get collectd in EPEL set to disable multi-lib? It has become an issue on EPEL where installing "collectd" via yum creates conflicts it shouldn't. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4267> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 4

#3883: more meaningful error if module isn't found
by Fedora Release Engineering 17 Jul '13

17 Jul '13

#3883: more meaningful error if module isn't found -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Reporter: kalev | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: enhancement | Status: new Milestone: | Component: other Keywords: | -------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Right now fedpkg fails with access denied message if there is not such module: {{{ $ fedpkg clone gtkmm30 R access for gtkmm30 DENIED to kalev }}} Would be nice to get a more meaningful error in that case, perhaps "module not found". Filing it in releng trac as the error is coming from gitolite, just being passed along by fedpkg. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3883> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 3

#3759: bad distro tags in Fedora 13/x86_64
by Fedora Release Engineering 17 Jul '13

17 Jul '13

#3759: bad distro tags in Fedora 13/x86_64 -------------------+-------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: james | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | -------------------+-------------------------------------------------------- From yum repolist -v fedora ... Repo-id : fedora Repo-name : Fedora 13 - x86_64 Repo-revision: 1274245576 Repo-tags : binary-x86_64 Repo-distro-tags: [cpe:/o:fedoraproject:fedora:13]: rawhide ...this isn't rawhide though. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3759> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 7

#2244: How to mass branch s390utils and other non-primary arch packages
by Fedora Release Engineering 17 Jul '13

17 Jul '13

#2244: How to mass branch s390utils and other non-primary arch packages --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- Reporter: toshio | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Type: task | Status: new Milestone: | Component: koji Keywords: | --------------------+------------------------------------------------------- This is a rel-eng decision that I'll need input on. Currently the packagedb branches packages which are not blocked in koji. Some packages which are not built for the primary arch are blocked in koji -- s390utils for instance. Does the packagedb need to whitelist these or should the packages be unblocked as they are discovered? -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2244> Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng> Release Engineering for the Fedora Project

1 5

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

rel-eng November 2010