August 2019 - rel-eng - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[releng] Issue #8624: Unretire mingw-libsoup

by Kalev Lember

kalev reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` mingw-libsoup got retired in the recent FTBFS cleanup. Please unretire it and unblock in f31. I'll take care of fixing the FTBFS. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8624

4 years, 7 months

3
7
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8664: Module mass-rebuild for F32 Rawhide needed

by Stephen Gallagher

sgallagh reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue At the Branch point, we need to perform a mass-rebuild of modular content so that they can be rebuilt against the new base module (in this case `platform:f32`). This does not seem to have happened during the F31 Branch from Rawhide, as https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-2019082... shows only those modules whose maintainers have done a manual rebuild since the Branch. * When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) Immediately (2019-08-21) * When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) When F32 goes EOL * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? Upgrade path on Rawhide will be broken for anyone with modules enabled. (That means pretty much everyone at this point). CC @kevin `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8664

4 years, 7 months

4
11
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8702: F31 stable push requests

by Adam Williamson

adamwill reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` This ticket will be used for requesting pushes of tested blocker / freeze exception fixes during F31 release freezes. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process . Similar to candidate compose request tickets, this ticket can be closed by releng after each push and re-opened by QA each time a new push is needed. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8702

4 years, 7 months

3
35
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8684: Create F32FTBFS and F32FailsToInstall Bugzilla trackers

by Miro Hrončok

churchyard reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue According to the Fails to build and Fails to install policy, we need new Buzgilla trackers for Fedora 32. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fai... * When do you need this? After Fedora 31 was branched (already happened). * When is this no longer needed or useful? When Fedora 32 goes EOL. * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? We cannot properly track F32 install and build failures. ---- I know I can create the bugizllas myself, but last time i did, it created confusion during teh mass rebuild. So I'd prefer if releng creates them. It also looks better if the trackers are created by the releng account. Thanks `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8684

4 years, 7 months

1
3
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8468: fedora-scm-requests new repository procedure repeatedly keeps the repo owned by the releng person

by Miro Hrončok

churchyard reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` 1. I've create a new repository request, where something was wrong 2. @limb processed the request, closed as invalid 3. I fixed the thing and reopened the issue 4. @limb processed the request, closed as invalid again (already exists) 5. as a result, the repo was created, but owned by @limb This is probably broken in some script that @limb runs, it probably creates the repo, checks some constraints and assigns the repo to me. When the constraints fail, the repo exists, but is not assigned to me. I cannot provide more details, because I have no idea what happens "on the other side". This already happened twice to me: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/10716 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/13178 In both cases, the branch was set to epel7 and initial_commit to false, if that makes any difference. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8468

4 years, 7 months

2
4
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8598: Switch the FTBFS reminders to F31FTBFS

by Miro Hrončok

churchyard reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` Please update the configuration of the weekly FTBFS bugzilla reminder to start notifying the Fedora 31 bugs. Thanks. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8598

4 years, 7 months

2
4
0 / 0

[pungi-fedora] Issue #759: Use of `dracut*` in `additional_packages` pulls in some unneccessary (and broken) stuff

by Adam Williamson

adamwill reported a new issue against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following: `` See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1734179 . That's a Fedora 31 blocker because an uninstallable package gets pulled into the Server DVD...but the package probably doesn't really need to be on the DVD at all. It's being included because in `fedora.conf` we list `dracut*` in `additional_packages`, which pulls in not just all the subpackages of the dracut .src.rpm itself but various other packages whose name starts with `dracut`, some of which we probably don't really want to pull in at all. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/issue/759

4 years, 7 months

3
9
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8713: Unretire ipsilon

by Neal Gompa

ngompa reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Name of the package? `ipsilon` * FAS username of the new maintainer? `ngompa` * Branches that you need it to be unretired for? `f31`, `master` * Package re-review BZ URL? N/A * Any extra information? It was just retired in [RH#1741099](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741099) as ipsilon now is py3 compatible and works in f31+ in git master `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8713

4 years, 7 months

2
10
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #7662: Build once, run everywhere seems to be pretty unsupported (modularity)

by Igor Gnatenko

ignatenkobrain reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue Today we've encountered issue that if your modulemd contains something like ```yaml - buildrequires: platform: [f29] requires: platform: [] ``` MBS doesn't tag it properly into f28-* because it checks for buildrequires and not for requires. Which is wrong: https://pagure.io/fm-orchestrator/issue/974 However, @puiterwijk mentioned that bodhi doesn't support this either because it would pick first tag instead of creating updates for multiple ones. It seems that bodhi would need to change some core parts for this. I'm submitting this ticket just to make sure that work is scoped and if can't be completed before F29 bodhi activation point, could be workarounded. * When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) F29 Bodhi activation point. * When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) When modularity dies. * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? One of the main use-cases for modularity doesn't work. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7662

4 years, 7 months

8
16
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #8676: EPEL 7 - package versions out of sync between architectures

by Mattias Ellert

ellert reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` * Describe the issue The aarch64 architecture is not up to date w.r.t. the other architectures. This causes differences in how packages are built, and builds - even though they are successful - are rejected due to that noarch subpackages differ between architectures. See e.g. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/root?collection=epel7 https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/nordugrid-arc?collection=e... In one case above different versions of rpm (4.11.3-35.el7 vs 4.11.3-40.el7) result differences in autogenerated perl dependencies. * When do you need this? (YYYY/MM/DD) As soon as possisble * When is this no longer needed or useful? (YYYY/MM/DD) When RHEL 7 is EOL * If we cannot complete your request, what is the impact? The affected noarch packages could possibly be converted to arch-dependent packages. But it would be inconsistent and waste disk space. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8676

4 years, 7 months

5
8
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

rel-eng August 2019