August 2019 - rel-eng - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[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

1 year, 5 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

1 year, 5 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

1 year, 5 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

1 year, 5 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

1 year, 5 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

1 year, 5 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

1 year, 5 months

5
8
0 / 0

[pungi-fedora] PR #755: Build Workstation ISO and Live medias for ppc64le

by John Doe

dftxbs3e opened a new pull-request against the project: `pungi-fedora` that you are following: `` Build Workstation ISO and Live medias for ppc64le `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/pungi-fedora/pull-request/755

1 year, 5 months

3
7
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #7555: permission to build livecd for minishift

by Praveen Kumar

kumarpraveen reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` I am part of minishift[0] development team and currently, we only have support for CentOS and RHEL live iso to provision Openshift locally, we also want to add support for Fedora iso so people can try the latest development around container world. As a starting point we only first try the scratch build of the iso with f28/f29/rawhide. ``` $ klist Ticket cache: KEYRING:persistent:1000:1000 Default principal: kumarpraveen(a)FEDORAPROJECT.ORG Valid starting Expires Service principal 06/08/2018 12:31:28 06/09/2018 12:28:38 HTTP/koji.fedoraproject.org(a)FEDORAPROJECT.ORG renew until 06/15/2018 12:28:32 06/08/2018 12:28:38 06/09/2018 12:28:38 krbtgt/FEDORAPROJECT.ORG(a)FEDORAPROJECT.ORG renew until 06/15/2018 12:28:32 $ koji spin-livecd --scratch minishift-fedora 1.0.0 rawhide x86_64 fedora.ks spin-livecd is deprecated and will be replaced with spin-livemedia [====================================] 100% 00:00:00 19.70 KiB 33.12 KiB/sec ActionNotAllowed: livecd permission required ``` [0] https://github.com/minishift/minishift `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7555

1 year, 5 months

5
15
0 / 0

[releng] Issue #7477: Changes for release SOP before f29

by Kevin Fenzi

kevin reported a new issue against the project: `releng` that you are following: `` This ticket will collect any changes we need to make to the release SOP that were missed in f28 but we should add in f29. We should collect them here and then close this once all of them are merged into the SOP. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7477

1 year, 5 months

5
9
0 / 0

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

rel-eng August 2019