February 2017 - rpmfusion-developers

by Nicolas Chauvet

Hello, FYI, there are several tools available to check ABI compatibility for a library. Unfortunately, the process to verify this compatibility seems to be unclear to some package maintainers. Please verify that the ABI is compatible before to issue an update on stable branches as per the Fedora Update policy https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy Here is a analysis done using libabigail (dnf install libabigail): fedabipkgdiff --server http://koji.rpmfusion.org/kojihub --topdir http://koji.rpmfusion.org/kojifiles NVR NVR Thx -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

7 years, 9 months

2
3
0 / 0

[Bug 4285] Review request: telegram-desktop - Telegram Desktop official client

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4285 --- Comment #16 from Vitaly Zaitsev <vitaly(a)easycoding.org> --- Updated to 1.0.12. SPEC: https://github.com/xvitaly/tgbuild/raw/master/telegram-desktop.spec SRPM: http://koji.russianfedora.pro/kojifiles/packages/telegram-desktop/1.0.12/... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

7 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

what rpmmacros are recommend when rebuilding xorg-drv-nvidia

by Knut Jørgen Bjuland

I have rebuilt xorg-drv-nvidia on my computer, but I am getting missing libglx.so. I believe this is caused by an error in my rpmmacros. I have this rpmmacros %_topdir %(echo $HOME)/rpmbuild %__arch_install_post \ [ "%{buildarch}" = "noarch" ] || QA_CHECK_RPATHS=1 ; \ case "${QA_CHECK_RPATHS:-}" in [1yY]*) /usr/lib/rpm/check-rpaths ;; esac \ /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot Are there any command that I should add in order to build xorg-drv-nvidia correctly. I have rebuild because I updated to nvidia 378.13.

7 years, 10 months

2
1
0 / 0

Re: [moc] Rebuild for GCC 7

by Nicolas Chauvet

Can you please hold on a little, I will handle the mass rebuild when I will be sure that the packages from fedora will be pushed into the repos. Thx 2017-02-13 18:54 GMT+01:00 Antonio <sagitter(a)rpmfusion.org>: > commit 51364c554bdb610b0a4b3e78810e5fc89349feb8 > Author: sagitter <sagitter(a)fedoraproject.org> > Date: Mon Feb 13 18:53:52 2017 +0100 > > Rebuild for GCC 7 > > moc.spec | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > --- > diff --git a/moc.spec b/moc.spec > index 1c765f8..cd019b2 100644 > --- a/moc.spec > +++ b/moc.spec > @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ > Name: moc > Summary: Music on Console - Console audio player for Linux/UNIX > Version: 2.6 > -Release: 0.15.alpha3%{?dist} > +Release: 0.16.alpha3%{?dist} > License: GPLv2+ and GPLv3+ > URL: http://moc.daper.net > > @@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/moc/decoder_plugins/*.la > %{_libdir}/%{name}/ > > %changelog > +* Mon Feb 13 2017 Antonio Trande <sagitter(a)fedoraproject.org> - 2.6-0.16.alpha3 > +- Rebuild for GCC 7 > + > * Wed Nov 16 2016 Antonio Trande <sagitter(a)fedoraproject.org> - 2.6-0.15.alpha3 > - Update to alpha3 > > _______________________________________________ > rpmfusion-commits mailing list -- rpmfusion-commits(a)lists.rpmfusion.org > To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-commits-leave(a)lists.rpmfusion.org -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

7 years, 10 months

2
1
0 / 0

[Bug 4285] Review request: telegram-desktop - Telegram Desktop official client

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4285 --- Comment #15 from Vitaly Zaitsev <vitaly(a)easycoding.org> --- (In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #14) > Is there an up-to-date package available for review? Yes. SPEC: https://github.com/xvitaly/tgbuild/raw/master/telegram-desktop.spec SRPM: http://koji.russianfedora.pro/kojifiles/packages/telegram-desktop/1.0.6/2... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

7 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 4285] Review request: telegram-desktop - Telegram Desktop official client

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4285 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dominik(a)greysector.net --- Comment #14 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net> --- (In reply to Vitaly Zaitsev from comment #13) > Updated to version 0.10.19. > > I think now it support exported CXXFLAGS even without patches: > > > cc1plus: warning: /home/builder/rpmbuild/BUILD/tdesktop-0.10.19/out/Release/Telegram_pch/stdafx.h.gch/.c++: not used because `_FORTIFY_SOURCE' is defined [-Winvalid-pch] Is there an up-to-date package available for review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

7 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Announce] RPM Fusion for EL is restored - EL7 support started

by Nicolas Chauvet

I'm please to announce that the RPM Fusion support for Enterprise Linux (RHEL,CentOS,SL) has been restored. The new Koji infra is now able to build packages for EL as free and nonfree repos (for some time already). Now it's possible for the packages built there to be pushed into the mirrors. Thx Xavier Bachelot, Orion Poplawski and others for heading the rebuilt of EL7 packages. You can find the related rpmfusion{free,nonfree}-release on the updated configuration page: https://rpmfusion.org/Configuration At this time the content is still located in the testing repository for EL7, the planis to move them from testing to stable in one or two weeks from now. While bootstrapping the EL7 repo, we've tried to look at existing work, specially from the nux repo. Unfortunately we haven't received any direct help from this contributor. So if you feel like some of your work depends on anything not yet available in RPM Fusion for EL. Please consider joining http://rpmfusion.org/Contributors. We welcome any contributors that enjoy working with others. Some packages rely on the EPEL repository to be available. Because of that, our release rpm have a mandatory requires for epel-release. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL For the record EL6 repo is provided as i686 and x86_64 whereas EL7 is only provided as x86_64 at this time. This lead to an issue with multilib packages in our infra (same as EPEL). So here is the possible workaround: If there is no specific arched dependencies (either binary only or because of limited BR) The best way is to build the same package on el6, I will also tag the build on el7, so both i686 and x86_64 build from el6 will be available on el7. This is what I expect to use for libtxc_dxtn (and steam eventually). As usual, if there is any issue, please report bugs into our https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org (choose EPEL component in our bugzilla) On a side note, given EL5 support will end in two months from now, it's unlikely that we will do any changes there anyway. -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

7 years, 10 months

4
4
0 / 0

FOSDEM this week-end

by Nicolas Chauvet

Just to inform the list that I will be at FOSDEM this week-end in Bruxelles. If you want to meet there, feel free to contact me. Thx and enjoy! -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

7 years, 10 months

3
2
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers February 2017