devel August 2026

devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

87 participants
73 discussions

z3 soname bump
by Jerry James 16 Aug '26

16 Aug '26

Version 5.1 of z3 has been released and comes with an soname bump. In a week, I will build it and rebuild its reverse dependencies: - opam - prusa-slicer -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/

1 0

s390x builder outage
by Kevin Fenzi via devel-announce 16 Aug '26

16 Aug '26

Just to notify a wider audience, our s390x builders have been offline today due to a failure of a storage array. Folks have been working today to bring it back up, but the fix will require parts that need to be overnight shipped. Hopefully the machines will be back online tomorrow after the replacement is installed. Arched Builds submitted now will wait for s390x builders to be back to complete. You can watch https://www.fedorastatus.org/ and/or https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/13326 for further status. Sorry for the outage. kevin -- _______________________________________________ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedorapr… Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new

20 39

service file permissions breaking due to file 5.47 / redhat-rpm-config
by Petr Sklenar 16 Aug '26

16 Aug '26

Hi, while testing F45 Rawhide I noticed systemd complaining during boot: Configuration file /usr/lib/systemd/system/flatpak-add-fedora-repos.service is marked executable. Please remove executable permission bits. Proceeding anyway. It turns out file 5.47 now classifies .service files as application/x-wine-extension-ini instead of text/plain. This breaks brp-mangle-shebangs, which greps for text/ to find executable files without shebangs and chmod -x them. So any package using install -p without explicit -m 0644 for unit files ends up shipping them with 0755. The big ones (systemd, httpd, nginx...) set permissions explicitly, so they are unaffected. I couldn't find a better way to check this than downloading the RPMs and scanning them directly, since repodata don't include file permissions: dnf5 download --repo=rawhide --destdir /tmp/scan/ <package-list> for f in /tmp/scan/*.rpm; do rpm -qlp --dump "$f" \ | grep -E '/usr/lib/systemd/.*\.(service|socket|timer)' \ | grep '0100755 ' done On an installed system it's simpler: find /usr/lib/systemd -type f -name '*.service' -perm /111 -ls I scanned all 1160 packages that ship unit files in rawhide (x86_64 + noarch) and found 20 affected: aprsd, archlinux-keyring, asahi-battery, containernetworking-plugins, crossfire, flatpak, gnupg2 (dirmngr, gpg-agent, keyboxd), grub2-tools, ip-sentinel, liquidwar-server, Perlbal, restmbmaster, scsi-target-utils, sgx-aesm, spindown, up-imapproxy, vaultwarden, vsomeip3-routingmanager Filed bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2513643 (file) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2513837 (redhat-rpm-config) Note that these packages were built during the F45 mass rebuild, so even if file or brp-mangle-shebangs gets fixed, these 20 packages won't pick up the fix until they are rebuilt individually. RPM developers also pointed out in BZ#2512037 that relying on brp-mangle-shebangs for this is fragile anyway, and specs should just use install -m 0644. Should we file individual bugs for these 20 packages, or fix the specs directly? Either way they'll need a rebuild. I can go ahead and file the bugzilla tickets if that makes sense. -- Petr Sklenar

10 12

Extend default compiler settings to harden applications
by Manthey, Norbert 16 Aug '26

16 Aug '26

Hi all, I would like to propose hardening Fedora artifacts by extending the default compilation flags. In the past, using the flags would have prevented or revealed CVEs or logic bugs. In Amazon Linux we have been looking into changing the default compiler flags. Specifically, we looked at adding the below: -fno-strict-overflow -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks For these flags, we did not see significant changes in performance tests. We found a few packages where the additional flags caused build errors, and submitted fixed to the respective packages. What's a good process to get the flags into the redhat-rpm-config package, e.g. via a new macro that could be overriden by specific spec files in case the flags should not be used? Is there more information I should provide? Would there be another process for other flags, like -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero where there can be minor performance consequences? Best, Norbert

3 2

Self Introduction: Dirk Nehring, looking for a sponsor (VDR packages)
by Dirk Nehring 15 Aug '26

15 Aug '26

Hi everyone, My name is Dirk Nehring. I have been a Linux user since 1994 and work as a system administrator and software developer. I am the author of a video output device plugin for VDR (Video Disk Recorder) that supports VAAPI and DRM, written in C++. My repositories are here: https://github.com/dnehring7/vdr-plugin-vaapivideo. You are welcome to look into the codebase. Fedora has been my distribution of choice since its very first release, both at work and privately. I have been building my own RPMs for years, mostly around VDR — an old project, but one that still has an active user base. Some of my current packaging work is available in Copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/dnehring/vdr-plugins/ I would like to give something back to the community and become a packager for VDR and its plugins, either as maintainer or co-maintainer. Beyond that I am happy to help wherever it is useful — for example by looking into orphaned packages and doing informal reviews. There is a new package from Martin (the VDR maintainer) on bugzilla which I have reviewed, contributed code and build an alternate version. My question: do I need a sponsor before I submit my first package review request, or should I file the review first and look for a sponsor afterwards? And is anyone here willing to sponsor me? If you prefer encrypted mail, my GPG key is 69AABD838065A1DEBBA4DE541F14C2AE739A32D9. Thanks, Dirk

2 1

Orphaning yosys/nextpnr & related packages
by Gabriel L. Somlo 15 Aug '26

15 Aug '26

I'm no longer able to properly look after these packages, and having not heard back from any of my co-maintainers over the last week or so, I'm formally orphaning them in hope that they get picked up by someone who can do them justice. The list includes: - yosys: HDL compilation, synthesis, and logic optimization - recent upstream support for SystemVerilog frontend may need to be packaged as standalone RPM, to be used by yosys as a buildrequires dependency - yosyshq-abc (fork of Berkeley ABC logic optimizer and tech-mapping tool, used by yosys as a dependency, but also able to be used as a stand-alone tool) - nextpnr: place-and-route tool for Lattice FPGAs - upstream has done extensive work on supporting other FPGA models, with various degrees of RPM packageability, and it would be nice to incorporate some of that in the Fedora version - **NOTE**: I can't *formally* orphan this package as my co-maintainer is the official owner, but walking away from it nonetheless !!! - trellis: Lattice ECP5 FPGA dependency for nextpnr - icestorm: Lattice iCE40 FPGA dependency for nextpnr - python-migen: a "pythonic" HDL meta-language that elaborates to Verilog before being compiled (e.g., with Yosys) Best, --Gabriel

2 1

soname bump: girara/zathura/mupdf
by Michael J Gruber 15 Aug '26

15 Aug '26

Hi there Ankur and I are bringing the latest versions of girara/zathura/mupdf to Fedora, which involves soname bumps. In the case of girara/zathura, upstream fixes bugs on the development branch only and releases from there. We update to the latest released versions which also update some dependencies (gtk4 instead of gtk3). In the case of mupdf, upstream fixes severe bugs on the 1.28.x branch (while developing 1.29.x on master) and releases from there, always bumping soname, most of the time needlessly though. ... and that is why we have FESCO exceptions (FESCO#1255 and FESCO#3329) to bring these updates to rawhide and released, which we will do using side-tags: f46-build-side-147442 f45-build-side-147444 f44-build-side-147446 As always, I"ve been using builds with these versions from my copr for a while already (on F44). Cheers Michael-who-still-wants-a-side-tag-badge-please ;-)

1 0

Non-responsive maintainer check for aconole
by Federico Pellegrin 14 Aug '26

14 Aug '26

Hello, In accordance with the Fedora non-responsive maintainer policy, I am attempting to contact Lubomir Rintel (lkundrak) Does anyone know how to contact this package maintainer? Bug reports / merge requests have had no response. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-anytree/pull-request/1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2377452 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2490993 Non-responsive bug has been filed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2513770 Thank you, Federico

5 5

Mock v6.8 released (and mock-core-configs v45.1)
by Pavel Raiskup 14 Aug '26

14 Aug '26

Hello maintainers! I'm glad I can announce that we have a new release of Mock v6.8 (the chroot build environment manager for building RPMs). Highlights: - New `separate_check` config option to run %check as a separate rpmbuild phase, preventing %check scripts from modifying already built RPM artifacts. - New `system_monitor` plugin for collecting build-time statistics. - New `pivot_root_chroot` option that uses pivot_root(2) to allow tools requiring user namespaces (e.g. pasta/passt) inside buildroots. - Many other bugfixes and improvements. Full release notes: https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-6.8 The updated packages are in Bodhi: [Fedora 44]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-c5f7661116 [Fedora 43]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-523b9dbe11 [EPEL 10.3]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-925a061b5b [EPEL 10.2]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-8edbcb7189 [EPEL 9]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-ead66248c1 [EPEL 8]: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2026-8c77971e82 Happy building!

6 14

Orphaning evtest, evemu and some X11 utilities
by Peter Hutterer 14 Aug '26

14 Aug '26

Hi all, I've orphaned evtest (which is also unmaintained and up for grabs upstream), evemu (same) and the following X utilities: - sessreg - x11perf - xcursorgen - xeyes - xkill - xsetroot - xvidtune - xwd Please grab them if you need them. Cheers, Peter

2 1

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel August 2026