@akrenz You need to submit a Package Request and have it Accepted before sending patches for new packages: https://getsol.us/articles/packaging/request-a-package/en/

Is this needed for another package? I don't see a Package Request for this.

If this needs out-of-tree modules, I don't want to add any more of them at the moment.

I am the maintainer for glvnd. Please do not submit patches for this.

I will update Mesa to 20.X.Y when it is stable. Please do not submit further patches for Mesa.

We will update LLVM when it is stable. It's not. Please do not submit further patches for LLVM.

@sethfl These are just headers. The benefits of any changes are only realized when the libraries that use them are updated. The most important of which being Mesa which hasn't incorporated these changes yet.

@kvark Upstream no longer support SMB1 because it has not been considered secure for a long time. The server admin will need to move to a newer version of SMB. They honestly shouldn't be using SMB1 at all, this has been a known issue for over a year now.

If you actually took the time to click the Linux download link, you would see that they only offer this as a Snap package.

@frendznet ... You install snap packages yourself, on your own system. There's nothing for us to send.

In T4138#168047, @frendznet wrote:

The application has been improved since last inspection.

In T4138#168046, @frendznet wrote:

Hello
Can we please re open this Request. Its urgent as need it for work

Hmm. I don't have anything newer than Haswell on the Intel side. We might have to put testing out to the community on this one.

@Staudey I'm going to have to commandeer this release number because I can't rebuild it without rebuilding the kernels. Which I'm updating right now. Still using your patch, just sorry you won't get credit in the pspec :/

@sethfl You need to make your changes to the summary by clicking Edit Revision and updating the text.

LGTM. Thanks!

@joebonrichie Can I ask you to start looking into the new one, Neo I think it's called?

LLVM 10 isn't ready for prime-time yet, so we'll be holding off of that. I'm fine with manpages so long as it doesn't over-complicate the build and the are patterned into the correct packages.

In D8534#137065, @sethfl wrote:

@EbonJaeger @Jacalz The repository is actually mine on github. The binary comes from official site here. All I did was create a makefile for the binary and create a repo for both on github in order to make it easier to package for multiple distros. If that is against any rules though, I was unaware, and I will work on a .yml based off the upstream tarball until we get word from the devs.

Looks like you based this on an old commit since the python version changed. The Summary should include a changelog from upstream to indicate what new things users can expect in this release.

You can sent the diff without a repository existing.

Any reason you can't use the flatpak? I'm not sure this has enough traction yet to be included.

Can you please provide the output of systemctl status aa-lsm-hook?

@serebit No need to draw this out.

Let me be perfectly clear. This is a very low priority issue that you are making sound far worse than it actually is. That rule is working exactly as Josh intended when it was implemented. If something truly needs to be patched with regard to having the work eopkg in it, I can 99% guarantee that it's a patch that should probably be applied to an upstream repository and not one hosted on Phab.

Please follow-up after the next kernel upgrade.

Navi support is still pretty new in both the Kernel and Mesalib. Let's see if upgrading those helps. Please follow-up after the next kernel upgrade. Thank you!

Probably just Nautilus hogging the render thread. Nothing we can do about this without an upstream fix.

Marking as Needs More Info so that we revisit this after the next kernel upgrade.

The rule is working exactly as intended. It doesn't allow upload of any eopkg files, or files containing the word eopkg, as this should never be a requisite for a package-related patch.

Needs a maintainer and I'll allow it as an alternative to Hack for monospace fonts geared towards development. Just don't go asking for the Golang font, @JoshStrobl and I both think it's hideous :p

Probably a kernel regression.

I'll allow it if you are maintaining it @algent

Probably a kernel bug. Keep us posted after the next kernel update and we'll dig deeper if needed. Marking as "Needs More Info" for follow-up.

@solusme We only keep a certain number of releases for each package around. It's impossible to guarantee that all history operations can be rolled-back.

@Adrian-Turjak I'm not letting this in the repo until I've had a chance to work with upstream to fix how it interacts with Solus. Right now it doesn't correctly report the status of many things. If you need it for scanning remote systems, it's just Bash and can easily be run from an unpacked archive.

LGTM. Thanks!

LGTM. Thanks!

LGTM. Thanks!

LGTM. Thanks!