RPM: build with sequoia for F43+ #27336
Merged
+12
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Lokesh Mandvekar <lsm5@redhat.com>
openshift-ci
bot
added
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
Member
Author
|
podman-sequoia should ideally go into containers-common as a common dependency, but I think that's best left for Fedora 44 release, when F42 will be EOL and sequoia will be used on all Fedoras. |
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
Member
Author
|
@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL |
Contributor
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: lsm5, Luap99 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
RPM changes following up on #26618
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?