Bug 2212302
Summary: | Need xcb-util-cursor and dev packages in the default RHEL 9 repo | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Reporter: | Liang Qi <cavendish.qi+fedora> |
Component: | distribution | Assignee: | Olivier Fourdan <ofourdan> |
Status: | CLOSED MIGRATED | QA Contact: | Release Test Team <release-test-team-automation> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 9.3 | CC: | alanm, amike, bodavis, brclark, casantos, cavendish.qi+fedora, csoriano, jgrulich, jwboyer, jwright, mkielian, mkolbas, ndegraef, ofourdan, pandrade, sbarcomb, tpopela |
Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | FutureFeature, MigratedToJIRA, Reopened, Triaged |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2023-09-11 15:04:52 UTC | Type: | Story |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 2238281, 2238273 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Liang Qi
2023-06-05 08:41:05 UTC
See also the original request in Qt Project, https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-113647 . Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 does not offer the Qt6 stack, and has no plans to add it at this time. We would suggest using the EPEL repository for xcb-util-cursor and Qt6. If a Red Hat Enterprise Linux customer needs Qt6, please file a customer portal case so we can track and manage the request correctly. This request was already pre-approved internally by Carlos and members of sst_gpu. (In reply to Tomas Popela from comment #3) > This request was already pre-approved internally by Carlos and members of > sst_gpu. Just to clarify Tomas comment, we're open to evaluate inclusion of packages in certain repositories (which ones TBD), but we still need internal discussion after we receive an official request. I think having an official customer request is a good first step, but we still didn't go through the internal evaluation process. Apologies if that was misinterpreted on my side. Issue migration from Bugzilla to Jira is in process at this time. This will be the last message in Jira copied from the Bugzilla bug. This BZ has been automatically migrated to the issues.redhat.com Red Hat Issue Tracker. All future work related to this report will be managed there. Due to differences in account names between systems, some fields were not replicated. Be sure to add yourself to Jira issue's "Watchers" field to continue receiving updates and add others to the "Need Info From" field to continue requesting information. To find the migrated issue, look in the "Links" section for a direct link to the new issue location. The issue key will have an icon of 2 footprints next to it, and begin with "RHEL-" followed by an integer. You can also find this issue by visiting https://issues.redhat.com/issues/?jql= and searching the "Bugzilla Bug" field for this BZ's number, e.g. a search like: "Bugzilla Bug" = 1234567 In the event you have trouble locating or viewing this issue, you can file an issue by sending mail to rh-issues. You can also visit https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570 for general account information. |