Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120211 changes

[Johannes Lips]

What's the reason pyorbit is orphaned and deprecated? It was not part of 
the recent mass orphaning and is a dep for many packages.
I just would like to know if it's worth reviving it since one of my 
packages is indirectly depending on it and now refuses to build in rawhide.

Thanks

johannes
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[mike cloaked]

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/2011-linuxquestions-org-members-choice-awards-95/desktop-environment-of-the-year-919888/

Shows an interesting result in terms of DE popularity - though given
the many discussions not only on Fedora lists but on other lists for
other distros also I am not really that surprised to see which are the
top few in the poll.

-- 
mike c
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Fedora Studio

[lakshminaras2...@gmail.com]

Hi
I can take up jmeters ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789251 )

I have xcftools for review. This package was recently deprecated and I am
reviving it for phatch. Here is the review request
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789660

On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Brendan Jones
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I have a dream ... that one day we will have a Fedora Audio spin. At the
> moment most Fedora audio users rely heavily on the Planet CCRMA repository
> for many of their audio packages. Fernando has has spent countless hours
> maintaining this repository (thanks!) but If any kind of Studio/audio spin
> is going to be realized we need to move the bulk of these packages into
> mainline Fedora.
>
> There is no proposal as yet for this spin, as there is still so much work
> to be done. I would be very surprised if this could be completed by F18 -
> however there are also some really exciting developments in the Linux audio
> world, whose releases should really coincide with this effort here
> (Ardour3/Ingen/SuperCollider).
>
> Below is a list of some of the packages that I've submitted for review and
> would be more than happy to swap - this is just a beginning there are many
> more to come. Maintainers/co-maintainers are more than welcome / actively
> encouraged.
>
> Also listed are packages pertaining to the new LV2 stack - an exciting
> opensource audio framework that is proving to be a shining light in the
> future of Linux audio.
>
> CCRMA
> 788718 clalsadrv - An ALSA driver C++ library (most of the following
> depend on this one)
> 789255 ebumeter  - Loudness measurement according to
>   EBU-R128
> 789251 jmeters   - Multichannel audio level meter
> 789249 jkmeter   - Horizontal or vertical bar-graph audio
>   levels meter
> 789240 freqtweak - Realtime audio frequency spectral
>   manipulation
> 789059 jaaa  - JACK and ALSA Audio Analyzer
> 789055 japa  - JACK and ALSA Perceptual Analyser
> 789385 ambdec- an ambiosonics decoder
> 789390 aeolus- aeolus organ synthesizer
> 789391 aeolus-stops - aeolus presets
>
> LV2
> 788717 lv2-ir- An LV2 impulse response reverb plugin
> 784605 lv2-instance-access
> - An LV2 audio plug-in extension (part of the spec)
> 783825 suil  - A lightweight C library for loading and wrapping
>   LV2 plugin UIs
> 789386 lilv  - An LV2 Resource Description Framework Library
>
> My packages awaiting review can be found here [1]
>
> cheers
>
> Brendan
>
> [1]
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/**buglist.cgi?query_format=**
> advanced&classification=**Fedora&product=Fedora&**
> component=Package%20Review&**bug_status=NEW&emailreporter1=**
> 1&emailtype1=substring&email1=**brendan.jones.it%40gmail.com
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/devel




-- 
Regards
Lakshmi Narasimhan T V
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Should we be using Bohdi yet for branched?

[Bruno Wolff III]

It doesn't look like Bohdi isn't set up for branched yet. I thought we had
made the switch over at essentially the same time we branched the source
repositories in the past. Also it looks like bugzilla hasn't been updated
yet to allow f17 as a distro version.

It looks like branched package updates are getting pulled in so it isn't
a big deal right now, but as well get to alpha freeze it's going to be
a problem.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Heads-up: Twisted-12.0.0 landing in rawhide

[Julian Sikorski]

Dear all,

I have just built python-twisted* 12.0.0 for rawhide. Please check if 
everything still works as intended.


Regards,
Julian

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: serious conflicts between python pks installed via yum vs pip

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Sat, 2012-02-11 at 13:52 +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:
> c) If we want to have as many Python packages packaged in RPMs (the 
> terminology is going to kill me soon) do we have some pip2spec (in the
> same manner as there is cpan2spec)? 

Reading this I wrote that: https://github.com/pypingou/pypi2spec
It is still pretty rough and far from polish but it does the basis
things (with the exception of retrieving the License information for
which I'm thinking that I'll have to parse the setup.py).

Hope this can help,
Pierre
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Should we be using Bohdi yet for branched?

[Thomas Spura]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Bruno Wolff III  wrote:
> It doesn't look like Bohdi isn't set up for branched yet.

http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2012-February/000889.html

On Feb 14 will be the "use bodhi and do updates" switch.

Greetings,
Tom
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Should we be using Bohdi yet for branched?

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 16:43:47 +0100,
  Thomas Spura  wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Bruno Wolff III  wrote:
> > It doesn't look like Bohdi isn't set up for branched yet.
> 
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel-announce/2012-February/000889.html
> 
> On Feb 14 will be the "use bodhi and do updates" switch.

Thanks. I should have noticed that.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[Genes MailLists]

On 02/12/2012 06:19 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/2011-linuxquestions-org-members-choice-awards-95/desktop-environment-of-the-year-919888/
> 
> Shows an interesting result in terms of DE popularity - though given
> the many discussions not only on Fedora lists but on other lists for
> other distros also I am not really that surprised to see which are the
> top few in the poll.
> 


  Interesting poll - of course some will jump on it as a non-scientific
and why it's inadequate because it either is too broad an audience or
too narrow .. :-) Or perhaps with only 600+ participants the std error
may be too high (what is it anyway if one makes reasonable
distributional assumptions for the poll takers .. stats quiz :-) ) ..

   however it jives exactly with my own experience where everyone I know
dropped gnome shell and moved to either KDE or xfce (not without
grumbling) .. of course my experience is def too small a sample size :-)

  While it may make sense to make KDE the default DE for fedora - I
suspect that this cannot happen in fedora due to pressures from the
large number of gnome devs associated with Fedora - or could it? Should it?

  I wonder if moving Gnome shell as a tablet spin and making KDE the
default laptop/desktop DE would have been a really smart move. Is it too
late? Perhaps we all really want a phone DE on our 42 inch desktops with
a touch screen that somehow doesn't cause muscle strain ...

 g
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[mike cloaked]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Genes MailLists  wrote:

>  Interesting poll - of course some will jump on it as a non-scientific
> and why it's inadequate because it either is too broad an audience or
> too narrow .. :-) Or perhaps with only 600+ participants the std error
> may be too high (what is it anyway if one makes reasonable
> distributional assumptions for the poll takers .. stats quiz :-) ) ..
>
>   however it jives exactly with my own experience where everyone I know
> dropped gnome shell and moved to either KDE or xfce (not without
> grumbling) .. of course my experience is def too small a sample size :-)
>
>  While it may make sense to make KDE the default DE for fedora - I
> suspect that this cannot happen in fedora due to pressures from the
> large number of gnome devs associated with Fedora - or could it? Should it?
>
>  I wonder if moving Gnome shell as a tablet spin and making KDE the
> default laptop/desktop DE would have been a really smart move. Is it too
> late? Perhaps we all really want a phone DE on our 42 inch desktops with
> a touch screen that somehow doesn't cause muscle strain ...
>

Yes it is a very small sample of self-selecting llinux enthusiasts who
were prepared to enter their opinion on that site (as you say of order
600) - however it just might not be too far from general opinion on a
much wider basis if the rumours one hears are anything like
representative. I know this might be considered trolling but that is
not the intention - there surely must be some level of concern that
the things that have been chosen for primary support and development
seem not to have the majority support of users and some of them could
be influential in many ways.

If that is the case then there is a risk that an ostrich like
head-in-sand approach to the views of users may mean that the way
things are planned for the future could lead to a migration away from
Fedora to other distributions which could inflict lasting damage to
Fedora and later Redhat. If I was a senior leader in Fedora I might
want to know much more about what the general feelings were concerning
this issue since the future development direction of where the effort
in desktops should be concentrated could depend on it, and of course
we all know it is impossible to measure with any real certainty.
Maybe I am wrong completely - and Fedora has made all the right
decisions all along and the new projects will just need a few bugs
sorting out and all will be well with superb performance at the next
GA for F17.  I do hope that this will be the case.

Nevertheless there has been a lot of disagreement on several key
projects given several extremely long-running threads on the lists in
recent weeks, which is in itself potentially damaging - and it would
be more valuable if a future path was chosen and agreed by the
majority that had more general consensus in support for which way to
move ahead. That might be none to easy - but dissent in the ranks
extended over a long period of time could cause difficulties. I would
not like to see Fedora lose general support but the decisions on which
version of grub, which main default desktop, which default daemon
startup system and so on, is very important to people who will be
using the distribution on a day-to-day basis - and some proportion of
those day-to-day users are the test team on which development
crucially depends. It is really important to have the significant
majority on-board with the way things are moving.

-- 
mike c
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[Jos Vos]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:35:17AM -0500, Genes MailLists wrote:

>   Interesting poll - of course some will jump on it as a non-scientific
> and why it's inadequate because it either is too broad an audience or
> too narrow .. :-) Or perhaps with only 600+ participants the std error
> may be too high (what is it anyway if one makes reasonable
> distributional assumptions for the poll takers .. stats quiz :-) ) ..

Right, this poll is most probably in no way representative for the
majority of the Fedora end-users.

>however it jives exactly with my own experience where everyone I know
> dropped gnome shell and moved to either KDE or xfce (not without
> grumbling) .. of course my experience is def too small a sample size :-)

I have the same experience (and I moved to Xfce myself too), but most
people I know are long-term UNIX/Linux developers.

>   While it may make sense to make KDE the default DE for fedora - I
> suspect that this cannot happen in fedora due to pressures from the
> large number of gnome devs associated with Fedora - or could it? Should it?
> 
>   I wonder if moving Gnome shell as a tablet spin and making KDE the
> default laptop/desktop DE would have been a really smart move. Is it too
> late? Perhaps we all really want a phone DE on our 42 inch desktops with
> a touch screen that somehow doesn't cause muscle strain ...

KDE is pretty nice these days, but IMHO way too complex to use/configure
for the average end-user.

-- 
--Jos Vos 
--X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV   |   Phone: +31 20 6938364
--Amsterdam, The Netherlands| Fax: +31 20 6948204
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Mike Chambers]

On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:08 +, Branched Report wrote:
> Compose started at Sun Feb 12 08:15:07 UTC 2012

Think this compose worked as now see all the images/efi and everything
else got created.  Gonna try a test install to see what happens.

-- 
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY

"Best little town on Earth!"

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

[Steve Grubb]

On Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:57:40 PM Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 11:41:48AM -0500, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 11, 2012 11:32:09 AM Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 10:42:53AM -0500, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > > > On Monday, February 06, 2012 09:31:50 AM Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> > > > > Ruby 1.9.3 has finally made it into Rawhide, there are still few
> > > > > more packages that need to be built, but otherwise the transitions
> > > > > was successful.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Please note again, that soname has been bumped to 1.9.1 and license
> > > > > is changed from GPLv2 or Ruby to BSD or Ruby, as already
> > > > > announced.
> > > > 
> > > > Would have been nice if this project had kicked off rebuilds like
> > > > other soname bump projects do. :)  I'm finding a problem with my
> > > > package. According to the
> > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby guidelines, I should be
> > > > doing the ruby_sitearch macro. But this seems to point to
> > > > /usr/local/lib64/ruby/site_ruby/ and I would have expected it to be
> > > > somewhere else like /usr/lib64/ruby/...
> > > > 
> > > > Did this really change to /usr/local/lib64/ruby/? The "local" part is
> > > > throwing off my package.
> > > 
> > > The new ruby package changed the rpm macros before the new packaging
> > > guidelines for ruby were (they're still pending but hopefully will be
> > > approved by next Wed) approved.  So I believe they want to change from
> > > %ruby_site* to %ruby_vendor*.  This portion of the new Guidelines isn't
> > > controversial to the FPC (FPC did implicitly assume that this change
> > > was arrived at via the whole Ruby SIG rather than just the ruby pakage
> > > maintainer, though -- if this is in error, please let us know) so it's
> > > not ideal but seems reasonable to update your package to use
> > > %ruby_vendorarchdir now that they've pushed out a package that uses
> > > these new macros.
> > 
> > Normally you have to define that in your spec file. What's the magic text
> > to define that? Also, I like keep my spec file as identical as possible
> > between all Fedora releases. Would I have any problem on F16/15 using
> > the same macro?
> 
> I haven't looked into the rawhide packages where this is implemented (and
> the macro files themselves weren't posted to the ticket where the FPC is
> reviewing the new Guidelines) so I can't tell you 100% for sure.
> 
> I'm guessing that the answer is going to be no.  But you may be able to
> work around that with:
> 
> %{!?ruby_vendorlibdir: %global ruby_vendorlibdir DEFINITIONHERE}
> 
> Note that I've just been reviewing the latest additions to the draft
> guidelines and some of the information there may lead to an even more major
> overhaul of the guidelines before they go final.
> 
> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/134

I guess I could just disable building ruby bindings and no longer support that 
language. Would anyone miss libprelude bindings for ruby? Not sure if there is 
a 
fedora process for dropping support of a language,

-Steve
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Mike Chambers]

On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:25 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:08 +, Branched Report wrote:
> > Compose started at Sun Feb 12 08:15:07 UTC 2012
> 
> Think this compose worked as now see all the images/efi and everything
> else got created.  Gonna try a test install to see what happens.
> 

OK , looked through the sub dir's and don't see a netinstall.iso or
boot.iso in the images dir like in F16 and later trees.  These still
missing/still need to be created or is there another method now to
create an ISO to do nfs installs and such?

-- 
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY

"Best little town on Earth!"

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Mike Chambers]

On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:46 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:25 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:08 +, Branched Report wrote:
> > > Compose started at Sun Feb 12 08:15:07 UTC 2012
> > 
> > Think this compose worked as now see all the images/efi and everything
> > else got created.  Gonna try a test install to see what happens.
> > 
> 
> OK , looked through the sub dir's and don't see a netinstall.iso or
> boot.iso in the images dir like in F16 and later trees.  These still
> missing/still need to be created or is there another method now to
> create an ISO to do nfs installs and such?

And lemme reply to my own question...I checked i386 side and it does
have the boot.iso but x86_64 does not (also my system).  So guessing
64bit side failed to create one for one problem or another?


-- 
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY

"Best little town on Earth!"

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:46:18 -0600
Mike Chambers  wrote:

> On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:25 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:08 +, Branched Report wrote:
> > > Compose started at Sun Feb 12 08:15:07 UTC 2012
> > 
> > Think this compose worked as now see all the images/efi and
> > everything else got created.  Gonna try a test install to see what
> > happens.
> > 
> 
> OK , looked through the sub dir's and don't see a netinstall.iso or
> boot.iso in the images dir like in F16 and later trees.  These still
> missing/still need to be created or is there another method now to
> create an ISO to do nfs installs and such?

Looks like the 32bit one worked fine, but the 64bit one failed: 

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/sbin/mkefiboot", line 105, in 
mkmacboot(opt.bootdir, opt.outfile, opt.label, opt.icon)
  File "/usr/sbin/mkefiboot", line 35, in mkmacboot
mkhfsimg(None, outfile, label=label, graft=graft)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/imgutils.py", line
292, in mkhfsimg mkfsargs=["-v", label], graft=graft)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/imgutils.py", line
272, in mkfsimage with Mount(loopdev, mountargs) as mnt:
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/imgutils.py", line
190, in __enter__ self.mnt = mount(self.dev, self.opts, self.mnt)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/imgutils.py", line
101, in mount check_call(mount + [dev, mnt])
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/subprocess.py", line 511, in check_call
raise CalledProcessError(retcode, cmd)
subprocess.CalledProcessError: Command '['mount', '/dev/loop0',
'/tmp/lorax.imgutils.OEZeQF']' returned non-zero exit status 32
template command error in x86.tmpl: runcmd mkefiboot --label=ANACONDA
--apple
--icon=/tmp/treebuild.20120212/output/work/x86_64/installroot/usr/share/pixmaps/bootloader/fedora.icns
 /tmp/treebuild.20120212/output/17/x86_64/os/EFI/BOOT 
/tmp/treebuild.20120212/output/17/x86_64/os/images/macboot.img
NameError: global name 'CalledProcessError' is not defined Traceback
(most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/pungi", line 226, in 
main() File "/usr/bin/pungi", line 126, in main
mypungi.doBuildinstall()
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pypungi/__init__.py", line
849, in doBuildinstall workdir=workdir, outputdir=outputdir)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/__init__.py", line
241, in run treebuilder.build()
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/treebuilder.py", line
195, in build self._runner.run(templatefile, kernels=self.kernels)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/ltmpl.py", line 135,
in run self._run(commands)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/ltmpl.py", line 154,
in _run f(*args)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pylorax/ltmpl.py", line 377,
in runcmd except CalledProcessError as e:
NameError: global name 'CalledProcessError' is not defined

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Mike Chambers]

On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:54 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:46:18 -0600
> Mike Chambers  wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:25 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:08 +, Branched Report wrote:
> > > > Compose started at Sun Feb 12 08:15:07 UTC 2012
> > > 
> > > Think this compose worked as now see all the images/efi and
> > > everything else got created.  Gonna try a test install to see what
> > > happens.
> > > 
> > 
> > OK , looked through the sub dir's and don't see a netinstall.iso or
> > boot.iso in the images dir like in F16 and later trees.  These still
> > missing/still need to be created or is there another method now to
> > create an ISO to do nfs installs and such?
> 
> Looks like the 32bit one worked fine, but the 64bit one failed: 

Noticed that after I checked both dirs, as did see boot.iso in 386 but
not 64bit.


-- 
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY

"Best little town on Earth!"

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:25 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: 
> On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:08 +, Branched Report wrote:
> > Compose started at Sun Feb 12 08:15:07 UTC 2012
> 
> Think this compose worked as now see all the images/efi and everything
> else got created.  Gonna try a test install to see what happens.

Hi, Can you please tel me where did you see the composes ? , I want a
new one to begin a new rawhide system. 

on http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ , don't find
any that not failed. 

thks, 
  

-- 
Sérgio M. B.

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:09:11 +
Sérgio Basto  wrote:

> On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 11:25 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: 
> > On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:08 +, Branched Report wrote:
> > > Compose started at Sun Feb 12 08:15:07 UTC 2012
> > 
> > Think this compose worked as now see all the images/efi and
> > everything else got created.  Gonna try a test install to see what
> > happens.
> 
> Hi, Can you please tel me where did you see the composes ? , I want a
> new one to begin a new rawhide system. 
> 
> on http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ , don't find
> any that not failed. 

Those are live spins... 

the rawhide and branched composes logs can be found at: 

http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/rawhide/
and
http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/

also the rel-eng list: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/rel-eng
gets the output of the cron jobs that generate rawhide and branched, so
you can see the full output in email. Usually it's pretty boring, but
it's pretty nice to see when something goes wrong. 

PS: If someone wants something to do, I'd be happy to provide the
script that fires off the live builds, and you could add it to the
buildbranched script in rel-eng git so they get made at the same time
in an automated way. :) 

Hope that helps, 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: serious conflicts between python pks installed via yum vs pip

[Neal Becker]

Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 09:00:55AM -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
>> 
>> I always try out packages first via easy_install or pip (after checking they
>> are not already available via yum).
>> 
>> Yes, I could try things via virtualenv, but I'm just not in that habit - and
>> I suspect many others are in the same boat.
>> 
> For this use case, why are you installing into
> /usr/lib{64,}/python2.7/site-packages ?
> 
> ~/.local/lib/python2.7/site-packages sounds like it would suit this use much
> better.
> 
> For pip, the command line to do that is:
> 
> pip-python --user PACKAGENAME
> 
> (I think there's an easy_install equivalent but I try to avoid setuptools
> stuff when I can :-)
> 
> I believe that that directory is set by upstream python so it should work
> out of the box on Fedora and other systems.
> 
> -Toshio

That sounds like a good suggestion - thanks!

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[Evandro Giovanini]

A web poll from linuxquestions.org? Surely you can't be serious with
this mail?

--
Evandro

Em Dom, 2012-02-12 às 11:35 -0500, Genes MailLists escreveu:
> On 02/12/2012 06:19 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> > http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/2011-linuxquestions-org-members-choice-awards-95/desktop-environment-of-the-year-919888/
> > 
> > Shows an interesting result in terms of DE popularity - though given
> > the many discussions not only on Fedora lists but on other lists for
> > other distros also I am not really that surprised to see which are the
> > top few in the poll.
> > 
> 
> 
>   Interesting poll - of course some will jump on it as a non-scientific
> and why it's inadequate because it either is too broad an audience or
> too narrow .. :-) Or perhaps with only 600+ participants the std error
> may be too high (what is it anyway if one makes reasonable
> distributional assumptions for the poll takers .. stats quiz :-) ) ..
> 
>however it jives exactly with my own experience where everyone I know
> dropped gnome shell and moved to either KDE or xfce (not without
> grumbling) .. of course my experience is def too small a sample size :-)
> 
>   While it may make sense to make KDE the default DE for fedora - I
> suspect that this cannot happen in fedora due to pressures from the
> large number of gnome devs associated with Fedora - or could it? Should it?
> 
>   I wonder if moving Gnome shell as a tablet spin and making KDE the
> default laptop/desktop DE would have been a really smart move. Is it too
> late? Perhaps we all really want a phone DE on our 42 inch desktops with
> a touch screen that somehow doesn't cause muscle strain ...
> 
>  g


-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 10:54 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> template command error in x86.tmpl: 
runcmd mkefiboot --label=ANACONDA
--apple
--icon=/tmp/treebuild.20120212/output/work/x86_64/installroot/usr/share/pixmaps/bootloader/fedora.icns
 /tmp/treebuild.20120212/output/17/x86_64/os/EFI/BOOT 
/tmp/treebuild.20120212/output/17/x86_64/os/images/macboot.img

the i386 doesn't have EFI/  dir , so though this command just run on
x86_64, unfortunately before make boot.iso .

Best regards,
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[Kevin Kofler]

Genes MailLists wrote:
>   While it may make sense to make KDE the default DE for fedora - I
> suspect that this cannot happen in fedora due to pressures from the
> large number of gnome devs associated with Fedora - or could it? Should
> it?

IMHO, not only should the KDE spin become the default, but the Xfce spin 
should replace the GNOME spin (which of course needs to stop calling itself 
the "Desktop spin") on the mirrors. GNOME is no longer a major desktop! Xfce 
is now the second most popular desktop after KDE Plasma Desktop.

>   I wonder if moving Gnome shell as a tablet spin and making KDE the
> default laptop/desktop DE would have been a really smart move. Is it too
> late? Perhaps we all really want a phone DE on our 42 inch desktops with
> a touch screen that somehow doesn't cause muscle strain ...

For a tablet spin, Plasma Active makes a lot more sense than gnome-shell:
http://plasma-active.org/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PlasmaActive

Plasma Active is actually designed for tablets, whereas the gnome-shell 
developers denied on more than one occasion that tablets were their intended 
target, even though its bizarre design happens to work out better for 
tablets than for normal computers.

Kevin Kofler

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[Olav Vitters]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:19:45AM +, mike cloaked wrote:
> http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/2011-linuxquestions-org-members-choice-awards-95/desktop-environment-of-the-year-919888/

This one had 12000 votes apparently:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/slideshow/readers-choice-2011?page=3
http://www.linuxjournal.com/slideshow/readers-choice-2011?page=44

Different outcome, but still.. just a web poll.

-- 
Regards,
Olav
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Linux Questions Desktop Environment of the Year - interesting result

[Mark Bidewell]

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Kevin Kofler  wrote:
> Genes MailLists wrote:
>>   While it may make sense to make KDE the default DE for fedora - I
>> suspect that this cannot happen in fedora due to pressures from the
>> large number of gnome devs associated with Fedora - or could it? Should
>> it?
>
> IMHO, not only should the KDE spin become the default, but the Xfce spin
> should replace the GNOME spin (which of course needs to stop calling itself
> the "Desktop spin") on the mirrors. GNOME is no longer a major desktop! Xfce
> is now the second most popular desktop after KDE Plasma Desktop.
>
>>   I wonder if moving Gnome shell as a tablet spin and making KDE the
>> default laptop/desktop DE would have been a really smart move. Is it too
>> late? Perhaps we all really want a phone DE on our 42 inch desktops with
>> a touch screen that somehow doesn't cause muscle strain ...
>
> For a tablet spin, Plasma Active makes a lot more sense than gnome-shell:
> http://plasma-active.org/
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PlasmaActive
>
> Plasma Active is actually designed for tablets, whereas the gnome-shell
> developers denied on more than one occasion that tablets were their intended
> target, even though its bizarre design happens to work out better for
> tablets than for normal computers.
>
>        Kevin Kofler
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

The confusion in the Linux Desktop space was a big reason why I jumped
from Fedora to a Mac.  I love KDE and it would be a great default, I
just wish that the decision hadn't been made to develop KDE in such a
way as to push the graphics envelope.   While I realize by Dell B130
is old, I should be able to drag a window around without artifacts
(with or win out compositing.  Ubuntu's Unity run the best.  I feel
that a lot of effort is being put into bling for bling's sake.  On my
Mac most of the "bling" enhances usability.  I wish KDE didn't use
5-10% of my CPU at idle.  IMO, the DE should attempt to consume as few
resources as possible.

-- 
Mark Bidewell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/markbidewell
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Test-Announce] 2012-02-13 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

[Adam Williamson]

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2012-02-13
# Time: 16:00 UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net

Greetings testers!

It's Monday, and you know what that means. We don't have any
non-standard topics on the agenda this week, but I think it's best to go
ahead and have the meeting anyway, so we can discuss the F17 Alpha
status with TC2 and the big SELinux bug.

This is a reminder of the upcoming QA meeting.  Please add any topic
suggestions to the meeting wiki page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20120213

The current proposed agenda is include below.

== Proposed Agenda Topics ==
1. Previous meeting follow-up
2. Upcoming QA events
3. AutoQA update
4. Open floor 
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

___
test-announce mailing list
test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

New ETL version needed for synfig update

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

Hello,

Upstream synfig has updated ETL to  0.04.14. The new version of synfig 
and synfigstudio depend on the recent update of that package. Is it 
possible to update it?


Regards,

--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Graphic&  Web Designer
E: l...@fedoraproject.org
W: http://www.thefinalzone.net


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel