Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120211 changes

[Johannes Lips]

Alright to answer my own question: It was already orphaned in the last
round before f16. So it's probably worth reviving!
But I think the associated workload with reviving a package could be
lowered, just to make it easier for contributors!

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Johannes Lips  wrote:

> 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

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

[Andrew Haley]

On 02/10/2012 07:12 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>> Given all that, it seems only logical to conclude that Fedora really
>> _isn't_ primarily intended for use as a production server.
>
> Bingo, which is why it's important for people like me who do it to
> realize what they're getting into and take some responsibility for
> that choice, like with any other technological choice.  If you aren't
> will to either take downtime for Anaconda or preupgrade, or do lots of
> fresh installs, or mess with yum upgrades, use RHEL/CO/SL/Etc.  Not
> for the feint of heart, and I sure as heck don't do it at work. :)

For what it's worth, I *do* use it at work and on the whole
I have very little trouble.  Yes, upgrading can be a PITA, but
it's usually just a few hours.  I don't mind.

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

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

[Matej Cepl]

On 13.2.2012 01:12, Kevin Kofler wrote:

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.


Kevin?

I am usually close to being on your side in most flamewars here, but 
changing the release policy based on the vote of 627 people on a random 
website? Really?


Best,

Matěj

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

Re: /usrmove?

[Michael Schroeder]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the biggest compat by just symlinking
> /bin to /usr/bin?

Yeah, that's the end goal, but we need rpm to support replacing
directories with symlinks first. Thus we don't rush the change.

Cheers,
  Michael.

-- 
Michael Schroeder   m...@suse.de
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH,  GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

File CGI-Application-Structured-Tools-0.015.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by eseyman

[Emmanuel Seyman]

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for 
perl-CGI-Application-Structured-Tools:

72cb59cfe6d6c78d1cb1fc77aaa7ecca  CGI-Application-Structured-Tools-0.015.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Re: /usrmove?

[drago01]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Michael Schroeder  wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the biggest compat by just symlinking
>> /bin to /usr/bin?
>
> Yeah, that's the end goal, but we need rpm to support replacing
> directories with symlinks first. Thus we don't rush the change.

That's unlikely to ever happen though.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: /usrmove?

[Michael Schroeder]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:25:08PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Michael Schroeder  wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the biggest compat by just symlinking
> >> /bin to /usr/bin?
> >
> > Yeah, that's the end goal, but we need rpm to support replacing
> > directories with symlinks first. Thus we don't rush the change.
> 
> That's unlikely to ever happen though.

Uh, why do you think so? I hope that you're aware that some rpm
development also happens outside of Redhat/Fedora.

Cheers,
  Michael.

-- 
Michael Schroeder   m...@suse.de
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH,  GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: /usrmove?

[drago01]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Michael Schroeder  wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:25:08PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Michael Schroeder  wrote:
>> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> >> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the biggest compat by just symlinking
>> >> /bin to /usr/bin?
>> >
>> > Yeah, that's the end goal, but we need rpm to support replacing
>> > directories with symlinks first. Thus we don't rush the change.
>>
>> That's unlikely to ever happen though.
>
> Uh, why do you think so? I hope that you're aware that some rpm
> development also happens outside of Redhat/Fedora.

A recent comment from Panu that I can't find right now.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: New ETL version needed for synfig update

[Jon Ciesla]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga
 wrote:
> 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?

Have you filed a bug against that package to alert the maintainer?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com

If not, that would be a great first step.

-J

> 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



-- 
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

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

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

[Nils Philippsen]

On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 11:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Let me put it this way, then: Fedora is released on a six month cycle,
> which is far faster than is usually considered desirable for server
> usage. It has a 13 month lifetime, which is far shorter than is usually
> considered desirable for server usage. Its key values and goals are
> assuredly not compatible with typical server usage - e.g. "First - We
> believe in the power of innovation and showing off new work in our
> releases. Since we release twice a year, you never have to wait long to
> see the latest and greatest software, while there are other Linux
> products derived from Fedora you can use for long-term stability. We
> always keep Fedora moving forward so that you can see the future first."
> There are numerous practical policies derived from these values which
> are clearly not optimal for server usage, such as the short freeze
> times, relatively low barrier of entry to disruptive features, and QA
> focus on installation and basic desktop use (we do virtually no QA on
> any kind of server usage). Finally, there are *several* Linux
> distributions available which have none of the above 'shortcomings' (so
> far as server usage is concerned).

I'd say the same 'shortcomings' also hurt the end user case. The
non-technical people I deal with loathe how we often introduce new
features and break stuff (or just their way of doing things) in the
process, even in updates -- I've stopped counting the "Oh, updates. I
wonder what you guys have broken now."-style comments by my wife. To me,
Fedora is much better suited to be run on servers than by end users --
admins usually can help themselves in these situations.

Don't take this as being against the slew of features Fedora introduces:
personally I'm much in favor of systemd, the /usr move, pulseaudio and
all that stuff -- there's no point in just treading water and being on
the forefront of things is where Fedora is supposed to be. But let's not
kid ourselves into thinking that with a life-cycle of only 13 months and
the amount of change we introduce in each new release (especially on the
desktop) we're somehow catering to end users who don't have a
technically skilled spouse, relative or friend in the background to help
if things don't work as expected.

Nils
-- 
Nils Philippsen  "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase 
Red Hat   a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
n...@redhat.com   nor Safety."  --  Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011

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

Re: CGAL license change to (L)GPLv3+

[Laurent Rineau]

Le mardi 07 février 2012 14:21:53 Laurent Rineau a écrit :
> From release 4.0, the CGAL libraries will be released under LGPLv3+ for the
> foundations, and GPLv3+ for the high level packages (instead of LGPLv2 and
> QPL respectively).

In the CGAL.spec file, I mentionned "License: LGPLv3+ and GPLv3+". Could not I 
simplify that into: "License: GPLv3+"?

-- 
Laurent Rineau
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LaurentRineau

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

[Bug 789977] perl-Module-Runtime-0.012 is available

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789977

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Module-Runtime-0.012-1
   ||.fc18
 Resolution||RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2012-02-13 09:28:54

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 789571] amavisd needs a systemd unit

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789571

Nicolas Mailhot  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||790042

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Re: CGAL license change to (L)GPLv3+

[Nils Philippsen]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 15:29 +0100, Laurent Rineau wrote:
> Le mardi 07 février 2012 14:21:53 Laurent Rineau a écrit :
> > From release 4.0, the CGAL libraries will be released under LGPLv3+ for the
> > foundations, and GPLv3+ for the high level packages (instead of LGPLv2 and
> > QPL respectively).
> 
> In the CGAL.spec file, I mentionned "License: LGPLv3+ and GPLv3+". Could not 
> I 
> simplify that into: "License: GPLv3+"?

You should probably ask this question on the fedora-legal mailing list
(on Cc).

Nils
-- 
Nils Philippsen  "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase 
Red Hat   a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
n...@redhat.com   nor Safety."  --  Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011

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

[Bug 789571] amavisd needs a systemd unit

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789571

Nicolas Mailhot  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|790042  |

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 11.2.2012 16:42, Steve Grubb napsal(a):

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.

-Steve


Hi Steve,

Actually we rebuild almost all packages, which we were rebuildable. 
Unfortunately, libprelude is one of the packages which is on our 
"blacklist". It seems that the Ruby binding needs some love, i.e. 
adaptation for Ruby 1.9.3. Also, it seems that the upstream is dead. Is 
that right? You'll know it better I hope ;)


Regarding the needed changes, this [2] is libprellude git repo with 
modified .spec file, however, I am afraid that it is not enough. The 
magic macros you have discussed later with Toshio are defined in 
/etc/rpm/ruby.macros and provided by ruby-devel package, so you don't 
have to define them manually in each package anymore.



Vit

[1] 
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2011-December/000729.html

[2] http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/ruby-git-repos/libprelude.tar.gz
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F16 Alpha GRUB install failure

[valent.turko...@gmail.com]

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:59 PM, David Lehman  wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 22:56 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> Between TC1 and release of F16 Alpha, something must have changed to the
>> worse with regard to installing GRUB to a partition's primary sector.
>> Partitioning hasn't changed. TC1 managed to install GRUB to /dev/sda3.
>> Anaconda now reports failure to install, and I've found this on virtual
>> console:
>>
>>   /usr/sbin/grub2-setup: warn: Attempting to install GRUB to a
>>   partitionless disk or to a partitionj. This is a BAD idea..
>>
>>   /usr/sbin/grub2-setup: warn: Embedding is not possible. GRUB can only be
>>   installed in this setup using blocklists. However, blocklists are
>>   UNRELIABLE and their use is discouraged..
>>
>>   /usr/sbin/grub2-setup: error: will not proceed with blocklists.
>>
>> Bug or feature?
>
> Both? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728742

I did Fedora 16 Respin iso install with all latest packages, including
latest Anaconda package, and still had this issue.

There were two ntfs partitions (Windows 7 + data partition) and 30 GB
of free space.

From 30GB free space I created
/root # 200 MB, ext4
/swap # 2.5 GB, swap
/ # 8.0 GB, ext4
/home # 19 GB, btrfs

grub2 install fails miserably :(

Are there any updates regarding this bug?
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] CGAL license change to (L)GPLv3+

[Tom Callaway]

On 02/13/2012 09:42 AM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 15:29 +0100, Laurent Rineau wrote:
>> Le mardi 07 février 2012 14:21:53 Laurent Rineau a écrit :
>>> From release 4.0, the CGAL libraries will be released under LGPLv3+ for the
>>> foundations, and GPLv3+ for the high level packages (instead of LGPLv2 and
>>> QPL respectively).
>>
>> In the CGAL.spec file, I mentionned "License: LGPLv3+ and GPLv3+". Could not 
>> I 
>> simplify that into: "License: GPLv3+"?
> 
> You should probably ask this question on the fedora-legal mailing list
> (on Cc).

Without looking at the code, the answer is "maybe".

If the libraries are composed of a combination of LGPLv3+ and GPLv3+
sources, then it would be accurate to simplify to "License: GPLv3+".

If the package contains some libraries under LGPLv3+, and some binaries
which are under GPLv3+, then "License: LGPLv3+ and GPLv3+" is appropriate.

Hope that helps,

~tom

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

Re: PCRE 8.30 will break API

[Petr Pisar]

On 2012-02-09, Petr Pisar  wrote:
>
> Result is pcre library has changed SONAME from libpcre.so.0 to
> libpcre.so.1. Other librararies (pcrecpp, pcreposix) delivered with this
> package remain compatible.
>
> Because pcre library is part of minimal build root I choosed following
> strategy to avoid breaking Koji:
>
> (1) pcre-8.30-1 will include both new libpcre.so.1 and old libpcre.so.0.
> (This is done by copying old files from build root while building
> this new package).
>
This has been successfully done.

> (2) Reverse dependencies will be rebuilt against this new library.
> x86_64 repository returns 109 packages:
>
I attempted to rebuild 104 packages, 22 packages have failed. Some
packages rebuilt other maintainers before me, or fixed them and rebuilt
after me.

Currently there is 17 packages linked against the old PCRE:

cegui
dansguardian
gambas2
gnaughty
kismet
matahari
medusa
mod_security
monotone
openscada
ovaldi
php
privoxy
R
regexxer
syncevolution
wmweather+

Most of them have been already failing before PCRE upgrade. I will
investigate the failures in the future.

I created PCRE 8.30 feature page for F18
 where you can track
the progress. There is a link with an example how to port an application
from removed pcre_info(3) to pcre_fullinfo() too.

-- Petr

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

Fedora 17 Alpha status: outstanding blockers

[Adam Williamson]

Hi, folks. To try and help avoid slips this release cycle, I'll be
notifying this list more systematically of outstanding blocker bugs as
we approach RC spin dates and release dates. Starting now!

We are due to compose the first Fedora 17 Alpha release candidate this
Thursday. In order to spin a release candidate build, all blocker bugs
must be addressed. As of now, the following confirmed blocker bugs are
outstanding:

1. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787744 - "RuntimeError:
device is already mapped (F17 Alpha TC1)" - this one is likely fixed in
TC2 and only requires re-testing by QA.

2. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787261 - "Fedora 17 Alpha
TC1 still has all F16 artwork" - we have (temporary?) F17 backgrounds
now, but still no update to fedora-logos. We need spot and the design
team to get on top of this one.

3. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789181 - "repoclosure
failure on 17-Alpha.TC2 DVDs (gnome-python2-bonobo-2.28.1-8.fc17)" -
this is a 'repoclosure' issue, which means that there are dependency
issues with a package on the DVD image. We need to track down the
ultimate problem here by walking the dep chain. It looks like some very
old GNOME stuff is still in something's dep chain and that's causing
problems.

4. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789180 - "repoclosure
failure on 17-Alpha.TC2 DVDs (libguestfs-1.17.4-7.fc17)" - this is
another repoclosure issue similar to the above.

5. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787781 - "Lorax Templates
are deleting required binaries post usrmove" - this is likely fixed
already, just needs confirmation from QA.

6. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788829 - "Cannot log in
with SELinux enabled in 2012-02-08 rawhide" - this is the big bug with
systemd that causes all kinds of issues if you try and boot with selinux
enabled in current Rawhide. We need the systemd maintainers to get on
top of this one.

Again, we need all of the above issues to be addressed in order to spin
the first RC build on time on Thursday, so if you are responsible for
any of the above bugs please work on it ASAP, and if you're not but you
have useful ideas / information, please chime in on the bug! Thanks.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:47 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 11:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Let me put it this way, then: Fedora is released on a six month cycle,
> > which is far faster than is usually considered desirable for server
> > usage. It has a 13 month lifetime, which is far shorter than is usually
> > considered desirable for server usage. Its key values and goals are
> > assuredly not compatible with typical server usage - e.g. "First - We
> > believe in the power of innovation and showing off new work in our
> > releases. Since we release twice a year, you never have to wait long to
> > see the latest and greatest software, while there are other Linux
> > products derived from Fedora you can use for long-term stability. We
> > always keep Fedora moving forward so that you can see the future first."
> > There are numerous practical policies derived from these values which
> > are clearly not optimal for server usage, such as the short freeze
> > times, relatively low barrier of entry to disruptive features, and QA
> > focus on installation and basic desktop use (we do virtually no QA on
> > any kind of server usage). Finally, there are *several* Linux
> > distributions available which have none of the above 'shortcomings' (so
> > far as server usage is concerned).
> 
> I'd say the same 'shortcomings' also hurt the end user case. The
> non-technical people I deal with loathe how we often introduce new
> features and break stuff (or just their way of doing things) in the
> process, even in updates -- I've stopped counting the "Oh, updates. I
> wonder what you guys have broken now."-style comments by my wife. To me,
> Fedora is much better suited to be run on servers than by end users --
> admins usually can help themselves in these situations.
> 
> Don't take this as being against the slew of features Fedora introduces:
> personally I'm much in favor of systemd, the /usr move, pulseaudio and
> all that stuff -- there's no point in just treading water and being on
> the forefront of things is where Fedora is supposed to be. But let's not
> kid ourselves into thinking that with a life-cycle of only 13 months and
> the amount of change we introduce in each new release (especially on the
> desktop) we're somehow catering to end users who don't have a
> technically skilled spouse, relative or friend in the background to help
> if things don't work as expected.

That also, at least arguably, isn't Fedora's aim (if it was, we'd be
doing a terrible job of it, I agree). To cite the Board again:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base

"Voluntary Linux consumer
Computer-friendly
Likely collaborator
General productivity user"

Those four - especially 'computer-friendly' and 'likely collaborator' -
don't scream 'end user' to me. My personal take has always been that
Fedora is not the friendly desktop operating system of today, but a
*prototype* of the friendly desktop operating system of tomorrow. A
constantly moving prototype - so it never sits still and becomes the
friendly desktop operating system of today. :)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Schedule for today's FESCo Meeting (2012-02-13)

[Stephen Gallagher]

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting today at 18:00UTC (1:00pm EST) in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.

Links to all tickets below can be found at: 
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9

= Followups =

#topic #799 Issues with maintainer responsiveness (clamav)
.fesco 799

= New business =



= Fedora Engineering Services tickets = 

https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-engineering-services/report/6

= Open Floor = 

For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket.  The
report of the agenda items can be found at
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9

If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until
the following meeting. 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Schedule for today's FESCo Meeting (2012-02-13)

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 12:44 -0500, Omair Majid wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 12:35 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
> > meeting today at 18:00UTC (1:00pm EST) in #fedora-meeting on
> > irc.freenode.net.
> > 
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket.  The
> > report of the agenda items can be found at
> > https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
> > 
> > If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
> > this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
> > e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
> > the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until
> > the following meeting. 
> 
> I would like to add https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/801 to the
> agenda. Shall I just bring it up during the open floor?

I've added it to the agenda.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
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]

Matej Cepl wrote:
> Kevin?
>
> I am usually close to being on your side in most flamewars here, but
> changing the release policy based on the vote of 627 people on a random
> website? Really?

It's not just that website. Survey the Fedora blogs a bit to see how many 
people switched away from GNOME 3. That poll is the first time I see this 
trend quantified in numbers, but it matches my expectations fairly well.

And I have been arguing for defaulting to KDE Plasma Desktop rather than 
GNOME 3 for a while, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KDE_Plasma_Desktop_by_default
(which unfortunately got summarily rejected by FESCo on the grounds that it 
had only my name on it rather than the KDE SIG as a whole), so it shouldn't 
come as a surprise that I still support that notion. And yes, I think Xfce 
is also a better desktop than GNOME 3, plus we should base our primary spins 
on what workspace environments are actually most popular rather than on 
history. GNOME Shell would make a great spins.fedoraproject.org spin, that 
kind of unconventional UIs is exactly what spins.fedoraproject.org is for 
(see also the Sugar spin).

Kevin Kofler

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

ConsoleKit in F17

[Matthias Clasen]

As part of the ckremoval feature [1], things have been steadily ported away 
from ConsoleKit api to logind.

While we hope to complete this for the desktop spin, we don't expect all spins 
to be free of ConsoleKit users in time for F17. Therefore, we need to make sure 
that CK continues to function - which is why we've put pam-ck-connector into 
the gdm pam stacks today. Spins which need ConsoleKit should make sure that 
they have a dependency on it somewhere (or pull it in via comps), since gdm has 
no hard dependency on it anymore.


Matthias


[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ckremoval
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Rpmbuild unable to recognize used libs?

[Andrea Musuruane]

On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Panu Matilainen
 wrote:
> On 02/11/2012 02:52 PM, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>     a reporter just submitted this bug against tecnoballz:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789544
>>
>> After closer inspection, I see that the RPM doesn't require the needed
>> libraries:
>>
>> $ rpm -q --requires tecnoballz
>> /bin/sh
>> /bin/sh
>> config(tecnoballz) = 0.92-11.fc16
>> hicolor-icon-theme
>> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
>> rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
>> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
>> rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
>>
>> The spec file is available here:
>> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=tecnoballz.git;a=tree
>>
>> But if I print the shared libraries needed by the binary I get:
>>
>> $ ldd /usr/bin/tecnoballz
>>     linux-vdso.so.1 =>  (0x7fff7213e000)
>>     libSDL-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libSDL-1.2.so.0 (0x003b9be0)
>>     libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x003b88e0)
>>     libSDL_image-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libSDL_image-1.2.so.0
>> (0x0033b1a0)
>>     libSDL_mixer-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libSDL_mixer-1.2.so.0
>> (0x003b8b60)
>>     libmikmod.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libmikmod.so.3 (0x003b89a0)
>>     libtinyxml.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libtinyxml.so.0 (0x7f8cda97a000)
>>     libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x003b8de0)
>>     libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x003b8960)
>>     libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x003b8a20)
>>     libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x003b88a0)
>>     libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x003b8920)
>>     /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x003b8860)
>>     libpng12.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libpng12.so.0 (0x0033b2a0)
>>     libjpeg.so.62 => /usr/lib64/libjpeg.so.62 (0x003b94a0)
>>     libtiff.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libtiff.so.3 (0x0033b4e0)
>>     libz.so.1 => /lib64/libz.so.1 (0x0033b120)
>>
>> I really don't understand what's wrong here. Any help is appreciated.
>
>
> It's a bug in rpmbuild's file classification rules, should be fixed in this
> update: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-1504
>
> While this obviously isn't fault of tecnoballz, a rebuild is needed to
> correct the dependencies.

There still seems to be problems. I rebuilt it locally with an updated
F16 and now I get:
$ rpm -qp --requires /home/andrea/rpmbuild/SRPMS/tecnoballz-0.92-13.fc16.src.rpm
autoconf
SDL_image-devel
SDL_mixer-devel
mikmod-devel
tinyxml-devel
desktop-file-utils
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1

As you can see now it misses at least explicit requires
(hicolor-icon-theme) and others too (/bin/sh, config(tecnoballz),
etc).

Regards,

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

Re: Rpmbuild unable to recognize used libs?

[Richard Shaw]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Andrea Musuruane  wrote:
> There still seems to be problems. I rebuilt it locally with an updated
> F16 and now I get:
> $ rpm -qp --requires 
> /home/andrea/rpmbuild/SRPMS/tecnoballz-0.92-13.fc16.src.rpm
> autoconf
> SDL_image-devel
> SDL_mixer-devel
> mikmod-devel
> tinyxml-devel
> desktop-file-utils
> rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
>
> As you can see now it misses at least explicit requires
> (hicolor-icon-theme) and others too (/bin/sh, config(tecnoballz),
> etc).

Would explicit requires be required by the source RPM? I would think
they would only be added to the binary RPMS.

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

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

[drago01]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Kevin Kofler  wrote:
> Matej Cepl wrote:
>> Kevin?
>>
>> I am usually close to being on your side in most flamewars here, but
>> changing the release policy based on the vote of 627 people on a random
>> website? Really?
>
> It's not just that website. Survey the Fedora blogs a bit to see how many
> people switched away from GNOME 3.

Well because people who stay with GNOME 3 don't go and write a blog
post "I did not switch away" ... it is just the other side that fells
the need to leave with noise.

> That poll is the first time I see this
> trend quantified in numbers, but it matches my expectations fairly well.

The poll is scientifically useless and you know that; and the one Olav
linked shows the opposite by the way.

>  unconventional UIs is exactly what spins.fedoraproject.org is for

Why must a desktop resemble the windows 95 UI paradigm? You call that
unconventional I call that progress.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Rpmbuild unable to recognize used libs?

[Andrea Musuruane]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Richard Shaw  wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Andrea Musuruane  wrote:
>> There still seems to be problems. I rebuilt it locally with an updated
>> F16 and now I get:
>> $ rpm -qp --requires 
>> /home/andrea/rpmbuild/SRPMS/tecnoballz-0.92-13.fc16.src.rpm
>> autoconf
>> SDL_image-devel
>> SDL_mixer-devel
>> mikmod-devel
>> tinyxml-devel
>> desktop-file-utils
>> rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
>> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
>>
>> As you can see now it misses at least explicit requires
>> (hicolor-icon-theme) and others too (/bin/sh, config(tecnoballz),
>> etc).
>
> Would explicit requires be required by the source RPM? I would think
> they would only be added to the binary RPMS.

Ops! I copy&pasted the wrong file! It is fine actually:

$ rpm -qp --requires
/home/andrea/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/tecnoballz-0.92-13.fc16.x86_64.rpm
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
config(tecnoballz) = 0.92-13.fc16
hicolor-icon-theme
libSDL-1.2.so.0()(64bit)
libSDL_image-1.2.so.0()(64bit)
libSDL_mixer-1.2.so.0()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libmikmod.so.3()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.11)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit)
libtinyxml.so.0()(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1

Sorry for the noise :-(((

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

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

[Michael Cronenworth]

drago01 wrote:

Why must a desktop resemble the windows 95 UI paradigm? You call that
unconventional I call that progress.


Not even Microsoft is staying with the 95 UI.

@Kevin, Windows 8 will look more like Gnome Shell than KDE. What then? 
Will we see millions of Windows users flock to Mac? I think not.

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

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120213 changes

[Sérgio Basto]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:

Hi, 
on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/ 
we got boot.iso 
on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/x86_64/os/images/
we got macboot.img  and efiboot.img 
what happened to boot.iso ? . 
To start one vm, I need it . 

Thanks,
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

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

FESCo Meeting Minutes (2012-02-13)

[Stephen Gallagher]

===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2012-02-13)
===


Meeting started by sgallagh at 18:00:33 UTC. The full logs are available
at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-02-13/fesco.2012-02-13-18.00.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* init process  (sgallagh, 18:00:33)

* #799 Issues with maintainer responsiveness (clamav)  (sgallagh,
  18:02:14)
  * AGREED: Ask ensc to document (at least by a link) the packaging
rationale inside the package; close ticket and let philipp reopen
with a specific proposal  (sgallagh, 18:22:16)

* #801 Feature Freeze Exception: Thermostat  (sgallagh, 18:23:39)
  * AGREED: Thermostat is granted a Feature Exception  (sgallagh,
18:31:05)

* #802 F17 Features - progress at Feature Freeze  (sgallagh, 18:31:23)
  * AGREED: move mkdumprd, eclipse juno to shiny-marketing features -
those are leaf nodes  (sgallagh, 18:39:13)
  * ACTION: FESCo members will review the critical Features and ask
owners for updates  (sgallagh, 19:09:15)

* Next week's chair  (sgallagh, 19:09:27)
  * ACTION: nirik to chair Feb 27 meeting  (sgallagh, 19:12:49)

* Open Floor  (sgallagh, 19:12:56)
  * AGREED: close the ticket with thanks for the update, and no action
currently  (sgallagh, 19:23:23)

Meeting ended at 19:36:11 UTC.




Action Items

* FESCo members will review the critical Features and ask owners for
  updates
* nirik to chair Feb 27 meeting




Action Items, by person
---
* nirik
  * nirik to chair Feb 27 meeting
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * FESCo members will review the critical Features and ask owners for
updates




People Present (lines said)
---
* sgallagh (124)
* mitr (61)
* limburgher (61)
* pjones (37)
* notting (37)
* mjg59 (32)
* nirik (25)
* t8m (18)
* mmaslano (13)
* abadger1999 (11)
* rbergeron (10)
* nb (7)
* zodbot (7)
* omajid (3)
* tibbs (2)
* vanaltj (1)
* ctyler (1)
* dbhole (1)




Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4

.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Undeprecating python-mwlib

[Ian Weller]

python-mwlib is currently deprecated. We dropped it about a year or two
ago because of hellish dependencies. Some of the issues have been
cleaned up so it's now up for re-review:
  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790154

This email is being sent because of this policy:
  
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_a_Deprecated_Package

-- 
Ian Weller 


pgpHIvpfXaR3Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[perl-Class-Load/f17] Update to 0.17

[Paul Howarth]

Summary of changes:

  1e3ce9f... Update to 0.17 (*)

(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 695597] Providing native systemd file for upcoming F15 Feature Systemd

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695597

Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||limburg...@gmail.com

--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla  2012-02-13 14:42:53 EST 
---
Steven, any objection to my making this change?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 695589] Providing native systemd file for upcoming F15 Feature Systemd

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695589

Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||limburg...@gmail.com

--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla  2012-02-13 14:42:34 EST 
---
Steven, any objection to my making this change?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Class-Load] Created tag perl-Class-Load-0.17-1.fc17

[Paul Howarth]

The lightweight tag 'perl-Class-Load-0.17-1.fc17' was created pointing to:

 1e3ce9f... Update to 0.17
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Class-Load] Created tag perl-Class-Load-0.17-1.fc18

[Paul Howarth]

The lightweight tag 'perl-Class-Load-0.17-1.fc18' was created pointing to:

 1e3ce9f... Update to 0.17
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120213 changes

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:36:21 +
Sérgio Basto  wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:
> 
> Hi, 
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/ 
> we got boot.iso 
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/x86_64/os/images/
> we got macboot.img  and efiboot.img 
> what happened to boot.iso ? . 
> To start one vm, I need it . 

See the thread about yesterdays branched report in this very mailing
list. ;) 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
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]

drago01 wrote:
> The poll is scientifically useless and you know that; and the one Olav
> linked shows the opposite by the way.

The one Olav linked to said only "GNOME" rather than "GNOME 3" or "GNOME 
Shell" and as such people who are still sticking with GNOME 2 will have 
voted for GNOME too. Several distributions are still shipping GNOME 2 (and 
users don't always use the latest version of their distribution either), so 
they might not even KNOW about GNOME 3 yet, or at least not have tried it 
yet. Plus, the poll is outdated by at least 2½ months (published Dec 1), 
which also contributes to people still rating GNOME based on the old GNOME 
2. (Again, most distributions are much slower in adopting GNOME 3 than 
Fedora.) Even the article itself admits that "Due to the timing of the GNOME 
3 release, it's hard to tell if the victory is because of version 3 or in 
spite of it." The LQ poll proves it was the latter.

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

[Chris Murphy]

On Feb 13, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  The LQ poll proves it was the latter.

I don't like Gnome 3 either. From the largely outsider perspective and new to 
linux in general, I get the impression Gnome dev is on a mission, of unknown 
origin, and could absolutely care less about any feedback, except large scale 
rejection of Gnome 3.

Nevertheless, the LQ poll can prove nothing. It is unlikely to be a scientific 
sample. And even if it turned out to be one, there is no data to prove it's a 
scientific sample. Fedora DE vs KDE spin download ratio compared to past 
release ratios would be more suggestive of a trend, if it exists.

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

[Bug 789784] Provide native systemd service

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789784

--- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones  2012-02-13 15:46:03 
EST ---
Jóhann, if you are PP, feel free to commit this.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
ocaml-devel mailing list
ocaml-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ocaml-devel

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

[Kevin Kofler]

I'm going to reply to both in one go here:


drago01 wrote:

>> Why must a desktop resemble the windows 95 UI paradigm?

Because that is what all current computer users are used to! And an 
"inconvenient" fact often ignored in usability studies is that the vast 
majority of your users will NOT be new to computers, but current computer 
users. It's a common pitfall (especially in the GNOME world) to 
underestimate the power of habit.

>> You call that unconventional I call that progress.

Change is not always for the better. This is not useful progress, but a 
useless change which breaks the habits of millions of existing users, just 
for the sake of being different. Your use of the word "progress" implies 
that there is some improvement in the change, but here I only see something 
different, not something better.


… to which Michael Cronenworth replied:

> Not even Microsoft is staying with the 95 UI.
> 
> @Kevin, Windows 8 will look more like Gnome Shell than KDE. What then?
> Will we see millions of Windows users flock to Mac? I think not.

Maybe. Maybe even to Plasma or Xfce. :-) Or maybe they'll just stick with 
the old version. Many people are still running old versions of Office due to 
the infamous "ribbon" crap. Some have even switched to OO.o/LibreOffice due 
to it, and those will become more once the old versions stop being viable.

Users can be very used to even small UI details. Power users have memorized 
them as part of their routine and will get annoyed if you force them to get 
used to a different workflow; non-technical users lack the kind of 
abstraction computer interfaces expect of them and instead remember the 
exact items to click on to do a specific task, and thus will feel totally 
lost in front of an unfamiliar interface. Don't underestimate the power of 
habit!

M$ is actually WAY TOO KEEN on breaking their UI paradigms these days (see 
the "ribbon" fiasco) and we should use that to our advantage (by offering 
users the UI they expect, and loudly advertising that), not stupidly copy 
everything M$ is doing.

Kevin Kofler

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

Re: ConsoleKit in F17

[Kevin Kofler]

Matthias Clasen wrote:
> While we hope to complete this for the desktop spin, we don't expect all
> spins to be free of ConsoleKit users in time for F17. Therefore, we need
> to make sure that CK continues to function - which is why we've put
> pam-ck-connector into the gdm pam stacks today. Spins which need
> ConsoleKit should make sure that they have a dependency on it somewhere
> (or pull it in via comps), since gdm has no hard dependency on it anymore.

For the KDE spin and anything derived from it (e.g. Scientific KDE), this
has already been addressed by kde-workspace-4.8.0-5.fc17:
- kde-workspace: Requires: ConsoleKit (shutdown/restart, works around #788171)
- kdm: Requires: ConsoleKit (works around #787855, nasty error message on login)
(See the referenced bugs in Bugzilla for the long-term fixes required.)

Kevin Kofler

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

[Bug 789784] Provide native systemd service

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789784

--- Comment #3 from Jóhann B. Guðmundsson  2012-02-13 
16:19:23 EST ---
Unfortunately I am not however Jon ( limburgher ) has been ping maintainers to
see if he can ship the submitted unit I'll ping him and point him to this one.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
ocaml-devel mailing list
ocaml-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ocaml-devel

Re: F16 Alpha GRUB install failure

[Chris Murphy]

On Feb 13, 2012, at 9:16 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> I did Fedora 16 Respin iso install with all latest packages, including
> latest Anaconda package, and still had this issue.
> 
> There were two ntfs partitions (Windows 7 + data partition) and 30 GB
> of free space.
> 
> From 30GB free space I created
> /root # 200 MB, ext4
> /swap # 2.5 GB, swap
> / # 8.0 GB, ext4
> /home # 19 GB, btrfs
> 
> grub2 install fails miserably :(
> 
> Are there any updates regarding this bug?

I think the problem is GRUB2's own install script/app, doesn't do a great job 
of accounting for disks partitioned where the 1st partition comes less than 
35KB after the MBR, and as the core.img is too large it fails to install 
between the MBR and partition 1.

Strangely though, anaconda manages to get it to install without a complaint.

Chris Murphy
-- 
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 02/13/2012 03:47 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:

> Fedora DE vs KDE spin download ratio compared to past release ratios would be 
> more suggestive of a trend, if it exists.

  Not necessarily - I always used the standard DVD to install and use
KDE and frankly never used the KDE spin - not once.

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

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

[Chris Murphy]

On Feb 13, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:

> On 02/13/2012 03:47 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 
>> Fedora DE vs KDE spin download ratio compared to past release ratios would 
>> be more suggestive of a trend, if it exists.
> 
>  Not necessarily - I always used the standard DVD to install and use
> KDE and frankly never used the KDE spin - not once.

Doesn't matter. The question is whether there is a change in trend. It's 
improbable that KDE adoption is increasing in statistically significant 
numbers, while at the same time KDE spin downloads remain flat, just because 
people can install KDE from the standard DVD installer. If there is a new trend 
developing, downloads and even yum updates would represent much more valuable 
data from which to draw general conclusions than a poll off one forum. The very 
poll's existence, and question structure, will disproportionately draw 
disaffected Gnome users to participate in the poll.

Let's not forget there are KDE affectionados who were not pleased with KDE4.

But in any event, the users almost don't matter when it comes to desktop 
experience. It's which environment has the most development (both for apps that 
run in it, as well as developers for the environment itself). Windows is an 
example of abysmal UI and UX, yet has a huge installed base who are not 
punishing MS over an objectively poor UI design. And long time Mac users have 
been expressing in larger numbers than any other release how irritated they are 
with the incorporation of iOS UI into Mac OS Lion (10.7) - and yet it's one of 
the most successful, by raw numbers, Mac OS upgrades of all time.

So the complaining, the anecdotes of people switching environments, and totally 
non-scientific forum polls, probably means almost exactly zero. What is a valid 
concern for RH though, is whether and when Gnome 3 makes sense on RHEL, and if 
the fallback mode experience is a better and practical default, than the 
standard experience, for the RHEL market.

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

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120213 changes

[Sérgio Basto]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 12:49 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: 
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:36:21 +
> Sérgio Basto  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:
> > 
> > Hi, 
> > on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/ 
> > we got boot.iso 
> > on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/x86_64/os/images/
> > we got macboot.img  and efiboot.img 
> > what happened to boot.iso ? . 
> > To start one vm, I need it . 
> 
> See the thread about yesterdays branched report in this very mailing
> list. ;) 


I read and wrote in that thread !.

I downloaded directories: images  isolinux  LiveOS, with wget -e
robots=off -m -np blabla
and make the boot.iso with:  
genisoimage -o ~/boot.iso -b isolinux/isolinux.bin -c  isolinux/boot.cat
-boot-load-size 4 -boot-info-table -no-emul-boot -R -J
-V "Fedora 17 x86_64" -T -graft-points isolinux=isolinux
images=images/pxeboot LiveOS=LiveOS

note : -V = "Fedora 17 x86_64" because 
cat isolinux/isolinux.cfg  | grep append 
we got CDLABEL=Fedora\x2017\x20x86_64

And it is working! 

Best regards, 
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

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

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120213 changes

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 19:36 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:
> 
> Hi, 
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/ 
> we got boot.iso 
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/x86_64/os/images/
> we got macboot.img  and efiboot.img 
> what happened to boot.iso ? . 
> To start one vm, I need it . 

There's a thread from a couple of days ago discussing it: the compose is
failing.

It's not usually a great idea to rely on the automated daily composes
working, they can often fail for one reason or another. If you just need
a boot.iso to do an install with, go with the last pre-release
(candidate) build, which at present is Alpha TC2 -
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/17-Alpha.TC2/ .
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: F16 Alpha GRUB install failure

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 9:16 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > I did Fedora 16 Respin iso install with all latest packages, including
> > latest Anaconda package, and still had this issue.
> > 
> > There were two ntfs partitions (Windows 7 + data partition) and 30 GB
> > of free space.
> > 
> > From 30GB free space I created
> > /root # 200 MB, ext4
> > /swap # 2.5 GB, swap
> > / # 8.0 GB, ext4
> > /home # 19 GB, btrfs
> > 
> > grub2 install fails miserably :(
> > 
> > Are there any updates regarding this bug?
> 
> I think the problem is GRUB2's own install script/app, doesn't do a great job 
> of accounting for disks partitioned where the 1st partition comes less than 
> 35KB after the MBR, and as the core.img is too large it fails to install 
> between the MBR and partition 1.
> 
> Strangely though, anaconda manages to get it to install without a complaint.

No, that's clearly not the problem here, because this thread is about
installing grub to the front of a partition - *not* to the MBR.

I'm not sure why it's failing for Valent when it does usually manage to
do this successfully, but it's definitely not the issue with the
post-MBR 'embedding area' being too small. That's an entirely separate
issue.

anaconda only calls grub2-install, with appropriate parameters, to
install grub. It doesn't do anything particularly special or clever.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Architectures supported by LSB, fedora, ubuntu and kvm

[Xibo Ning]

Hello,
Just as the subject, I made a text table. It's simple. The column name
explains itself. I think it is usefull for somebody.
The table also contains two columns:
'is_fedora_kvm_support?' and 'is_ubuntu_kvm_support?'. The two columns
tell us whether  fedora/ubuntn kvm  could virtualize
 the architecture.
I got the information from LSB, fedora and ubuntu offical site.  kvm
information comes from KVM packages of fedora 16 and ubuntu 10.04 LTS.
I am not familar with most of these architectures. So, I would like to
receive feedback and advice.

The table in attach file.

Best regards,
xning


support_arch_list
Description: Binary data
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Test-Announce] Proven tester status

[Adam Williamson]

Just wanted to make note of the current status of proven testers. As
decided by FESCo late last year, proven tester feedback now has exactly
the same status as non-proven tester feedback, effectively rendering it
pointless to be a proven tester.

I have added a note about this to the proven tester page:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester

As noted there, and as discussed at meetings and with FESCo, I'm hopeful
we'll be able to make use of proven tester status again once Bodhi 2.0
hits. Therefore I don't think we should take down all the documentation,
kill the group, or stop accepting membership requests. But do be aware
that, at present, proven tester status is basically meaningless.

Of course, there'll be lots of discussion at QA meetings and FESCo
meetings before we decide whether and how to 'reactivate' the group.

Thanks all!
-- 
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

Re: F16 Alpha GRUB install failure

[Chris Murphy]

On Feb 13, 2012, at 7:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> 
>> I think the problem is GRUB2's own install script/app, doesn't do a great 
>> job of accounting for disks partitioned where the 1st partition comes less 
>> than 35KB after the MBR, and as the core.img is too large it fails to 
>> install between the MBR and partition 1.
>> 
>> Strangely though, anaconda manages to get it to install without a complaint.
> 
> No, that's clearly not the problem here, because this thread is about
> installing grub to the front of a partition - *not* to the MBR.

The GRUB2 manually doesn't outright say "unsupported" or "not recommended" but 
it does say insertion prior to the 1st partition is what's recommended. I've 
had zero problems with GRUB legacy installing into specific partitions, but 
worse than 50% failure with GRUB2 so I've given up on stuffing it into specific 
partitions.


> anaconda only calls grub2-install, with appropriate parameters, to
> install grub. It doesn't do anything particularly special or clever.

Well I've got a number of cases on F16 where anaconda's call to grub2-install 
produces a smaller core.img than calling grub2-install directly. I don't have 
an explanation for this, but it's just enough of a difference in size that it 
causes problems with older partitioning schemes that start partition 1 at 
sector 63.

Is anaconda passing --force by default?


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

Re: New ETL version needed for synfig update

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

On Mon 13 Feb 2012 04:55:03 AM PST, Jon Ciesla wrote:


Have you filed a bug against that package to alert the maintainer?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com

If not, that would be a great first step.



Done. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790249

I found out Lubomir is the maintainer. I co-maintain synfig at the 
moment. I request for co-maintainance in order to bring that package up 
to date with upstream.


--
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

Re: F16 Alpha GRUB install failure

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 19:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 7:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> 
> >> I think the problem is GRUB2's own install script/app, doesn't do a great 
> >> job of accounting for disks partitioned where the 1st partition comes less 
> >> than 35KB after the MBR, and as the core.img is too large it fails to 
> >> install between the MBR and partition 1.
> >> 
> >> Strangely though, anaconda manages to get it to install without a 
> >> complaint.
> > 
> > No, that's clearly not the problem here, because this thread is about
> > installing grub to the front of a partition - *not* to the MBR.
> 
> The GRUB2 manually doesn't outright say "unsupported" or "not
> recommended" but it does say insertion prior to the 1st partition is
> what's recommended. I've had zero problems with GRUB legacy installing
> into specific partitions, but worse than 50% failure with GRUB2 so
> I've given up on stuffing it into specific partitions.
> 
> 
> > anaconda only calls grub2-install, with appropriate parameters, to
> > install grub. It doesn't do anything particularly special or clever.
> 
> Well I've got a number of cases on F16 where anaconda's call to
> grub2-install produces a smaller core.img than calling grub2-install
> directly. I don't have an explanation for this, but it's just enough
> of a difference in size that it causes problems with older
> partitioning schemes that start partition 1 at sector 63.
> 
> Is anaconda passing --force by default?

When installing to a partition not to the MBR, yeah, it does.

It's easy enough to look at anaconda's actual code for all this. It's in
pyanaconda/bootloader.py . Here it is in all its glory:

def install(self):
# XXX will installing to multiple drives work as expected with GRUBv2?
for (stage1dev, stage2dev) in self.install_targets:
args = ["--no-floppy", self.grub_device_name(stage1dev)]
if stage1dev == stage2dev:
# This is hopefully a temporary hack. GRUB2 currently refuses
# to install to a partition's boot block without --force.
args.insert(0, '--force')

rc = iutil.execWithRedirect("grub2-install", args,
stdout="/dev/tty5", stderr="/dev/tty5",
root=ROOT_PATH)
if rc:
raise BootLoaderError("bootloader install failed")

I suppose the --no-floppy may make it a tad bit smaller. You could try
that on your manual invocations.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

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