On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 11:49:52PM +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 19:49 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>
> > Any ideas how to troubleshoot?
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Xorg_problems
>
> Please file a bug against xorg-x11-drv-ati . Thanks.
>
I think the
Adam Williamson redhat.com> writes:
> The window doesn't matter that much anyway, as by no means all packages
> pushed to updates-testing during the pre-final cycle have been (or will
> be) approved as updates. So it's perfectly possible people who installed
> pre-releases will have what you ter
On 05/17/2010 07:15 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> We don't by any means have enough programmed testing to be confident
> about this kind of status for more than milestone releases at present.
> Given that, it certainly seems much safer to just build F(N+1) on F(N),
> as proposed earlier.
Yes - t
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 14:50 -0400, Andre Robatino wrote:
> If I haven't missed something, it looks like there was only a 2-day
> window (during a weekend) between the update to fedora-release-13-1
> (which enabled updates and disabled updates-testing)
>
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/t
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 11:41 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 05/17/2010 11:22 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > otherwise it remains at B2.
> >
> > Just because you manage to build a kernel, or even manage to boot a
> > kernel, doesn't mean it really works. We really need all the testing
> > th
On 17 May 2010 16:06, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> On 17 May 2010 19:08, Rawhide Report wrote:
>> Compose started at Mon May 17 08:15:09 UTC 2010
>>
>> Broken deps for i386
>> --
>>
>> plexus-containers-component-annotations-javadoc-1.0-0.1
On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 10:40 -0500, Mike Chambers wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 08:23 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
> >What if a user puts in a timeout - after a successful boot will it
> > stay or be reset to 0. It should never change what the user desires ...
> > you may need a fancier sma
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 13:46 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> > In that case, why default to keeping around more than 1 kernel or installing
> > memtest86? (We do still install memtest86 by default, right?)
>
> The usual PC behavior of banging on the keyboard brings the boot menu
> even if there
On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 19:49 +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> Any ideas how to troubleshoot?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Xorg_problems
Please file a bug against xorg-x11-drv-ati . Thanks.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedorapr
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 10:52 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 11:26 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 10:31 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >
> > > > What you'd loose with using flags is the "distro version" context.
> > >
> > > Erm, the bug would be filed ag
This was a failed experiment with fedora hosted, and I no longer need to
manage this package. If anybody wants it, it's now an orphan in pkgdb.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 20:36 +0530, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> >vfrnav-0.4-1.fc13.i686 requires libgps.so.18
> Anyone interested in looking for reasons for above breakages - fixing
> or pinging maintainers (whatever suits)? I will look into it in couple
> of days (coming weekend). Anyone else
Start End Name
Tue 04-May Tue 18-May Final Infrastructure Change Freeze
Thu 13-May Thu 20-May Test 'Final' RC
Tue 18-May Tue 18-May Fedora 13 Final Go/No-Go Meeting (20:00 EST)
Thu 20-May Thu 20-May Start Stage & Sync RC to Mirrors
Thu 20-May Tue 25-May Stage & Sync RC to Mi
If I haven't missed something, it looks like there was only a 2-day
window (during a weekend) between the update to fedora-release-13-1
(which enabled updates and disabled updates-testing)
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-May/090747.html
and the next push to updates-testing
htt
On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 11:26 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 10:31 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> > > What you'd loose with using flags is the "distro version" context.
> >
> > Erm, the bug would be filed against a particular version. EG the bug
> > has to be filed against
On 05/15/2010 03:04 AM, Conrad Meyer wrote:
> On Friday 14 May 2010 11:05:13 pm Chris Jones wrote:
>> I was under the impression that a timeout is intentional/used only if
>> another operating system is detected upon installation. ie. Windows. If no
>> other operating system is detected, then there
On Mon, 17 May 2010 12:35:55 -0400
Jon Masters wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 16:05 +1000, Chris Jones wrote:
> > I was under the impression that a timeout is intentional/used only if
> > another operating system is detected upon installation. ie. Windows.
> > If no other operating system is dete
On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 16:05 +1000, Chris Jones wrote:
> I was under the impression that a timeout is intentional/used only if
> another operating system is detected upon installation. ie. Windows.
> If no other operating system is detected, then there's no point having
> a timeout.
I strongly disa
On 05/17/2010 11:22 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> otherwise it remains at B2.
>
> Just because you manage to build a kernel, or even manage to boot a
> kernel, doesn't mean it really works. We really need all the testing
> that goes into a full Fedora release before we trust what is built
> fro
On Monday, May 17, 2010, 7:24:14 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 14 May 2010 14:22, drago01 wrote:
>> 4) People adding negative karma because "unrelated bug that has been
>> present in the older version is still not fixed"
> I get this all the time. It would be nice to be able to have a
> "discou
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 11:17:11AM -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:59:08AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 09:06:52AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> > > Unless RHEL 6 is needed to get sufficient VM capability, as was said
> > > above would
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:35:37AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 05/17/2010 04:59 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> > The problem with using a VM created using the latest unstable Fedora
> > is that the latest unstable Fedora might not be working. Perhaps we
> > could always build Fedora n+1
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:59:08AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 09:06:52AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> > Unless RHEL 6 is needed to get sufficient VM capability, as was said
> > above would it not be cleaner to compile the entire release in a VM
> > using fedora
On 17 May 2010 19:08, Rawhide Report wrote:
> Compose started at Mon May 17 08:15:09 UTC 2010
>
> Broken deps for i386
> --
> almanah-0.7.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libedataserver-1.2.so.11
> almanah-0.7.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libeda
On 15 May 2010 22:13, Till Maas wrote:
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 09:29:37PM +0530, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
>> On 15 May 2010 21:07, Till Maas wrote:
>
>> > The upstream release monitoring tool (formerly fever) is not really used
>> > to identify such packages, because there is no process to identify
>
Hello,
python-nltk license has been changed from 'GPLv2' to 'ASL 2.0' in the
latest rawhide build.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=173792
The 0.9.9 version in F-13 and below keeps GPLv2.
Cheers
Robin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedor
Compose started at Mon May 17 08:15:09 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
almanah-0.7.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libedataserver-1.2.so.11
almanah-0.7.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libedataserverui-1.2.so.8
anjal-0.3.2-2.fc14.i686 r
On 05/17/2010 04:59 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> The problem with using a VM created using the latest unstable Fedora
> is that the latest unstable Fedora might not be working. Perhaps we
> could always build Fedora n+1 on top of Fedora n.
>
> Rich.
>
What some do is keep several build tr
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 11:04:18PM +0100, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:05:04PM +0100, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 03:42:47PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > Tony Nelson (tonynel...@georgeanelson.com) said:
> > > > > > same opinion here. I have ac
On 14 May 2010 14:22, drago01 wrote:
> 4) People adding negative karma because "unrelated bug that has been
> present in the older version is still not fixed"
I get this all the time. It would be nice to be able to have a
"discount this karma" button for maintainers, rather than having to
add an
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 12:49 +0200, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Mon, 17 May 2010 06:39:14 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>
> > Yes, it does compole all schemas in that directory into a single
> > binary.
>
> Are those files in size comparable to the current gconf files?
I haven't done exte
Hi.
On Mon, 17 May 2010 06:39:14 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> Yes, it does compole all schemas in that directory into a single
> binary.
Are those files in size comparable to the current gconf files?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 11:10 +0200, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sun, 16 May 2010 22:09:11 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>
> > %postun
> > glib-compile-schemas /usr/share/glib-2.0/schemas ||:
> >
> > %posttrans
> > glib-compile-schemas /usr/share/glib-2.0/schemas ||:
>
> I sure hope this i
Hi.
On Sun, 16 May 2010 22:09:11 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> %postun
> glib-compile-schemas /usr/share/glib-2.0/schemas ||:
>
> %posttrans
> glib-compile-schemas /usr/share/glib-2.0/schemas ||:
I sure hope this is solved somewhat intelligently and does not compile
each and every schema on e
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 09:06:52AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> Unless RHEL 6 is needed to get sufficient VM capability, as was said
> above would it not be cleaner to compile the entire release in a VM
> using fedora itself?
Last I heard, the builders were going to be changed to use a VM to
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Padre:
015498432f152b03aade99b946a64b5f Padre-0.61.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/
Xose Vazquez Perez writes:
> It's a 'must have', for some packages.
>
> e.g. GLIBC:
> http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob_plain;f=sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/kernel-features.h;hb=HEAD
>
> A lot of features can't be used, because 2.6.18(3.5 years old)
> is the base kernel.
This is not true
37 matches
Mail list logo
