Jeff Spaleta wrote, at 07/22/2010 03:11 PM +9:00:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:00 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> - numpy is segfaulting during %check; am waiting on a gdb build to
>> finish (linked against 2.7) before I debug; this blocks pygtk2 which
>> blocks various things
>
> Sigh... of course it
Richard W.M. Jones wrote, at 07/22/2010 03:45 PM +9:00:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:54:32AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> right now a glibc build is going on that has --enablekernel=2.6.32
>>
>> from Jakub
>>
>> Bumping that from 2.6.18 used currently means e.g. to get rid of compat
>> bloat for
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 09:48:04AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi, Gerard. I just realized I need a newer build of Unison - 2.32 - to
> sync with a machine running a different distro. I see from the -devel
> archives that you currently don't have enough time to maintain your
> packages.
Can yo
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:54:32AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> right now a glibc build is going on that has --enablekernel=2.6.32
>
> from Jakub
>
> Bumping that from 2.6.18 used currently means e.g. to get rid of compat
> bloat for private futexes, utimensat, fallocate, O_CLOEXEC/pipe2 etc. (
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:00 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> - numpy is segfaulting during %check; am waiting on a gdb build to
> finish (linked against 2.7) before I debug; this blocks pygtk2 which
> blocks various things
Sigh... of course it does. Since numpy pretty much blocks all the
packages im
On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 20:02 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> I'm planning to do a partial mass-rebuild for Python 2.7.
>
> This would cover all Python 2 users within the distribution, roughly
> 1000 src.rpms.
>
> Some notes can be seen at:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Python_2.7/MassReb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've created a 'new' src.rpm and .spec and submitted them for review at:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=617056
The current conflicts with gnupg2 are:
file /usr/bin/gpg-zip from install of gnupg-1.4.10-2.fc13.x86_64
conflicts with file f
On 07/21/2010 09:36 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> Well, I am not a native speaker. We were looking for a verb that
>> > basically means "make this take effect immediately".
>> >
>> > i.e. the "enable"/"disable" commands makes some changes for the next
>> > time they are looked at, and then adding --
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I will forego the bikeshedding and say it should be sysconfig or
> syssetup but I do believe it will cause a lot of complaints.
sys-armyknife
system-get-me-a-beer
More seriously systemctl has been bantered around on this list
alread
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 05:25:19AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Now, after discussing this over 2years with many folks and reading up on
> launchd and SMF and the opinions on the net, we then distilled of the
> requests a set of good features we wanted to implement. Some of those
That is int
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 22:13 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:49:21AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > The logic behind chkconfig is exposed in many ways in the user
> > interface, for example in the chkconfig command line, e.g.
> > commands such as "resetpriorities", an
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:36:34PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 04:25 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > i.e. the "enable"/"disable" commands makes some changes for the next
> > time they are looked at, and then adding --realize on top makes those
> > changes take effect imme
On Wed, 21.07.10 23:00, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
> My laptop already boots fast enough already, although I guess if it can be
> improved even further with minimal disruption, why not. I don't see it as
> worth a lot of pain, though -- not because I don't use my laptop a lot, but
>
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:49:21AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > So, um. This is not so awesome, because for logged output, the multi-line
> > format makes it hard to parse. And for human-readable output, it's got the
> > opposite problem: it's more than 80 columns, and it's very verbose,
>
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:28:32PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> Well Lennart's post basically boils down to:
> * Boot faster
I don't need my systems to boot any faster. Or rather, I would like them to,
but the majority of the time is spent in the bios boot sequence already as
disks come online an
On Wed, 21.07.10 22:34, Sam Varshavchik (mr...@courier-mta.com) wrote:
> Or, when Anaconda is in the middle of updating a system from a
> previous version of Fedora.
>
> Existing udev rules in /lib/udev/rules.d may result in udev
> attempting to execute commands or scripts that have not yet been
On Wed, 21.07.10 22:13, Chuck Anderson (c...@wpi.edu) wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:49:21AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > The logic behind chkconfig is exposed in many ways in the user
> > interface, for example in the chkconfig command line, e.g.
> > commands such as "resetpriorit
Lennart Poettering píše v Čt 22. 07. 2010 v 04:11 +0200:
> Or to put this differently: launchd is in fact one great invention. It
> is a design an engineer up with, not a user/admin. And there's a reason
> for that. That's not to say the user/admin is dumb or anything, but the
> technical possibil
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 04:25 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 22.07.10 12:06, Dave Airlie (airl...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > It is needed:
> > >
> > > if [ $1 -eq 1 ] ; then
> > > # For new installations, hook unit file into the appropriate
> > > places via sym
Lennart Poettering writes:
On Wed, 21.07.10 20:08, Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) wrote:
Normally, we don't want a service to be started just because the package has
been installed:
Yepp, which is why I said "very low-level ones", i.e. as low-level as
for example udev, which you reall
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> I was pretty clear in everything you cut off about the whole "You know
> what people need, they need this"
Well Lennart's post basically boils down to:
* Boot faster
* Have the init system be more flexible and powerful
If your concern is
On Thu, 22.07.10 12:06, Dave Airlie (airl...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>
> >
> > It is needed:
> >
> > if [ $1 -eq 1 ] ; then
> > # For new installations, hook unit file into the appropriate places
> > via symlinks
> > /usr/bin/systemd-install enable --realize=reload %{unit
> > na
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:49:21AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> The logic behind chkconfig is exposed in many ways in the user
> interface, for example in the chkconfig command line, e.g.
> commands such as "resetpriorities", and stuff like that.
I think having some level of command-line use
On Wed, 21.07.10 19:39, Mike McGrath (mmcgr...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > BTW, you are emphasizing that that there was no reason for the stfuf we
> > do. But you are wrong. There actually is. The reason why we came up with
> > systemd-install as a counterpart of chkconfig instead of patching
> > chkco
>
> It is needed:
>
> if [ $1 -eq 1 ] ; then
> # For new installations, hook unit file into the appropriate places
> via symlinks
> /usr/bin/systemd-install enable --realize=reload %{unit name}.service
> > /dev/null 2>&1 || :
> else
> # For old installations, just reloa
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 19:49, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 21.07.10 20:13, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
>
> But anyway, I give up. If you keep looking long enough you'll find
> something you don't like in everything.
If this is how you normally deal with problems, I am beg
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 19:30, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 21.07.10 20:08, Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) wrote:
> It is needed:
>
> if [ $1 -eq 1 ] ; then
> # For new installations, hook unit file into the appropriate places
> via symlinks
> /usr/bin/systemd-install
On Wed, 21.07.10 20:13, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
> It appears that you're looking at this from the point of view of chkconfig
> as a tool which causes certain manipuations of the system to happen
> (symlinks changed). That's the backwards approach. Look at it from the other
> side
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> > I think the bigger question is why are we doing this?
>
> There's some motivation here:
> http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html
>
I was pretty clear in everything you cut off about th
On Wed, 21.07.10 20:08, Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > - If you want to enable and possibly start a service from the %post of
> > an RPM then use the "systemd-install enable" command, which will
> > create a few symlinks as listed in the [Install] section of the unit
> > fil
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Jonathan Underwood
wrote:
> On 21 July 2010 12:12, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Thanks, but afaics that thread doesn't really answer any of my
>> questions, it's just a bunch of yum technicalities about how the
>> implementation of having two packages actually works.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> I think the bigger question is why are we doing this?
There's some motivation here:
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 21.07.10 13:29, Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) wrote:
>
> > Once upon a time, drago01 said:
> > > And when I say/here admin I'd expect to be talking about a human (not
> > > some kind of robot that has hardwired commands and can't adapt t
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 07:15:29PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> There are legitmate concerns here, and if Fedora as a whole doesn't care
> about them, that sucks for Fedora.
It has been brought to my intention that this statement is unfairly sweeping
and broad. Which is encouraging, really, so l
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:18:09AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> BTW, you are emphasizing that that there was no reason for the stfuf we
> do. But you are wrong. There actually is. The reason why we came up with
> systemd-install as a counterpart of chkconfig instead of patching
> chkconfig is
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 03:13:12PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 20.07.10 20:24, Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 15:42 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > >
> > >> Perhaps someone cou
On Wed, 21.07.10 14:38, Dave Jones (da...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > lvm is brain damaged. strace lvm pvscan, and watch as it opens a bunch
> > of stuff that there's no way there'd ever be a volume on.
> > /dev/snd/*, tty's, usbmon etc etc
>
> looking closer, it seems to be only stat'ing, instead
On Wed, 21.07.10 13:29, Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) wrote:
> Once upon a time, drago01 said:
> > And when I say/here admin I'd expect to be talking about a human (not
> > some kind of robot that has hardwired commands and can't adapt to
> > changes).
>
> If you only have to manage one syste
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 06:55:41PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > And in this case, where it's clearly a matter of taste and bike-shedding
[...]
> > I probably shouldn't even have bothered to even reply to this mail of
> > yours.
> Well, it's nice that you deign to participate.
Sorry for returni
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 07:27:52PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> It's called systemd-install, not install-systemd. "systemd-" is the
> common prefix for many of the systemd tools (though not all). How very
> discoverable.
However, only some of those actions are "install". So that's confusing
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 04:47:38PM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > There will be an outage starting at 2010-07-21 16:00 UTC, which will
> > last approximately 3 hours. Outages will be small but noticeable for
> > small segments as systems are upda
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/2010 11:32 AM, David Shaw wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
>
I am not interested in co-maintaining gnupg-1. However I do not oppose
to revive it in koji.
>>>
>>> Forgive my ignorance of the process, but ho
> Not sure if I've asked the wider audience here, but is the import.log
> file of any use to anybody? It's one more file that might differ
> between branches even when all else is the same, and I don't necessarily
> want to keep munging it with fedpkg when importing items. Would anybody
> cry if
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=563935
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
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=592672
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
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=563935
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2010-07-21
16:02:37 EDT ---
perl-IPC-ShareLite-0.13-4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Not sure if I've asked the wider audience here, but is the import.log
file of any use to anybody? It's one more file that might differ
between branches even when all else is the same, and I don't necessarily
want to keep munging it with fedpkg when im
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 04:47:38PM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> There will be an outage starting at 2010-07-21 16:00 UTC, which will
> last approximately 3 hours. Outages will be small but noticeable for
> small segments as systems are updated and rebooted.
>
> To convert UTC to your
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> I just want to see changes in a backwards-compatible way whenever it is
> practical. I understand that that is not always the case, but I don't
> see anything here that indicates systemd and the long-standing
> chkconfig/service interfaces ca
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/20/2010 11:22 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
>>> Using names like f13, el5, and so forth would also keep dist-git
>>> consistent with git branch naming conventions. If we were to do
>>> something like that we might as well just use the value of %{d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/2010 01:55 AM, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 22:15 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
>> On 07/20/2010 08:55 PM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
>>> On 7/20/2010 19:13, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
BTW, while typing the abov
On Wed, 21.07.10 09:51, Jeff Spaleta (jspal...@gmail.com) wrote:
Heya,
> Is there a reasonable deadline to shoot for? Let me get past this
> weekend and I'll try to commit to doing so that I can be publicly
> shamed if I fail at doing it.
Thanks a lot for looking into this. Much appreciated!
N
Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said:
> Regular desktop end user wont notice any other change other than perhaps
> faster bootup and the people that call themselves "power/advanced/admin"
> users should have no problem to adapt and are urged from the start to
Please remember that F
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 14:30 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 04:26:14PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Tue, 20.07.10 16:04, Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) wrote:
> >
> > > I am not entirely sure though why those processes actually access those
> > > dirs i
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 02:30:03PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 04:26:14PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Tue, 20.07.10 16:04, Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) wrote:
> >
> > > I am not entirely sure though why those processes actually access those
>
On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
>>> I am not interested in co-maintaining gnupg-1. However I do not oppose
>>> to revive it in koji.
>>
>> Forgive my ignorance of the process, but how can I help this happen? Aside
>> from my own problems with the change, there are other repor
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 04:26:14PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 20.07.10 16:04, Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) wrote:
>
> > I am not entirely sure though why those processes actually access those
> > dirs in this case. Maybe they are iterating through the files in /dev
Once upon a time, drago01 said:
> And when I say/here admin I'd expect to be talking about a human (not
> some kind of robot that has hardwired commands and can't adapt to
> changes).
If you only have to manage one system, good for you. I have to manage a
bunch, and everything that is different
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/2010 12:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:45 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 07/21/2010 09:39 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:25 -0400, Colin
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:47 PM, James Antill wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 17:16 +0200, drago01 wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
>> > Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said:
>> >> And as the general rule goes "native configuration breaks legacy
>> >> conf
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 12:58 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Thanks, but afaics that thread doesn't really answer any of my
> > questions, it's just a bunch of yum technicalities about how the
> > implementation of having two packages actually works. What I'm
> > inter
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Jeff Splata's reply seemed to be enlightening, at least to me:
/s/Splata/Spaleta/
Sorry, Jeff!
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Thanks, but afaics that thread doesn't really answer any of my
> questions, it's just a bunch of yum technicalities about how the
> implementation of having two packages actually works. What I'm
> interested in is what was the original reason for having two branches
> packa
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:51:02 -0500, Michael wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > What was the initial reason for the 2.18 / 2.27 packaging
> > split? Is there any reason to continue to package multiple releases?
> > Should we just go back to having a single, 2.32-versioned 'unison'
> > package, or
On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 13:36 +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Hi,
>
> F-13's NetworkManager is currently still at version
> 0.8.1-0.1.git20100510.fc13, which on my Sony netbook intermittently
> disconnects on some networks, and could not pair up with the Google
> Nexus One's wireless tether (
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> We can add similar code to chkconfig too: something that warns the admin
> when a native systemd unit file exists, and then redirects the command
> properly. It is now on my todo list, but not even near the top of the
> list.
Is there
On Wed, 21.07.10 10:00, Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > If we are breaking curmudgeony workflows it be really nice to provide
> > some breadcrumbs along the way to help us old dogs learn new tricks.
> > Admins are going to need to learn how to use and configure systemd
> > native
2010/7/21 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> There is an RFE for the same compatibility from chkconfig #616857 as in
> chkconfig will try to use systemd native files first and spill out a
> deprecation warning or just spill out deprecation warning hinting users (
> Written in C patches welcome ) and #6127
On Wed, 21.07.10 13:12, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:04:39PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > ls /lib/systemd/system/
> > To enable service ( chkconfig $service on )
> > systemd-install enable $service.service
> > To disable service ( chkconfig
On 21 July 2010 12:12, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Thanks, but afaics that thread doesn't really answer any of my
> questions, it's just a bunch of yum technicalities about how the
> implementation of having two packages actually works. What I'm
> interested in is what was the original reason for hav
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:29:40AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Different for no good reason (other than to break legacy configuration)
> is crap.
Plus one million to this, by the way.
> Providing multiple interfaces, one to manage some services and one to
> manage the others, is major crap.
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 11:51 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > What was the initial reason for the 2.18 / 2.27 packaging
> > split? Is there any reason to continue to package multiple releases?
> > Should we just go back to having a single, 2.32-versioned 'unison'
> > pa
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:04:39PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> ls /lib/systemd/system/
> To enable service ( chkconfig $service on )
> systemd-install enable $service.service
> To disable service ( chkconfig $service off )
> systemd-install disable $service.service
I don't care what sp
On 07/21/2010 04:03 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Would it be reasonable to extend chkconfig so that it can know which
services it can no longer control and provide a pointer blurb to
admins when they try to use chkconfig with those services in the F14
timeframe. The reality is any change to scriptabl
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 08:03 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> 2010/7/21 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> > Admins will need to know that they have to use chkconfig for services that
> > do not have a native systemd $service file. ( legacy for services )
> >
> > And as the general rule goes "native configurat
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:45 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 07/21/2010 09:39 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:25 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Ankur Sinha
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> type=SE
Adam Williamson wrote:
> What was the initial reason for the 2.18 / 2.27 packaging
> split? Is there any reason to continue to package multiple releases?
> Should we just go back to having a single, 2.32-versioned 'unison'
> package, or should we bump unison227 to be 2.32, or add a unison232
> pack
Hi, Gerard. I just realized I need a newer build of Unison - 2.32 - to
sync with a machine running a different distro. I see from the -devel
archives that you currently don't have enough time to maintain your
packages.
I'd like to ask you to make me a co-maintainer so I can do this, but
obviously
On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 17:18 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:02 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > I'm planning to do a partial mass-rebuild for Python 2.7.
>
>
> Please, when you hit build failures, and you will if you can
> provide a link to a failure report that is easily
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 2:35 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to thank everyone for their get well wishes. I am already a lot
> better than I was when I wrote the initial mail and have full internet
> access again. The mail might have been a little premature, but this is
> what happens if one
2010/7/21 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> Admins will need to know that they have to use chkconfig for services that
> do not have a native systemd $service file. ( legacy for services )
>
> And as the general rule goes "native configuration breaks legacy
> configuration" so if a native systemd $servic
right now a glibc build is going on that has --enablekernel=2.6.32
from Jakub
Bumping that from 2.6.18 used currently means e.g. to get rid of compat
bloat for private futexes, utimensat, fallocate, O_CLOEXEC/pipe2 etc. (lots
of cloexec/nonblocking stuff), ADJ_OFFSET_SS_READ, accept4, realtime cl
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 17:16 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said:
> >> And as the general rule goes "native configuration breaks legacy
> >> configuration" so if a native systemd $service file does exist t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/2010 07:44 AM, David Shaw wrote:
> On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:22 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 18:42 +0200, Karel Klic wrote:
>>> On 07/13/2010 06:03 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
This is why I'm so surprised to see gpg be depr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/20/2010 11:35 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to thank everyone for their get well wishes. I am already a lot
> better than I was when I wrote the initial mail and have full internet
> access again. The mail might have been a little premat
Once upon a time, drago01 said:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said:
> >> And as the general rule goes "native configuration breaks legacy
> >> configuration" so if a native systemd $service file does exist than
> >> changing
On 07/21/2010 05:12 PM, Koji Build System wrote:
> ;client certificate
> Subject: Package: udev-151-8.fc13 Tag: dist-f13-updates Status: failed Built
> by: ctyler
> To: cty...@fedoraproject.org, har...@fedoraproject.org
> X-Koji-Tag: dist-f13-updates
> X-Koji-Package: udev
> X-Koji-Builder: ctyler
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said:
>> And as the general rule goes "native configuration breaks legacy
>> configuration" so if a native systemd $service file does exist than
>> changing service via chkconfig no longer will work.
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 16:39 +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> another less ugly (but still ugly) solution would be adding:
> Obsoletes: N-V-R.fc13
> Obsoletes: N-V-R.fc12
> in koji automatically for the same NVR as the package has, but I don't know
> if
> this would not make yum's depsolver cry
On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:22 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 18:42 +0200, Karel Klic wrote:
>> On 07/13/2010 06:03 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
>>> This is why I'm so surprised to see gpg be deprecated in f13. Upstream
>>> is supporting both and the manpage even indicates that the binary sh
On Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:19:54 Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 10:55 +0200, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 22:15 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > On 07/20/2010 08:55 PM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> > > > Using names like f13, el5, and so forth wo
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 10:08 -0400, James Antill wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 11:19 +0200, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
>
> > Ugly potential fix for this ugly issue: Patch rpm and yum to compare
> > N-V-R.fc13 exactly like N-V-R.f13, and carry that patch until F-15.
>
> That would be ... hard.
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 10:08 -0400, James Antill wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 11:19 +0200, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
>
> > Ugly potential fix for this ugly issue: Patch rpm and yum to compare
> > N-V-R.fc13 exactly like N-V-R.f13, and carry that patch until F-15.
>
> That would be ... hard.
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 11:19 +0200, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
> Ugly potential fix for this ugly issue: Patch rpm and yum to compare
> N-V-R.fc13 exactly like N-V-R.f13, and carry that patch until F-15.
That would be ... hard.
And ugly doesn't even begin to describe it. Also IMO using only a
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:45 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> chcon -t bin_t /usr/libexec/mission-control* /usr/libexec/telepathy*
That fixed it. Thanks
regards,
Ankur
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/2010 09:39 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:25 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>>>
type=SELINUX_ERR msg=audit(1279715487.164:21): security_compute_sid:
invalid co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/2010 08:42 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> type=SELINUX_ERR msg=audit(1279715487.164:21): security_compute_sid: invalid
> context unconfined_u:unconfined_r:telepathy_mission_control_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
> for scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfi
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:25 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> >
> >> type=SELINUX_ERR msg=audit(1279715487.164:21): security_compute_sid:
> >> invalid context
> >> unconfined_u:unconfined_r:telepathy_mission_control_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 for
> >> sc
On Tue, 2010-07-20 at 23:22 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > Using names like f13, el5, and so forth would also keep dist-git
> > > consistent with git branch naming conventions. If we were to do
> > > something like that we might as well just use the value of %{dist}.
>
> But that's just too
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 06:34 -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:38:12PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > It was suggested to keep the Makefile that exists in every package
> > module/branch in CVS right now, but set it up so that any Make command
> > issued would print a remi
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
