Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:04:46PM +0200, Florent Le Coz wrote: >>   On 28/07/2010 14:52, Mike McGrath wrote: >> > In my opinion including software that even upstream says is not ready is >> > for a distribution that's "lost their way".  We

Re: Firefox 4 repo

Le 28/07/2010 19:11, Kai Engert a écrit : > Remi does: http://blog.famillecollet.com/post/2010/07/28/Firefox-4.0-Beta-2-en F12 + F13, i386 + x86_64 build available. + P.S. spec and patches http://github.com/remicollet/remirepo/tree/master/firefox/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraprojec

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/29/2010 12:01 PM, Liang Suilong wrote: > So will Chromium get into the third-party repos like RPM Fusion? RPM > Fusion has ffmpeg packages. > > The problem is that RPM Fusion needs much more time and more resources > to build such a big package. Since ffmpeg can be runtime detected by Ch

Re: Firefox 4 repo

Le 28/07/2010 19:11, Kai Engert a écrit : > Remi does: http://blog.famillecollet.com/post/2010/07/28/Firefox-4.0-Beta-2-en F12 + F13, i386 + x86_64 build available. + -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

So will Chromium get into the third-party repos like RPM Fusion? RPM Fusion has ffmpeg packages. The problem is that RPM Fusion needs much more time and more resources to build such a big package. On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 4:58 AM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On 07/28/2010 04:47 PM, Conan Kudo (

Re: Gnome 3 delayed

2010/7/29 Michał Piotrowski : > 2010/7/29 Chris Jones : >> >> I'm not going to pretend that I'm not pleased about the delay. I plan >> to keep using G2 for as long as I possible can, long after the Gnome 3 >> release. > > Is it possible to disable gnome-shell in the gnome 3? Or because it is > not

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 07:03 +0200, David Tardon wrote: > > And while Thunderbird 3 was included due to the slow development pace of > > the upstream (we used to have a very old Tb 2), Firefox 4 comes with at > > least a killer feature, WebM (IIRC, another killer feature is the new js > > engine

Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Meeting #3 Friday @ 16:00 UTC

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 23:08 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:33:46 -0700 > John Poelstra wrote: > > > > > Open Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bugs = 6 > > Days until Release Candidate Compose = 8 > > > > Here's the run down on the current open Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker > > bugs > >

Re: Can anyone contact Balint Christian (rezso)?

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 10:39:02 +0200 Sven Lankes wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 02:31:19PM +0200, Sven Lankes wrote: > > > Following the process > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers > > Is someone able to get in touch with Christian Balint (rezso)? > >

Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Meeting #3 Friday @ 16:00 UTC

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:33:46 -0700 John Poelstra wrote: > > Open Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bugs = 6 > Days until Release Candidate Compose = 8 > > Here's the run down on the current open Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker > bugs Just a few cents from me on a few of them... > 615443 :: NEW :: livecd-t

Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Meeting #3 Friday @ 16:00 UTC

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 21:57 -0700, Matt McCutchen wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 19:33 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > > 597858 :: NEW :: firefox :: Gecko Maintainer :: "SELinux is preventing > > firefox from making its memory writable and executable." crashes rawhide > > firefox start :: https://b

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 09:57:56AM +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote: > On 07/28/2010 01:08 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> On 07/27/2010 10:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >>> > >>> Are we skipping Firefox 4 for Fedora 14? Beta 2 has been released > >>> recently and I am wondering if we can go with it if it

Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Meeting #3 Friday @ 16:00 UTC

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 19:33 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > 597858 :: NEW :: firefox :: Gecko Maintainer :: "SELinux is preventing > firefox from making its memory writable and executable." crashes rawhide > firefox start :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597858 > --It's unclear if thi

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 21:20, wrote: > I found a fix on bugzilla: > rpm -e --nodeps systemd-units > yum install systemd-units > Which created the symlinks and default.service which seemed to be missing, > and allowed the boot to finish, but I may have been to quick to use it. One > CPU core is

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

I found a fix on bugzilla: rpm -e --nodeps systemd-units yum install systemd-units Which created the symlinks and default.service which seemed to be missing, and allowed the boot to finish, but I may have been to quick to use it. One CPU core is at maximum and Chrome won't open, so I'm temporari

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 19:33, wrote: > Add init=/sbin/upstart to the end of the kernel line and it will boot up > using upstart. Last lines in my boot read failing to load default.service > and then failing to start default.service. > > Check one of the recent previous messages. ln -sf /lib/sy

Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Meeting #3 Friday @ 16:00 UTC

Open Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bugs = 6 Days until Release Candidate Compose = 8 Here's the run down on the current open Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker bugs 615443 :: NEW :: livecd-tools :: David Huff :: booting live images from nightly fails (can't mount root filesystem) :: https://bugzilla.redhat

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

Add init=/sbin/upstart to the end of the kernel line and it will boot up using upstart. Last lines in my boot read failing to load default.service and then failing to start default.service. -Original Message- From: darrell pfeifer To: Development discussions related to Fedora Sent

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

2010/7/29 Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) : > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 23:28 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote: >> >> > Speaking of which, is there any chance to split ffmpeg into free (which >> > could be included in fedora) and nonfree part? IIRC we've

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

I installed the latest systemd and added the appropriate symbolic link to graphical startup. My system hangs when almost complete at the plymouth throbber. In text mode it gets to the end of starting services and hangs. gdm never starts. In /var/log/messages, these seem to be the suspicious lines

Re: Fedora 14 Milestone Reached: Feature Freeze-2010-07-27

Jonathan MERCIER said the following on 07/28/2010 06:37 PM Pacific Time: > For D Programming Feature: > ldc is in stable repo > tango is in review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608069 by > Chen Lei. > > For guideline i do a draft and ticket is open for review: > https://fedorahosted.

Fedora 14 Milestone Reached: Feature Freeze-2010-07-27

Yesterday, July 27, 2010, we reached Feature Freeze for Fedora 14 As previously noted, at Feature Freeze it is expected that all features are *significantly* "feature complete" and ready for testing: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Feature_Freeze_Policy. A review of the status section on the fol

Re: Gnome 3 delayed

2010/7/29 Chris Jones : > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:36 AM, James Laska wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 16:27 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > It seems that Gnome 3 will be released in march 2011. How will this >> > affect Fedora 14? Gnome 3 was an important feature of F14. >>

Re: Gnome 3 delayed

2010/7/28 James Laska : > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 16:27 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote: >> Hi, >> >> It seems that Gnome 3 will be released in march 2011. How will this >> affect Fedora 14? Gnome 3 was an important feature of F14. >> >> http://lwn.net/Articles/397482/ > > I believe it will continued

Re: Gnome 3 delayed

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:36 AM, James Laska wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 16:27 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > > Hi, > > > > It seems that Gnome 3 will be released in march 2011. How will this > > affect Fedora 14? Gnome 3 was an important feature of F14. > > > > http://lwn.net/Articles/39

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 17:00:01 -0500, "Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ)" wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > That is assuming that "the other repo" uses the same name as Fedora's. > Fedora could call it ffmpeg-free, and "the other repo" could call it > ffmpeg-nonfree, and

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

Orcan Ogetbil (oget.fed...@gmail.com) said: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > Fedora just can't > > include ffmpeg for obvious reasons, > > How many more years are we talking about for ffmpeg? Given that ffmpeg continues to add new codecs (AFAIK), approximately MA

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > Fedora just can't > include ffmpeg for obvious reasons, How many more years are we talking about for ffmpeg? Speaking of which, when can we include a mp3 decoder library in Fedora? I heard that all mp3 decoding patents will expire in 2

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 23:28 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote: > > > Speaking of which, is there any chance to split ffmpeg into free (which > > could be included in fedora) and nonfree part? IIRC we've done something > > like that with xine-lib-

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 23:28 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote: > Speaking of which, is there any chance to split ffmpeg into free (which > could be included in fedora) and nonfree part? IIRC we've done something > like that with xine-lib-extras and gst-plugins-bad in the past... ffmpeg, unfortunately,

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 16:58 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On 07/28/2010 04:47 PM, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 2:16 PM, drago01 > > wrote: > > > > > > No disagreement here ... in fact this is a not really a "baby step" > > but "

Re: Crash on Subcommander 2.0.0 Beta 5

Am Mittwoch, den 28.07.2010, 22:05 +0200 schrieb Jochen Schmitt: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hallo, > > unfortunately, an user has reported an crash on subcommander 2.0.0 Beta 5 > in the following bug report: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619182 > > B

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 13:55:23 -0700 darrell pfeifer wrote: > On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 23:34, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > >> > > > > First it seems that my boot would fail. It was unable to find or > > run a 'default.target' and would hang. Unfortunately it advises you > > to check the logs, but sinc

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/28/2010 04:47 PM, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 2:16 PM, drago01 > wrote: > > > No disagreement here ... in fact this is a not really a "baby step" > but "have something usable and start from there" which makes a lot of > sense.

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 23:34, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> > > First it seems that my boot would fail. It was unable to find or run a > 'default.target' and would hang. Unfortunately it advises you to check > the logs, but since syslog isn't up yet and you can't do anything to > look at dmesg thats n

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 2:16 PM, drago01 wrote: > > No disagreement here ... in fact this is a not really a "baby step" > but "have something usable and start from there" which makes a lot of > sense. > > As much as I want Chromium to be in Fedora, I don't want it in the repository if it is going

F14 Wallpapers Package -- Need a Review

Hi all, As some of you might know, we (the Fedora Design Team) would like to have first wallpapers available in Alpha release. So I've prepared a package with them (pretty much reusing spec file from previous releases) which is now awaiting a review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=618

Re: coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 15:10 -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > Item 4 is the main point that has been the big ticket item that things > > like Canonical's PPAs have hit. > > They also hit the Staples Easy Button about 1000 times. If there's a > case to be made that this should be easy to do, then we

Re: coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:51 PM, seth vidal wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 21:49 +0200, drago01 wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:37 PM, seth vidal >> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 14:12 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: >> > >> >> Maybe baby steps?  Small incremental changes.  Sure some features

Re: coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 15:37 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 14:12 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > Maybe baby steps? Small incremental changes. Sure some features will be > > missing that kopers will provide. But perhaps we could just create a > > Fedora-13-devel tag in koji, p

Crash on Subcommander 2.0.0 Beta 5

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hallo, unfortunately, an user has reported an crash on subcommander 2.0.0 Beta 5 in the following bug report: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619182 Because, I have no idea, what was going wrong, I would post this message to the list in

Re: coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

On 28/07/10 20:49, drago01 wrote: > > 5. Some easy way to enable/disable such repos other than messing with > config files? gnome-packagekit-extra tick what you need. -- Regards, Frank Murphy UTF_8 Encoded Friend of Fedora -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedo

Re: coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

drago01 (drag...@gmail.com) said: > 5. Some easy way to enable/disable such repos other than messing with > config files? yum-plugin-tmprepo? (This may not fit your definition of 'easy'.) Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/d

Re: coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 21:49 +0200, drago01 wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:37 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 14:12 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > >> Maybe baby steps? Small incremental changes. Sure some features will be > >> missing that kopers will provide. But perhaps w

Re: coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:37 PM, seth vidal wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 14:12 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> Maybe baby steps?  Small incremental changes.  Sure some features will be >> missing that kopers will provide.  But perhaps we could just create a >> Fedora-13-devel tag in koji, push i

Re: Python 2.7 status: python2.7 is in dist-f14

Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said: > Still, if they were in the py27 tag they *must* need to be rebuilt again > anyway, because the later builds in Rawhide would have been against > Python 2.6 and hence would be broken anyway. So in practice it doesn't > make a huge different, AFAICT. Bo

coprs and personal repos: [Was: Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?]

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 14:12 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > Maybe baby steps? Small incremental changes. Sure some features will be > missing that kopers will provide. But perhaps we could just create a > Fedora-13-devel tag in koji, push it to it's own repo or to individual > fedora-13-spot / fed

[Test-Announce] Testing Fedora? Please enable SELinux if you can

I've been asked by FESCo to post this public service announcement :) We'd just like to remind those who test Fedora, in whatever way...running a stable release with updates-testing, running Rawhide, being a proven tester (especially)...that it's best if you test with SELinux enabled and enforcing.

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, drago01 wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: >> > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: >> > >> >> On 07/28/2010 02:25 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote:

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, drago01 wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: > > > >> On 07/28/2010 02:25 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: > >> > > >> >> On 07/28/2010 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: > >> On 07/28/2010 02:25 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: >> > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: >> > >> >> On 07/28/2010 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:37 -0400, Paul W. F

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: > On 07/28/2010 02:25 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: > > > >> On 07/28/2010 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:37 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:04:46PM +0200,

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/28/2010 02:25 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: > >> On 07/28/2010 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >>> On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:37 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:04:46PM +0200, Florent Le Coz wrote: > On 28/07/2010 14:52,

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Peter Jones wrote: > On 07/28/2010 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:37 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:04:46PM +0200, Florent Le Coz wrote: > >>> On 28/07/2010 14:52, Mike McGrath wrote: > In my opinion includin

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/28/2010 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:37 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:04:46PM +0200, Florent Le Coz wrote: >>> On 28/07/2010 14:52, Mike McGrath wrote: In my opinion including software that even upstream says is not ready is

Re: Seeking to merge python 2.7 into rawhide

At 19:00 on 26 Jul 2010, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > revelation (okay, okay, i'm sneaking this one in because *i* depend > > on it :>) > > I depend on it to and it needs a complete overhaul and an upstream > reboot. Want to help me start an

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

Again, I never know where to reply in these long threads. ;) Personally, I would suggest we let people who are involved with upstream and follow development and handle bugs for firefox decide this. We could call them our "firefox package maintainers". ;) So, this thread serves as a way to let

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/28/2010 09:59 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Nope. That's only for things that are declared as features. If you don't > declare your version update to be a feature, you can happily do it right > up to the release freeze. > I'd like to apply it to

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

The work done by Remi, providing a parallel install Firefox 4 for Fedora 13, could be reused to provide the same parallel install in Fedora 14. http://rpms.famillecollet.com/fedora/13/remi/i386/repoview/firefox4.html http://blog.famillecollet.com/pages/Config-en kai -- devel mailing list

Re: Python 2.7 status: python2.7 is in dist-f14

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:55 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > David Malcolm (dmalc...@redhat.com) said: > > A further 26 builds in dist-f14-py27-rebuild had newer builds in > > rawhide, so we'll need to rebuild these; some are important e.g. yum and > > anaconda (see [1] again). > > Oof. In the fut

Re: Firefox 4 repo

On 18.07.2010 16:06, Mike Chambers wrote: > Anyone doing any builds of this during development and supplying a repo > to download and install that way instead of source builds? Or is it too > buggy to do at the moment? Remi does: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/fedora/13/remi/i386/repoview/firef

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:37 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:04:46PM +0200, Florent Le Coz wrote: > > On 28/07/2010 14:52, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > In my opinion including software that even upstream says is not ready is > > > for a distribution that's "lost their way".

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 09:41 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Chen Lei wrote: > > 2010/7/28 Frank Murphy : > >> On 28/07/10 13:52, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> > >> Maybe as firefox4 available in > >>> updates-testing, but certainly not a core default package. > >> > >> +

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 07:52 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > I think what people are missing is that even though our release is > scheduled for late October. The feature freeze was _yesterday_. meaning > that firefox would need to have been ready for use yesterday. Not in > October when it might ma

Re: Python 2.7 status: python2.7 is in dist-f14

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/28/2010 09:25 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > Looks like a bug in the script that I used; it was meant to not move > them, but in fact it did. D'oh. Due to an earlier bug in this script (which David successfully fixed) I didn't notice this later bug

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 19:16 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > We was delayed in F-12 (two weeks) and in F-13 (two weeks), probably > > we'll have a final version for Firefox 4 before or a bit after we > > release F-14. Another thing, we can test a lot and assist in upstream > > during our testing pha

Re: Fedora 14 branching and dist-git roll out

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/28/2010 08:15 AM, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: > So once the package is converted is the git repo read/write so we can > begin updates or is it all down until the conversion is complete? Kinda, but not for production use. Once they are all conve

Re: f14 boost-1.44.0 upgrade: notice of intent

On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 13:47 -0700, Benjamin Kosnik wrote: > > Do you have a list of packages which will need to be rebuilt? This is > > the last day before we branch, and with the dist-git outage there will > > be a short time to fix things before the Alpha freeze. Is anything in > > the critpath

Re: Python 2.7 status: python2.7 is in dist-f14

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:55 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > David Malcolm (dmalc...@redhat.com) said: > > A further 26 builds in dist-f14-py27-rebuild had newer builds in > > rawhide, so we'll need to rebuild these; some are important e.g. yum and > > anaconda (see [1] again). > > Oof. In the fut

Re: Python 2.7 status: python2.7 is in dist-f14

David Malcolm (dmalc...@redhat.com) said: > A further 26 builds in dist-f14-py27-rebuild had newer builds in > rawhide, so we'll need to rebuild these; some are important e.g. yum and > anaconda (see [1] again). Oof. In the future, can we make sure we just don't move these builds that override ne

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:04:46PM +0200, Florent Le Coz wrote: > On 28/07/2010 14:52, Mike McGrath wrote: > > In my opinion including software that even upstream says is not ready is > > for a distribution that's "lost their way". We can still be a leading > > distribution and not include pre-r

Re: Fedora 14 branching and dist-git roll out

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 07/23/2010 11:54 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: >> The conversion will take a couple days, which means our normal short >> outage for branching will be a bit extended.  I wish there was anothe

Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd is now the default init system in rawhide

Hi On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Sat, 24.07.10 00:14, Casey Dahlin (cdah...@redhat.com) wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:54:50PM -0500, Garrett Holmstrom wrote: >> > On 7/23/2010 20:26, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> > > - You can boot into either of them

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Martin Sourada wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 09:57 +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote: >> On 07/28/2010 01:08 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: >> >> On 07/27/2010 10:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Are we skipping Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?  Beta 2 has been released >> >>

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 09:57 +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote: > On 07/28/2010 01:08 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> On 07/27/2010 10:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >>> > >>> Are we skipping Firefox 4 for Fedora 14? Beta 2 has been released > >>> recently and I am wondering if we can go with it if it fits i

Re: Gnome 3 delayed

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 16:27 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > It seems that Gnome 3 will be released in march 2011. How will this > affect Fedora 14? Gnome 3 was an important feature of F14. > > http://lwn.net/Articles/397482/ I believe it will continued to be offered as an experimental

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/28/2010 07:50 PM, Andreas Tunek wrote: > > Epiphany is basically uselessin F13, see Bug 603358. Using it here just fine without that issue. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Gnome 3 delayed

Hi, It seems that Gnome 3 will be released in march 2011. How will this affect Fedora 14? Gnome 3 was an important feature of F14. http://lwn.net/Articles/397482/ Regards, Michal -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

2010/7/28 Rahul Sundaram : > On 07/28/2010 03:33 AM, Brandon Lozza wrote: >> Doesn't our version already support WebM? >> > > Nope.  We have updated Gstreamer and WebKit-Gtk in Fedora 13 and 12 for > WebM support bringing it to Epiphany and Midori users and I assume > Spot's Chromium repo users als

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/28/2010 07:23 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > Is Red Hat Legal just more careful than Novell's legal department? > Otherwise, how is it that they ship Firefox with custom patches (and call > it Firefox) and we don't.. Firefox can be shipped with custom patches and the trademark intact

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:57:39 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 07/28/2010 05:47 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Rahul Sundaram >> wrote: >>> On 07/28/2010 04:22 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote The FSF drafted up the four freedoms and it's not offtopic, we're discus

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Chen Lei wrote: > 2010/7/28 Frank Murphy : >> On 28/07/10 13:52, Mike McGrath wrote: >> >>  Maybe as firefox4 available in >>> updates-testing, but certainly not a core default package. >> >> +1 >> >> -- >> Regards, > > This is extremely complicated which means we

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

2010/7/28 Frank Murphy : > On 28/07/10 13:52, Mike McGrath wrote: > >  Maybe as firefox4 available in >> updates-testing, but certainly not a core default package. > > +1 > > -- > Regards, This is extremely complicated which means we can't push any xulrunner related packages to stable for a long

Broken dependencies: perl-Data-Alias

perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1) On i386: perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1) Please resolve this as soon as possible. -- Fedora Extra

Broken dependencies: perl-Config-Model

perl-Config-Model has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Config-Model-1.205-2.fc14.noarch requires perl(YAML::Any) >= 0:0.303 On i386: perl-Config-Model-1.205-2.fc14.noarch requires perl(YAML::Any) >= 0:0.303 Please resolve this as soon as possible. -- Fe

Broken dependencies: perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule

perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1) On i386: perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1) Please resolve this as soon as

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 28/07/2010 14:52, Mike McGrath wrote: > In my opinion including software that even upstream says is not ready is > for a distribution that's "lost their way". We can still be a leading > distribution and not include pre-release software. Especially pre-release > software that's not only in o

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Frank Murphy wrote: > On 28/07/10 13:52, Mike McGrath wrote: > >  Maybe as firefox4 available in >> updates-testing, but certainly not a core default package. > > +1 > > -- > Regards, > > Frank Murphy > UTF_8 Encoded > Friend of Fedora > -- > devel mailing list >

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 28/07/10 13:52, Mike McGrath wrote: Maybe as firefox4 available in > updates-testing, but certainly not a core default package. +1 -- Regards, Frank Murphy UTF_8 Encoded Friend of Fedora -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Florent Le Coz wrote: > On 28/07/2010 00:24, Brandon Lozza wrote: > > F11 or F12 had a beta version of firefox > > > > spot's chromium builds do support webm, it works great :) > > > > > It's still not included in fedora's repositories, so it doesn't change > anything. > Fir

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >  On 07/28/2010 05:47 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>>  On 07/28/2010 04:22 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote The FSF drafted up the four freedoms and it's not offtopic, we're discussing

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/28/2010 05:47 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> On 07/28/2010 04:22 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote >>> The FSF drafted up the four freedoms and it's not offtopic, we're >>> discussing Firefox4 and the fact that we won't be able to make changes >>

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >  On 07/28/2010 04:22 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote >> The FSF drafted up the four freedoms and it's not offtopic, we're >> discussing Firefox4 and the fact that we won't be able to make changes >> to it to fix it without their permission. > > Ther

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 28/07/2010 00:24, Brandon Lozza wrote: > F11 or F12 had a beta version of firefox > > spot's chromium builds do support webm, it works great :) > > It's still not included in fedora's repositories, so it doesn't change anything. Firefox 4 in F14 is, in my opinion, a MUST HAVE for a distributi

Re: selinux issue with wine

On 28/07/10 12:20, Ankur Sinha wrote: > I know nothing about selinux. I have no clue what the command would do. > We generally report selinux denials as bugs, and wanted to confirm if > this is another one that is to be reported. > > Sorry if it cause noise on the list. > Hi Ankur, *Normally* i

Re: selinux issue with wine

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:50:49 +0530, Ankur wrote: > We generally report selinux denials as bugs, and wanted to confirm if > this is another one that is to be reported. Well, if there were a policy for this already, SELinux would not have complained about it. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedo

Re: selinux issue with wine

On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 12:38 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:08:24 +0530, Ankur wrote: > > > hi, > > > > I've recently come across an selinux issue. > > > > Is this another selinux issue with the package? > > > > (I don't want to switch off selinux.) > > Why don't you c

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

Le 28/07/2010 12:45, Brandon Lozza a écrit : > > Mozilla's trademark requirements violate Freedom #2 > The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it > do what you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a > precondition for this. > > We're NOT allowed to make changes

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: > > The FSF drafted up the four freedoms and it's not offtopic, we're > discussing Firefox4 and the fact that we won't be able to make changes > to it to fix it without their permission. You know that Fedora isn't any different or even worse

Re: Firefox 4 for Fedora 14?

On 07/28/2010 04:22 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote > The FSF drafted up the four freedoms and it's not offtopic, we're > discussing Firefox4 and the fact that we won't be able to make changes > to it to fix it without their permission. There is no specific non-upstream change that Firefox maintainers in

  1   2   >