Hi,
I was trying to find out why is coin3d version 3.1.3 (latest stable
version) and its python binding (pivy) not in fedora. All I managed to
get was a bugzilla thread
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?format=multiple&id=458975
which was talking about getting coin3d version 3 for Fedora. H
Seems generally reasonable to me.
Is there a definition somewhere of what constitutes a "critical path
update"?
Eric
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 18:49:13 -0700
Eric Smith wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Were there reports of the existing build causing problems?
>
> I don't think there was any prior F14 build of meshlab. I got email
> for the FTBFS bug.
Yeah, there was a 1.2.2-4.fc14 build.
http://koji.fedoraproje
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 10:59 -0400, Brandon Lozza wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On 09/21/2010 07:20 AM, Brandon Lozza wrote:
> >> One thing I wanted to point out. Windows users get to install the
> >> latest Firefox, KDE, and other apps without having to wait fo
We've built gobject-introspection 0.9.6 in rawhide today. This version
changes the format of .gir files, making it necessary to rebuild all
packages that install gir files. I've started doing those rebuilds, but
I didn't get entirely through, so there will be some fallout in
tomorrows rawhide.
--
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 22:10 +, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 12:36:15 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>
> > DEBUG util.py:260: Transaction Check Error: DEBUG util.py:260:file
> > /usr/lib/girepository-1.0/DBusGLib-1.0.typelib conflicts between
> > attempted installs of
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:10:37PM +, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 12:36:15 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>
> > DEBUG util.py:260: Transaction Check Error: DEBUG util.py:260:file
> > /usr/lib/girepository-1.0/DBusGLib-1.0.typelib conflicts between
> > attempted inst
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Were there reports of the existing build causing problems?
I don't think there was any prior F14 build of meshlab. I got email for
the FTBFS bug.
> I don't see the point of pushing it as an update at all, unless it's
> fixing some bad behavior in the existing build or
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> I'd like to ask for feedback and helping cleaning up an updates policy
> draft page:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kevin/Updates_Policy_Draft
>
> How can we clarify the language or the layout of the page to be more
> cl
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 17:09:32 -0500
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 15:47:04 -0600,
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Greetings.
> >
> > I'd like to ask for feedback and helping cleaning up an updates
> > policy draft page:
>
> Do you want feedback on the mailing list or the Talk pa
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 15:47:04 -0600,
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> I'd like to ask for feedback and helping cleaning up an updates policy
> draft page:
Do you want feedback on the mailing list or the Talk page pn the wiki?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https:/
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 12:36:15 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> DEBUG util.py:260: Transaction Check Error: DEBUG util.py:260:file
> /usr/lib/girepository-1.0/DBusGLib-1.0.typelib conflicts between
> attempted installs of dbus-glib-0.86-4.fc14.i686 and
> gobject-introspection-0.9.6-1.fc15.i686
>
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 15:45, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
>>you want something better than stable for KDE you can one click
>>install the factory KDE repo. You can one click install the trunk repo
>>too. They even have two Chromium branches available for single click
>>install (version 6 and 7). Per
Greetings.
I'd like to ask for feedback and helping cleaning up an updates policy
draft page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kevin/Updates_Policy_Draft
How can we clarify the language or the layout of the page to be more
clear? Are there places that it could be more like the existing pack
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2010-09-21)
===
Meeting started by nirik at 19:30:01 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-09-21/fesco.2010-09-21-19.30.log.html
Meeting summary
-
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:59:06 -0400, you wrote:
>However, if for example Microsoft had a similar system and did package
>software for it. Their users would be up in arms for the latest
>firefox too and Microsoft wouldn't keep them on an old firefox
>version.
You are ignoring the troubles Microsoft
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:06:09 -0700
Eric Smith wrote:
> A bug was filed against meshlab because of an FTBFS for Fedora 14. I
> added a patch to resolve it and submitted an update. After seven
> days with no feedback, I was able to push it to stable.
Were there reports of the existing build cau
On Tuesday, September 21, 2010, 2:54:31 AM, Martin Stransky wrote:
> On 09/21/2010 01:45 AM, Bojan Smojver wrote:
>> On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 17:50 +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote:
>>> Isn't that a security related
>>> update?
>> Ping...
> I'm working on it, recently it's delayed in rel-eng:
> https://fed
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:20:05 -0400, you wrote:
>One thing I wanted to point out. Windows users get to install the
>latest Firefox, KDE, and other apps without having to wait for a new
>Windows release. If users had to wait for Windows 8 to get the latest
>Firefox, things would be messy. I don't un
On Friday, September 17, 2010 11:04 am, Richard Hughes wrote
> On 17 September 2010 08:01, FlorianFesti wrote:
> > Can someone please elaborate a bit what pieces of information are really
> > needed? The .desktop files as a whole?
>
> Information we use in app-install:
>
> TABLE translations:
>
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 03:07 +0800, Liang Suilong wrote:
> If someone has enough interest in backporting something from a newer
> release, we can set up a personal repo on the repos.fedorapeople.org.
> Just like firefox4 and yum-rawhide repo.
>
>
> Maybe we wait for Copr. Seth Vidal is working o
If someone has enough interest in backporting something from a newer
release, we can set up a personal repo on the repos.fedorapeople.org. Just
like firefox4 and yum-rawhide repo.
Maybe we wait for Copr. Seth Vidal is working on it. We can easily set up
and manage a backport or testing repo on Co
Join us on irc.freenode.net #fedora-meeting for this important meeting.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010 @ 21:00 UTC (17:00 EDT/14:00 PDT)
"Before each public release Development, QA, and Release Engineering
meet to determine if the release criteria are met for a particular
release. This meeting i
DEBUG util.py:260: Transaction Check Error:
DEBUG util.py:260:file /usr/lib/girepository-1.0/DBusGLib-1.0.typelib
conflicts between attempted installs of dbus-glib-0.86-4.fc14.i686 and
gobject-introspection-0.9.6-1.fc15.i686
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 10:06 -0700, Eric Smith wrote:
> A bug was filed against meshlab because of an FTBFS for Fedora 14. I
> added a patch to resolve it and submitted an update. After seven days
> with no feedback, I was able to push it to stable.
>
> For an FTBFS for a new Fedora release, do
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 15:46 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:
> Thank you to all the feature owners and developers for all their hard
> work to make Fedora 14 the best Fedora release yet. We are almost to
> the end!
>
> As a follow-up to last week's reminder
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:06:09 -0700, Eric Smith wrote:
> For an FTBFS for a new Fedora release, does it really make sense to have
> the seven day delay? I don't see what the downside would be of allowing
> it to be pushed to stable immediately. Even if there's something wrong
> with the update, i
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 01:23:37PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
> meeting tomorrow at 19:30UTC (3:30pm EDT) in #fedora-meeting on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
I won't be able to make it, as per usual, due to having to commute to
the univ
A bug was filed against meshlab because of an FTBFS for Fedora 14. I
added a patch to resolve it and submitted an update. After seven days
with no feedback, I was able to push it to stable.
For an FTBFS for a new Fedora release, does it really make sense to have
the seven day delay? I don't
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 14:13 +0200, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
> On 09/20/2010 02:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 01:05 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
> >> I have recently switched from F13 to F14 using preupgrade.
> >> abtr-gui UI seems to be good but misses button to manually i
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:59:06 -0400,
Brandon Lozza wrote:
> However, if for example Microsoft had a similar system and did package
> software for it. Their users would be up in arms for the latest
> firefox too and Microsoft wouldn't keep them on an old firefox
> version. Where is the logic i
Compose started at Tue Sep 21 13:15:26 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
RackTables-0.18.3-1.fc14.noarch requires /usr/local/bin/php
RackTables-0.18.3-1.fc14.noarch requires perl(File::FnMatch)
1:anjuta-2.30.0.0-2.fc1
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/21/2010 07:20 AM, Brandon Lozza wrote:
>> One thing I wanted to point out. Windows users get to install the
>> latest Firefox, KDE, and other apps without having to wait for a new
>> W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/21/2010 07:20 AM, Brandon Lozza wrote:
> One thing I wanted to point out. Windows users get to install the
> latest Firefox, KDE, and other apps without having to wait for a new
> Windows release. If users had to wait for Windows 8 to get the lat
commit a369372a4b5626a96f973aca52393977e8d4e66b
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Tue Sep 14 17:38:20 2010 +0200
6.11 bump
perl-Test-Inter required to build is missing now.
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Date-Manip.spec | 19 +++
sources |2 +-
3 fi
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:36:46 -0400, you wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 21:58:53 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>>2010/9/20 Micha? Piotrowski :
Ok, so maybe it's time to setup Fedora "backports" repo for these that
wants new and shiny Fire
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=633750
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Is GNU/Linux supposed to be a mirror into software's past?
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Brandon Lozza wrote:
> One thing I wanted to point out. Windows users get to install the
> latest Firefox, KDE, and other apps without having to wait for a new
> Windows release. If users had to wait for
One thing I wanted to point out. Windows users get to install the
latest Firefox, KDE, and other apps without having to wait for a new
Windows release. If users had to wait for Windows 8 to get the latest
Firefox, things would be messy. I don't understand what the fear is of
doing this on GNU/Linux
namically determine C++ include path at compile time (# 630474)
- Remove unneeded BuildRoot field and clean section
lxdm-0.3.0-0.1.20100921gitcf9b2cbb.fc15
---
* Tue Sep 21 2010 Christoph Wickert -
0.3.0-0.1.20100921gitcf9b2cbb
- Update to GIT snapshot of 2010092
On 09/20/2010 02:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-09-20 at 01:05 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
>> I have recently switched from F13 to F14 using preupgrade.
>> abtr-gui UI seems to be good but misses button to manually install
>> debug-info of package similar
>> to KDE 4.5 crash repor
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 13:49 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:51:03 +0200, Michał wrote:
>
> > Setting up "official" backport repo will avoid repos fragmentation.
> > Keeping all cool updates in one place appears to be a reasonable idea.
> > Am I right?
>
> Wait a minute! Yo
Thanks for your announcement, Andre. I will be away on holidays in the
following three days, so testers please help validate the DVD, CD and
Live Image installation tests[1]. Thanks in advance!
Rgds,
Hurry
[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test
On Tue, 2010-09
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:51:03 +0200, Michał wrote:
> Setting up "official" backport repo will avoid repos fragmentation.
> Keeping all cool updates in one place appears to be a reasonable idea.
> Am I right?
Wait a minute! You need to define "fragmentation" here. It seems you refer
to the geograph
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 12:39:09 -0400, Tom wrote:
> "Bryn M. Reeves" writes:
> > On 09/15/2010 05:06 PM, Robert Spanton wrote:
> >> So, would be acceptable to register requests for -static package
> >> variants as tickets on bugzilla? Or is there a better way to try to
> >> encourage people to gener
On Wed, 2010-09-15, I wrote:
> However, only a few packages in Fedora provide -static variants. This
> has meant that I've had to locally build these, which is obviously not
> desirable from a maintenance perspective.
>
> So, would be acceptable to register requests for -static package
> variants
Martin Stransky redhat.com> writes:
> I'm working on it, recently it's delayed in rel-eng:
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4125
Thank you!
--
Bojan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi all,
Yorba, the company that develops our current default photo management
tool (Shotwell), finally released an updated version of Valencia, a
gedit Vala development environment, a few months back. We've had this
package in our review queue for a lot longer, and unfortunately the
review got sta
2010/9/21 Adam Williamson :
> On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 08:49 +, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
>> Sounds like the only way to package Firefox under such a backport scheme
>> would be to bundle Gecko etc.
>
> Yup. In MDV, Firefox isn't/wasn't allowed under the backports
> guidelines. I think this ma
On 09/21/2010 02:19 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:43:43 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> The Mandriva policy is a reasonable starting point:
>>
>> http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Policies/SoftwareMedia#Backports_policy
>>
>> it's sketchy and not greatly written, but the
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 08:49 +, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:43:43 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > The Mandriva policy is a reasonable starting point:
> >
> > http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Policies/SoftwareMedia#Backports_policy
> >
> > it's sketchy and not greatly
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:43:43 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> The Mandriva policy is a reasonable starting point:
>
> http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Policies/SoftwareMedia#Backports_policy
>
> it's sketchy and not greatly written, but the basic idea is that
> backports should only be 'leaf' packages
Fedora 14 Beta RC3 is now available [1]. Please refer to the following
pages for download links and testing instructions.
Installation:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test
Desktop:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test
Ideally, all
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:31:06 -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 09:59:51PM +, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
>> Well, we're not, thankfully, in the same situation as some other distro
>> where each third-party repository overlap quite a lot because they
>> rebuild, possibly
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 20:00:21 -0500, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> On 9/20/2010 16:41, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Fedora Koji Build System
>> wrote:
>>> Miro-3.0.3-2.fc13 unsuccessfully untagged from
>>> dist-f13-updates-testing-pending by bodhi Operation fail
56 matches
Mail list logo
