Hi list,
I don't have time to maintain stardict (flies and ibus are quite intense),
so I am thinking to pass it to more capable and loving hands.
Anyone?
--
Ding-Yi Chen
Software Engineer
Internationalization Group
Red Hat, Inc.
Register now for Red Hat Virtual Experience, December 9.
Enterpr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/09/2010 04:05 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 09:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 21:31 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>> On 11/09/2010 07:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
In practice, we run ver
On Tuesday, November 09, 2010 14:23:54 Björn Persson wrote:
> Adam Jackson wrote:
> > % ldd `which gcalctool` | grep libX
> > libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x05f1a000)
[snip]
> ldd appears to resolve dependencies recursively. I typically use
> readelf to see what a program links to
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 08:06:13PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/09/2010 07:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 11:49 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> >> Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>> Only point to note is that it would definitely be a good thing to fix
> >>> Bu
On 11/09/2010 10:33 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
> wrote:
>> No. I'm sorry but it's fundamentaly unfair to hold me responsible for the
>> behaviour of others. If you think this shouldn't have been brought up fine
>> but if others decide to draw p
Le mardi 09 novembre 2010 à 14:19 -0500, Adam Jackson a écrit :
> When I say "vnc-like" I mean "let's scrape the pixels out of the
> rendering buffer and shove them over the wire". VNC itself is rooted,
> but vnc-like remoting can be rooted or rootless. In wayland the
> fundamental object of com
That's true, using freenx to access a whole desktop works well with xfce and
no sound. I can't imagine it working so well if trying to run gnome-shell,
sound etc remotely.
I get the impression a lot of the current desktop infrastructure doesn't
make sense when accessed remotely, eg if I ssh'ed int
On Tue, 09.11.10 23:14, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote:
> Lennart Poettering píše v Út 09. 11. 2010 v 23:07 +0100:
> > I think you aren't even aware how broken this "mix and match" network
> > approach of classic X11 is. The semantics of D-Bus and other IPCs in a
> > distributed X11 session
Lennart Poettering píše v Út 09. 11. 2010 v 23:07 +0100:
> I think you aren't even aware how broken this "mix and match" network
> approach of classic X11 is. The semantics of D-Bus and other IPCs in a
> distributed X11 session has never been clearly defined, and all kinds of
> integration between
On 11/09/2010 08:04 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
> wrote:
>> On 11/09/2010 06:12 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>>> I've mostly been watching here and I think people have been fairly
>>> clearly about their concerns: Network transparency is import
On Tue, 09.11.10 04:05, Jon Masters (jonat...@jonmasters.org) wrote:
> > > From what I've read so far you can run rootless X as a Wayland client so
> > > you can just use your remote X apps like you did in the past next to
> > > native
> > > Wayland apps. Also if there is a real interest in th
On 11/09/2010 09:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 21:31 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 11/09/2010 07:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> In practice, we run very few metrics on Bugzilla
>> This is the problem we should be gather all kinds of bug metrics and
>> genera
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 04:35:33PM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > > The UX will probably be somewhere between ssh -Y, vncserver(1), and:
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651591
> > Hopefully with a better security model than 'ssh -Y'?
> What kind of attack are you trying to prevent
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 21:31 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 07:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > In practice, we run very few metrics on Bugzilla
>
> This is the problem we should be gather all kinds of bug metrics and
> general component activity from bugzilla.
>
> This is
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 16:26 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 04:17:25PM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > The UX will probably be somewhere between ssh -Y, vncserver(1), and:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651591
>
> Hopefully with a better security model than '
At least it's winter now and a hot netbook is less of a problem than in the
summer.
On 9 Nov 2010 21:22, "Adam Williamson" wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 21:05 +, Camilo Mesias wrote:
> I'm using the experimental 3d now with gno...
You're probably not. nouveau basically has no power management
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 22:29 +0100, Rasmus Ory Nielsen wrote:
> Hi Seth,
>
> Den 09-11-2010 15:05, seth vidal skrev:
> >> > Unfortunately yum-builddep doesn't work for me. I need to be able to
> >> > change
> >> > $releasever and enabled repositories (hence the mock config file). Is
> >> > that
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
wrote:
> No. I'm sorry but it's fundamentaly unfair to hold me responsible for the
> behaviour of others. If you think this shouldn't have been brought up fine
> but if others decide to draw premature conclusions from this it's their
> fault an
On 11/09/2010 07:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> In practice, we run very few metrics on Bugzilla
This is the problem we should be gather all kinds of bug metrics and
general component activity from bugzilla.
This is very vital information for QA group to harvest and have.
( without it we cant f
Hi Seth,
Den 09-11-2010 15:05, seth vidal skrev:
>> > Unfortunately yum-builddep doesn't work for me. I need to be able to
>> > change
>> > $releasever and enabled repositories (hence the mock config file). Is that
>> > possible with yum-builddep?
> yum-builddep --releasever --disablerepo='*'
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 04:17:25PM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> The UX will probably be somewhere between ssh -Y, vncserver(1), and:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651591
Hopefully with a better security model than 'ssh -Y'?
If this has Xpra-like functionality (i.e. "screen for X"
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 21:05 +, Camilo Mesias wrote:
> I'm using the experimental 3d now with gnome shell. After a few days,
> it seems like it performs OK although it locks up for a few seconds
> now and then. It seems to recover and I can't see any obvious log
> messages around the time of the
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 17:55 +, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > Remoting a wayland application is _trivial_. Either to an X or to a
> > wayland view system. It's hard to make wayland remoting less flexible
> > than X over the network, since the na
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 09:03:38PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:43:06PM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > - We lose network transparency! Well, sure, the protocol doesn't have
> > that directly. You can still do vnc-like things trivially and with a
> > modest amount
On 11/09/2010 07:33 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
> wrote:
>> Then why are people already calling for the rejection of Wayland even
>> though Wayland is still far from being finished and hasn't even touched
>> Fedora yet.
>>
>> raising concerns !=
I'm using the experimental 3d now with gnome shell. After a few days,
it seems like it performs OK although it locks up for a few seconds
now and then. It seems to recover and I can't see any obvious log
messages around the time of the freeze. It does survive
suspend/resume, which is great. My impr
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:43:06PM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> - We lose network transparency! Well, sure, the protocol doesn't have
> that directly. You can still do vnc-like things trivially and with a
> modest amount of additional wayland protocol (or just inter-client
> conventions) you can
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 08:53:36AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> well, I imagine you know more about this than me, but I run with
> Japanese input support at least occasionally, and my impression is that
> a lot of it is a fragile tower necessitated by the fact that the deep
> underlying stuff wa
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 02:28:10PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:24 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 02:14:32PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:05 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:44:19PM -0500, B
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651571
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=459236&action=diff
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=459236&action=edit
Description: If an entry contains a to-be-encrypted attribute,
id2entry_add_ext handles a copy of the entry in whi
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> Actually there is. When someone files a good bug, as opposed to one that
> requires more than trivial attention due to significant missing or invalid
> information, achieving fixed status is an informal statement that the filer's
> effort was va
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:33 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2010/11/09 08:45 (GMT-0800) Adam Williamson composed:
>
> > There isn't a prize system for bug reports.
>
> Actually there is. When someone files a good bug, as opposed to one that
> requires more than trivial attention due to significan
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:34 -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Adam Jackson said:
> > - We lose network transparency! Well, sure, the protocol doesn't have
> > that directly. You can still do vnc-like things trivially and with a
>
> VNC-like remoting is a significant loss for server
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=561389
--- Comment #12 from Sandro Janke 2010-11-09
14:34:42 EST ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > (In reply
Once upon a time, Adam Jackson said:
> - We lose network transparency! Well, sure, the protocol doesn't have
> that directly. You can still do vnc-like things trivially and with a
VNC-like remoting is a significant loss for server environments compared
to X-like remoting.
With an X-based GUI m
On 2010/11/09 08:45 (GMT-0800) Adam Williamson composed:
> There isn't a prize system for bug reports.
Actually there is. When someone files a good bug, as opposed to one that
requires more than trivial attention due to significant missing or invalid
information, achieving fixed status is an in
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> OK, so it's likely that everything will just continue to work
> remotely, and people won't experience any problems. And they won't
> have to run VNC just to get their favourite app to display remotely.
>
> If this had been explained clearly to
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:24 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 02:14:32PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:05 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:44:19PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > > >
> > > > And where does that sit in the arc
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:12 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> To the extent that those apps call (and link) only against the toolkit
> and not against an assumed backend, sure. The strict linking changes in
> F12 or F13 or whichever it was helped a lot with this, and gtk3 will
> help more, but to pick
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:19 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:01 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:47 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > > And I'm saying you can get the network remoting effect you like in X, in
> > > Wayland. It's not built into the local Wa
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 02:14:32PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:05 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:44:19PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > >
> > > And where does that sit in the architecture?
> > >
> > > Looking over the architecture page (2nd
Adam Jackson wrote:
> % ldd `which gcalctool` | grep libX
> libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x05f1a000)
> libXfixes.so.3 => /usr/lib/libXfixes.so.3 (0x001c1000)
> libXext.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x00d42000)
> libXrender.so.1 => /usr/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0
...and once again, I'm afraid I'll have to give my apologies. I'll be
reliably online again next week.
--
Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:01 -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:47 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > And I'm saying you can get the network remoting effect you like in X, in
> > Wayland. It's not built into the local Wayland rendering system, but
> > there are both trivial ways to
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 14:05 -0500, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:44:19PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> >
> > And where does that sit in the architecture?
> >
> > Looking over the architecture page (2nd figure) it looks like the only
> > way to get the kind of network transpare
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 10:54 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:43 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
>
> > - All my X apps have to be ported! Yes, if they want to be native
> > wayland clients, they do.
>
> Minor correction (I think?) - the apps don't really need to be ported,
>
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 06:12 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> I've mostly been watching here and I think people have been fairly
>> clearly about their concerns: Network transparency is important to
>> them, and they understand that the wayland me
On 11/09/2010 06:43 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 17:40 +, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering of I'm reading this correctly. The downsides that have
>> been described are quite severe in contrast to the possible benefits.
>> It is, of course, possible that a mistake has
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 20:06 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/09/2010 07:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 11:49 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> >> Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>> Only point to note is that it would definitely be a good thing to fix
> >>> Bugzilla
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 12:02 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
> meeting tomorrow at 18:30UTC (1:30pm EDT) in #fedora-meeting on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
> = Followups =
>
> #topic Updates policy
>
> #351 Create a policy for updates - sta
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:44:19PM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
>
> And where does that sit in the architecture?
>
> Looking over the architecture page (2nd figure) it looks like the only
> way to get the kind of network transparency that X has under Wayland is
> to put the network between the Wa
Hi,
On 11/09/2010 07:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 11:49 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> Only point to note is that it would definitely be a good thing to fix
>>> Bugzilla to merge the CC lists, I'll file a bug on that. =)
>>
>> Filed 9 years
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting tomorrow at 18:30UTC (1:30pm EDT) in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.
= Followups =
#topic Updates policy
#351 Create a policy for updates - status report on implementation
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/351
#
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:47 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 12:12 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> > > Remoting a wayland application is _trivial_. Either to an X or to a
> > > wayland view system. It's hard to make wayland remoting less flexible
> > > than X over the network
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:47 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 12:12 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> > > Remoting a wayland application is _trivial_. Either to an X or to a
> > > wayland view system. It's hard to make wayland remoting less flexible
> > > than X over the network
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:43 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> - All my X apps have to be ported! Yes, if they want to be native
> wayland clients, they do.
Minor correction (I think?) - the apps don't really need to be ported,
the toolkits do. Once GTK+ is ported to Wayland, fr'instance, all GTK+
a
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 12:12 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > Remoting a wayland application is _trivial_. Either to an X or to a
> > wayland view system. It's hard to make wayland remoting less flexible
> > than X over the network, since the natural remoting level (surface
> > updates) is basic
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> wayland...when they feel its ready. By introducing it for discussion
> before they were ready to engage in that discussion you've actually
> made it more difficult for the discussion to move forward as you've
> taken away their best shot to me
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 19:12 +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 06:12 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 04:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 for bringing these points up. No offense to krh (becaus
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 17:40 +, Andrew Haley wrote:
> I'm wondering of I'm reading this correctly. The downsides that have
> been described are quite severe in contrast to the possible benefits.
> It is, of course, possible that a mistake has been made, and the acute
> loss of functionality is
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:27 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) said:
> > > B/c the perception I get is that only the desktop-oriented folks know
> > > what users want or need and the server-oriented folks do not.
> > > I think that's in error, too.
> >
> > In fact,
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
wrote:
> Then why are people already calling for the rejection of Wayland even
> though Wayland is still far from being finished and hasn't even touched
> Fedora yet.
>
> raising concerns != screaming the sky is falling
Actually, if we go bac
Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) said:
> > B/c the perception I get is that only the desktop-oriented folks know
> > what users want or need and the server-oriented folks do not.
> > I think that's in error, too.
>
> In fact, us server-oriented folks are often blessed with working directly
> wi
Gregory Maxwell (gmaxw...@gmail.com) said:
> So,
>
> > You are, in short, scared.
>
> ... I think this is a rather unfair characterization.
I don't know about that. Something new is discussed, and not everyone
understands it, and they have concerns about how it may handle some particular
cases.
Is anyone interested in resurrecting SWI Prolog? I just noticed that it was
dropped from F13 and F14.
The version in F12 was 5.7.11, the current version is 5.10.2 according to:
http://www.swi-prolog.org/
The previous packager was Gerard Milmeister.
http://www.mail-archive.com/devel@lists.fed
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 11:49 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Only point to note is that it would definitely be a good thing to fix
> > Bugzilla to merge the CC lists, I'll file a bug on that. =)
>
> Filed 9 years ago: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10898
On 11/09/2010 06:12 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 04:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for bringing these points up. No offense to krh (because it's nice
>>> technology) but you can pull my genuine networked applicat
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 12:37:34PM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> B/c the perception I get is that only the desktop-oriented folks know
> what users want or need and the server-oriented folks do not.
> I think that's in error, too.
In fact, us server-oriented folks are often blessed with working direc
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> Remoting a wayland application is _trivial_. Either to an X or to a
> wayland view system. It's hard to make wayland remoting less flexible
> than X over the network, since the natural remoting level (surface
> updates) is basically stateless
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Only point to note is that it would definitely be a good thing to fix
> Bugzilla to merge the CC lists, I'll file a bug on that. =)
Filed 9 years ago: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108983
Or 1 year ago: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523634
--
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 12:16 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 08:45 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > So, once more for the cheap seats: *why* do you think closing an older
> > bug as a dupe of a newer one is a respect issue? What's the big problem
> > with it?
>
> As a devel - I
On 11/09/2010 04:49 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 04:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
>
>>> And what happens when all the apps are native Wayland apps and
>>> none of those can be run remotely?
>>>
>>> If I wanted to step back to the pre-net era, I'd run Windows.
>>
>> +1 for brin
On 11/09/2010 05:13 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 11:44 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
>> I think we'd like to see the Fedora community figure out its position
>> on the subject— so that it can tell the Wayland developers "If you
>> continue on this track, then as things stand,
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 17:25 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 10:23:22AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> > At which point, it's too late. Unless Server-y people
>
> I object strongly to this perception that nobody involved in developing
> desktop technologies has any idea what s
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 10:23:22AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> At which point, it's too late. Unless Server-y people
I object strongly to this perception that nobody involved in developing
desktop technologies has any idea what server admins want. What we're
seeing is the development of technolo
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 08:45 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> So, once more for the cheap seats: *why* do you think closing an older
> bug as a dupe of a newer one is a respect issue? What's the big problem
> with it?
As a devel - I've found that I close bugs as dupes of other bugs and I
try to hav
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 11:44 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I think we'd like to see the Fedora community figure out its position
> on the subject— so that it can tell the Wayland developers "If you
> continue on this track, then as things stand, Fedora will not be
> making it a part of the defaul
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 04:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
>
>> +1 for bringing these points up. No offense to krh (because it's nice
>> technology) but you can pull my genuine networked applications from my
>> cold dead hands. I agree that I see t
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 04:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> +1 for bringing these points up. No offense to krh (because it's nice
> technology) but you can pull my genuine networked applications from my
> cold dead hands. I agree that I see this ongoing trend to move toward
> things that are fluffy an
On 11/09/2010 03:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 11/9/10 7:23 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
>> At which point, it's too late. Unless Server-y people point out that
>> things like network apps actually matter, the default path may be to do
>> what will look nice on a local desktop (for the record, I can s
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 12:29 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 02:50:15PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 16:41 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Really, I have no
> > > problem using my keyboard,
> >
> > Given your location and native lang
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 04:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> > And what happens when all the apps are native Wayland apps and
> > none of those can be run remotely?
> >
> > If I wanted to step back to the pre-net era, I'd run Windows.
>
> +1 for bringing these points up. No offense to krh (because it
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 02:48 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2010/11/09 07:39 (GMT+0100) David Tardon composed:
>
> > Btw, maybe you should look at the proverb in your signature and try to
> > apply it to yourself. Because in this thread you have neither shown
> > understanding nor used pleasant wor
On 11/9/10 8:23 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> I've seen the responses on the Wayland list, and it's always "Wayland
> isn't intended to do that." So, there's no point raising objections
> there.
>
> The risk is that Wayland gets developed and a bunch of key
> applications in Fedora get broken. The W
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 11/9/10 8:23 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> I've seen the responses on the Wayland list, and it's always "Wayland
>> isn't intended to do that." So, there's no point raising objections
>> there.
>>
>> The risk is that Wayland gets developed a
On Tuesday, November 09, 2010 16:30:17 Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> > On Monday, November 08, 2010 15:49:28 Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm trying to find out what are differences between environment for
> >> local rpm build and usual user's e
On 11/9/10 7:23 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> At which point, it's too late. Unless Server-y people point out that
> things like network apps actually matter, the default path may be to do
> what will look nice on a local desktop (for the record, I can see full
> screen tearing-free graphics both using
Caolán McNamara writes:
> time taken was 0.004 seconds
> zip warning: help.jar not found or empty
> adding: com.sun.PresenterScreen-linux_x86_64/presenter.xhp (deflated 81%)
>
> and nothing else.
Perhaps some ENOSPC condition?
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fing
A few folks have sufficient access to log into the builders and strace
things if necessary. You're welcome to ping me on IRC.
- J<
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
So, local mock x86_64 builds work just fine. But AFAICS the build just
hangs in fairly random places when put through x86_64 koji, anyone got
any good ideas about how to find out even what process is hung ?
e.g.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=2589336&name=build.log&offset=-400
On Monday, November 08, 2010 15:49:28 Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to find out what are differences between environment for local
> rpm build and usual user's environment. I've added regression tests to
> %check section of ksh spec file. These tests never fails when executed in
> us
On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> On Monday, November 08, 2010 15:49:28 Michal Hlavinka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm trying to find out what are differences between environment for local
>> rpm build and usual user's environment. I've added regression tests to
>> %check section of ksh spec f
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 16:09 +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 10:05 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 08:43 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 01:36:43AM +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> >>> On 11/06/2010 12:21 AM, Richard W.M. Jones
Michal Hlavinka writes:
> So it seems rpmbuild has a bug and breaks sigpipe somehow...
Perhaps it leaves it ignored? You can check with /proc/$$/status.
$ (trap '' SIGPIPE; bash x.sh)
early termination not causing broken
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint =
2010/11/9 Adam Jackson :
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 08:00 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> > "RK" == Rudolf Kastl writes:
>>
>> RK> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=7794
>> RK> guess you pulled that somewhere else.
>>
>> fedpkg co xorg-x11-drv-intel; less xorg-x11-drv
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:48 +0100, Rasmus Ory Nielsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Den 09-11-2010 13:37, Brendan Jones skrev:
> >
> > On 11/09/2010 10:33 PM, Rasmus Ory Nielsen wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Given a SRPM file and a mock config file, how do I get a list of all
> >> missing
> >> buildrequires for t
> "RK" == Rudolf Kastl writes:
RK> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=7794
RK> guess you pulled that somewhere else.
fedpkg co xorg-x11-drv-intel; less xorg-x11-drv-intel/*spec
- J<
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/m
> "RK" == Rudolf Kastl writes:
RK> Hello, I wanted to point out that about a month and a half ago intel
RK> released a new driver version 2.13.0. Could we please have an update
RK> in rawhide?
Currently rawhide seems to be at 2.13.901, a development version past
the one you are requesting.
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 08:00 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > "RK" == Rudolf Kastl writes:
>
> RK> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=7794
> RK> guess you pulled that somewhere else.
>
> fedpkg co xorg-x11-drv-intel; less xorg-x11-drv-intel/*spec
2.13.901 wasn't b
On 11/09/2010 10:48 PM, Rasmus Ory Nielsen wrote:
> Unfortunately yum-builddep doesn't work for me. I need to be able to change
> $releasever and enabled repositories (hence the mock config file). Is that
> possible with yum-builddep?
>
You could try something like:
mock -r fedora-14-i386 --ins
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
