On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:16:42PM -0800, John Reiser wrote:
>> On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>> > 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
>> > the vendor
>> False. In this particular c
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 05:20:57PM -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 05:11 PM, nodata wrote:
> > On 17/11/10 22:16, John Reiser wrote:
> >> On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> >>> 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
> >>> the vendor
>
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 15:21 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 08:57 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >
> >> This solution could be reverting the problem causing glibc change, or
> >> maybe changing it to do forward memcpy's while
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 04:27:48AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:26:31PM -0500, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 November 2010 22:59:54 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > Pretty sure it doesn't point them out. It just breaks them.
> >
> > Using memcpy on overlappi
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:39:15PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> Any normal person writing code is going to write a memcpy that copies
> up, whether a simple C loop or optimized assembly, so I really doubt
> you'll find lots of architectures that are widely used in the Unix world
> where people use
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 23:30:00 Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Matthew Garrett said:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:03:02PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> > > However, I still think that changing memcpy away from years of "it just
> > > works" is an ABI change that should not be taken
Once upon a time, Matthew Garrett said:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:30:00PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> > How is that relevant? If the behavior changes on only some
> > architectures, then it is okay?
>
> If it's broken on non-x86 already then there haven't been "years of 'it
> just works'".
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 23:27:48 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:26:31PM -0500, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 November 2010 22:59:54 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > Pretty sure it doesn't point them out. It just breaks them.
> >
> > Using memcpy on overlapping
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> POSIX specifies memcpy's ABI. Both the previous implementation and the
> current glibc implementation of memcpy() is compliant with the defined ABI.
No, POSIX doesn't specify ABIs, only APIs.
--
Chris Adams
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY In
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:30:00PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Matthew Garrett said:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:03:02PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> > > However, I still think that changing memcpy away from years of "it just
> > > works" is an ABI change that should not be tak
Once upon a time, Matthew Garrett said:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:03:02PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> > However, I still think that changing memcpy away from years of "it just
> > works" is an ABI change that should not be taken lightly and IMHO
> > shouldn't be done in a "stable" release of gl
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:26:31PM -0500, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 November 2010 22:59:54 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Pretty sure it doesn't point them out. It just breaks them.
>
> Using memcpy on overlapping ranges is undefined behavior; a crash is a pretty
> good way of pointin
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 22:59:54 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:42:56AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Because it's NOT a bug in glibc, because what glibc does is CORRECT,
> > because it actually POINTS OUT bugs in applications which are
> > portability issues and can hur
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 16:43:48 Magnus Glantz wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 10:18 PM, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> >> 2) Create a work-around for the end-users (as has been done by several
> >> people in the BZ #638477-thread)
> >
> > This pretty much erases whatever incentive Adobe might have to act
Chris Adams writes:
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
Fulko Hew writes:
>I know the definition for memcpy (on Linux) says don't use overlapping
>regions
No, the definition for memcpy on Linux does not say that. What says that is
the POSIX specification. Which is called a "standard".
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Tom "spot" Callaway
wrote:
> Here are the list of this week's changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
>
> The FPC has taken over evaluating exceptions to the Bundled Library
> Guidelines. A list of standard questions to be answered to give the FPC
> infor
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:03:02PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> However, I still think that changing memcpy away from years of "it just
> works" is an ABI change that should not be taken lightly and IMHO
> shouldn't be done in a "stable" release of glibc. Is memcpy called
> often enough (and on la
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:42:56AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Because it's NOT a bug in glibc, because what glibc does is CORRECT, because
> it actually POINTS OUT bugs in applications which are portability issues and
> can hurt future optimization opportunities (regardless of whether the
> c
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
[snip]
> shouldn't be done in a "stable" release of glibc. Is memcpy called
> often enough (and on large enough blocks) that this change makes a real
> performance difference (not just on a synthetic memcpy benchmark)?
Most code is not perform
On 11/17/2010 03:13 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:16:42PM -0800, John Reiser wrote:
>> On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>>> 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
>>>the vendor
>> False. In this particular case, it is po
> "MF" == Mike Fedyk writes:
MF> Hopefully some better spam filtering can be implemented so that
MF> fedora's mail servers don't end up in spam block lists anymore.
Spam filtering will never prevent every spam from getting through. The
host forwards lots of mail; people are going to falsely
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> Fulko Hew writes:
> >I know the definition for memcpy (on Linux) says don't use overlapping
> >regions
>
> No, the definition for memcpy on Linux does not say that. What says that is
> the POSIX specification. Which is called a "standard".
Just for kick
Nov 17 17:58:28 mail1 postfix/smtpd[29706]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
bastion02.fedoraproject.org[209.132.181.3]: 450 4.7.1 Service
unavailable; Client host [209.132.181.3] blocked using
dnsbl.sorbs.net; Currently Sending Spam See:
http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?209.132.181.3;
from= to=
proto=E
On Wed, 17.11.10 20:00, Bruno Wolff III (br...@wolff.to) wrote:
> I am using rawhide now and am seeing some issues that might be systemd
> related, but am not completely sure. Should I file these against the package
> that is having the problem (e.g. nut) and copy someone, or should I file
> these
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> * F12 critical path/update testing issues. (does it matter this close to
>> EOL?)
>
> Now Fedora n-1 is F13 and we're already seeing the same sort of issues there
> (e.g. the KDE 4.5.3 (non-critpath) bugfix update has ka
I am using rawhide now and am seeing some issues that might be systemd
related, but am not completely sure. Should I file these against the package
that is having the problem (e.g. nut) and copy someone, or should I file
these against systemd?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
ht
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:58:52AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Magnus Glantz wrote:
> > Because Adobe is not the one that pretty quickly risks loosing users.
> > Ignoring flash content on the web is not done as easy as you can change
> > between two Linux distributions.
>
> Uh, for me it's much e
Fulko Hew writes:
I know the definition for memcpy (on Linux) says don't use overlapping
regions
No, the definition for memcpy on Linux does not say that. What says that is
the POSIX specification. Which is called a "standard".
pgpoYWFweeBxG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailin
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:08:00PM -0500, Fulko Hew wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Jon Masters
> > wrote:
> > > Did anyone upstream look into a compatibility environment variable that
> > > could be exported to change the dire
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Fulko Hew wrote:
> I know the definition for memcpy (on Linux) says don't use overlapping
> regions but thats really a poor excuse for knowingly misbehaving when
> it could certainly prevented. Sorry, but using 'optimization' as a defense
> is just plain poor engi
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Jon Masters
> wrote:
> > Did anyone upstream look into a compatibility environment variable that
> > could be exported to change the direction of the memcpy? Yes, it's a
> > hack, but it would allow affected
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=643298
Itamar Reis Peixoto changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
Magnus Glantz wrote:
> Because Adobe is not the one that pretty quickly risks loosing users.
> Ignoring flash content on the web is not done as easy as you can change
> between two Linux distributions.
Uh, for me it's much easier. I've run for years without ANY Flash plugin. At
the moment, I'm ru
Josh Boyer wrote:
> I will be very, very, disappointed if that gets added as a criteria
> for a Fedora release. It would be no different than making sure the
> nvidia driver works, and we certainly shouldn't be doing that either.
+1
We should not support proprietary software, ever.
Kevi
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> Dont we have an upstream mantra to uphold...
>
> Forward all Fedora users and otherwize that experience this to Adobe..
>
> If we are going hack around this on our side where are we going to draw
> the line..
>
> Are we planning to start hacking around every ill wr
Andrew Haley wrote:
> So we should be able simply to patch glibc, right? Can't see any reason
> not to.
Because it's NOT a bug in glibc, because what glibc does is CORRECT, because
it actually POINTS OUT bugs in applications which are portability issues and
can hurt future optimization opportun
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 23:38:38 +0100
François Cami wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Kevin Kofler
> wrote:
> > Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >> So, there are no folks in the KDE sig using F13 anymore?
> >>
> >> Perhaps call for testers in the users / kde lists?
> >
> > I think this issue goes far,
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:16:42PM -0800, John Reiser wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> > 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
> >the vendor
> False. In this particular case, it is possible to binary edit the plugin
> libflashplayer.
Benjamin Kreuter writes:
In the grand scheme of things, this is a bug that Adobe could fix pretty
quickly, if they feel like they have a good reason to do that. Why not put
the burden on them?
They are fixing it.
There's no need to waste any more electrons on this. Linus's fix is a
tempora
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 17:36:54 -0500,
Adam Jackson wrote:
>
> Breaking proprietary drivers has _never_ been a ship criteria while I've
> been in charge. Remember F9, when we shipped an xserver 1.5 snapshot
> before all the binary drivers were ported? I got a lot of shit for
> that, that was
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> So, there are no folks in the KDE sig using F13 anymore?
>>
>> Perhaps call for testers in the users / kde lists?
>
> I think this issue goes far, far beyond just KDE. There are packages which
> have few users even for F
* Peter Jones [17/11/2010 23:31] :
>
> To be fair, we're not packaging flash in Fedora anyway.
>From the post that started this thread:
"This solution could be reverting the problem causing glibc change, or
maybe changing it to do forward memcpy's while still using the new SSE
instructions,
Once upon a time, Gregory Maxwell said:
> But is it only me who worries that lots of people are running code
> exposed to the internet that has obviously never even been run under
> valgrind?
Yeah, people are acting like Adobe Flash is the only program in the
world to make this (unfortunately qui
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 15:42 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 16:33:59 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
> > On 11/17/2010 03:41 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 21:46:09 +0100, François
> > > Cami wrote:
> > >> IIRC broken proprietary drivers never stopped
Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> I maintain LibRaw, which is only a static library -- upstream has
> rejected the idea of maintaining dynamic libs since they would have to
> take care of ABI compatibility across releases.
>
> I wanted to know if there are any other only-static libraries out
> there and
On 11/17/2010 05:20 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> The original testing that went with the GLIBC patches also showed no
> speedup on the hardware Linus uses, but it did show an impressive
> (perhaps too impressive) speedup on other hardware:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha/1
On Wednesday 17 November 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > I'd get rid of the versioned javadoc dir altogether, and simply install
> > to %{_javadocdir}/%{name}. Unversioned is good for bookmarking and
> > javadoc crosslinking.
>
> One thing you have to be careful of, no matter
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 07:39 -0500, Eric "Sparks" Christensen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/17/2010 03:57 AM, Martin Sourada wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 17:17 -0500, Eric "Sparks" Christensen wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
>
2010/11/18 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> On 11/17/2010 09:09 PM, Marius Andreiana wrote:
> > Does anybody have suggestions how an end user could debug this?
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580703
>
>
Had you tried this already [1]
>
> JBG
>
> 1. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_de
On 11/17/2010 05:11 PM, nodata wrote:
> On 17/11/10 22:16, John Reiser wrote:
>> On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>>> 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
>>> the vendor
>>
>> False. In this particular case, it is possible to binary edit the
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
> Lets also not forget that the motivation for changing memcpy was to
> get some speedup - has anyone seen evidence of any significant benefit
> of that glibc change?
>
> The BZ ref'd in this thread has linus' (simple) tests which dont
>
* John Reiser [17/11/2010 22:30] :
>
> On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>
> > 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
> >the vendor
>
> False. In this particular case,
FWIW, I was refering to the general case.
>
On 17/11/10 22:16, John Reiser wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>> 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
>> the vendor
>
> False. In this particular case, it is possible to binary edit the plugin
> libflashplayer.so so that all its cal
Lets also not forget that the motivation for changing memcpy was to
get some speedup - has anyone seen evidence of any significant benefit
of that glibc change?
The BZ ref'd in this thread has linus' (simple) tests which dont
confirm any benefit of the change compared to his simpler version (
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Marius Andreiana
wrote:
> Does anybody have suggestions how an end user could debug this?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580703
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590907
Regards,
François
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.
On 11/17/2010 09:09 PM, Marius Andreiana wrote:
> Does anybody have suggestions how an end user could debug this?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580703
Had you tried this already [1]
JBG
1. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_sound_problems
--
devel mailing list
devel@list
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, there are no folks in the KDE sig using F13 anymore?
>
> Perhaps call for testers in the users / kde lists?
I think this issue goes far, far beyond just KDE. There are packages which
have few users even for Fedora n, let alone n-1.
Yet another example of the update proc
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 16:33:59 -0500,
Peter Jones wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 03:41 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 21:46:09 +0100,
> >François Cami wrote:
> >>
> >> IIRC broken proprietary drivers never stopped us from shipping, but I
> >> could be wrong.
> >
> > Offic
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=652158
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-17
16:46:58 EST ---
perl-Net-SNMP-6.0.1-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update
On 11/17/2010 03:45 PM, mike cloaked wrote:
> Just a thought - but for those users who use chrome/chromium as prime
> browser where flash is part of the deal
Flash is only bundled in Google's Chrome builds, not in the FOSS
Chromium code.
~spot
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 11/17/2010 10:18 PM, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
>> 2) Create a work-around for the end-users (as has been done by several
>> people in the BZ #638477-thread)
> This pretty much erases whatever incentive Adobe might have to actually fix
> the bug. Instead of fixing their code, now what they can do
commit 78e76d0737f2985f6c00420034e2e1d2483a7f0a
Author: Tom "spot" Callaway
Date: Wed Nov 17 16:36:40 2010 -0500
update to 6.0.1, which removed all occurrences of the "locked" attribute,
deprecated in perl 5.12.0
perl-Net-SNMP.spec | 22 ++
sources|2
commit 493a74751626dab9e00fc77476b015b5c7b0220e
Author: Tom "spot" Callaway
Date: Wed Nov 17 16:36:18 2010 -0500
update to 6.0.1, which removed all occurrences of the "locked" attribute,
deprecated in perl 5.12.0
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Net-SNMP.spec | 22 ++--
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Net-SNMP:
6137f04f9942d703f66179f890e3d096 Net-SNMP-v6.0.1.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
On 11/17/2010 03:41 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 21:46:09 +0100,
>François Cami wrote:
>>
>> IIRC broken proprietary drivers never stopped us from shipping, but I
>> could be wrong.
>
> Officially. Unofficially, it was probably a contributing factor.
No, I don't think
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:41:15PM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 21:46:09 +0100,
> François Cami wrote:
> >
> > IIRC broken proprietary drivers never stopped us from shipping, but I
> > could be wrong.
>
> Officially. Unofficially, it was probably a contributing facto
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:08:10PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Well it would be mightily nice to have an infrastructure that can handle
> > keyboard extended keys (almost every new keyboard sold in the last
> > decade has one or more of those) without barfing because the
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> Did anyone upstream look into a compatibility environment variable that
> could be exported to change the direction of the memcpy? Yes, it's a
> hack, but it would allow affected users to have an option.
Could we make use of that sort of envir
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 15:58:28 Magnus Glantz wrote:
> I'm not saying that a broken Adobe Flash would stop Fedora from shipping.
>
> But.. if we notice that it's broken, we can:
> 1) Notify Adobe about it, so they -can- provide a fix. If they do not
> know, they can't fix it.. The Adobe dev
On 11/17/2010 12:41 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> 2) Issues found in proprietary software cannot be fixed by anybody except
>the vendor
False. In this particular case, it is possible to binary edit the plugin
libflashplayer.so so that all its calls to memcpy become calls to memmove.
The change
On 11/17/2010 10:02 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 08:58 PM, Magnus Glantz wrote:
>> But.. if we notice that it's broken, we can:
>> 1) Notify Adobe about it, so they -can- provide a fix. If they do not
>> know, they can't fix it.. The Adobe developers I e-mailed with did say
>>
Does anybody have suggestions how an end user could debug this?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580703
Thanks!
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Well it would be mightily nice to have an infrastructure that can handle
> keyboard extended keys (almost every new keyboard sold in the last
> decade has one or more of those) without barfing because the original
> x11 protocol designers thought 8 bits would be enough for
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 15:21:55 Magnus Glantz wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 09:09 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 +0100,
> >>
> >> Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> For those who do not know i
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> 3. Spend that time working on open alternative and get rid of flash for
> good
Write a cross-platform IDE for HTML5-based technologies. Of course it
would also require a fast Javascript JIT engine, which has been frowned
upon[1], so I don't know if there is a
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Alexander Kurtakov wrote:
> Are you interested in helping us getting m2eclipse packaged and available
> on
> Fedora?
If yes please join #fedora-java on freenode.net or say so on this mailing
> list
> and I'll help as much as possible for this to become a reality.
Here are the list of this week's changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
The FPC has taken over evaluating exceptions to the Bundled Library
Guidelines. A list of standard questions to be answered to give the FPC
information on whether to grant exceptions has been added to the
Guidelines:
ht
On 11/17/2010 08:58 PM, Magnus Glantz wrote:
> But.. if we notice that it's broken, we can:
> 1) Notify Adobe about it, so they -can- provide a fix. If they do not
> know, they can't fix it.. The Adobe developers I e-mailed with did say
> that they took the issue seriously, they want it to work on
On 11/17/2010 09:46 PM, François Cami wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Magnus Glantz wrote:
>> On 11/17/2010 09:09 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Wolff IIIwrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 +0100,
Hans de Goedewrote:
> For th
On 10:51:26 pm Wednesday, November 17, 2010 Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:23:49 -0500,
>
> "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote:
> > Here are the list of recent changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java
> > Diff:
> > https:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 21:46:09 +0100,
François Cami wrote:
>
> IIRC broken proprietary drivers never stopped us from shipping, but I
> could be wrong.
Officially. Unofficially, it was probably a contributing factor.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedorapro
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Magnus Glantz wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 09:09 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 +0100,
>>> Hans de Goede wrote:
For those who do not know it yet, recent Fedora glibc upda
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:44 PM, Magnus Glantz wrote:
> For me it's natural that we should care about the end-user experience of
> Fedora, even if that does include us caring about application outside of the
> Fedora owned repositories.
Just a thought - but for those users who use chrome/chromiu
On 11/17/2010 09:30 PM, Ugis Fedora wrote:
> From: jonat...@jonmasters.org
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:16:20 -0500
> Subject: Re: Fixing the glibc adobe flash incompatibility
> CC: fedora-devel-l...@redhat.com
>
> On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 08:57 +0100, Hans de Go
* Magnus Glantz [17/11/2010 21:33] :
>
> I really can't see why it would be a bad thing Fedora would do QA on a
> proprietary software that is very important for a majority of the Fedora
> users.
1) Time spent doing QA on proprietary software is time that will not be
spent doing QA on free so
> From: jonat...@jonmasters.org
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:16:20 -0500
> Subject: Re: Fixing the glibc adobe flash incompatibility
> CC: fedora-devel-l...@redhat.com
>
> On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 08:57 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> > This solution could be re
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:23:49 -0500,
"Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote:
> Here are the list of recent changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java
> Diff:
> https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=206526&oldid=154023
Sho
On 11/17/2010 02:26 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 14:14 -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote:
>>
>
> Yes, thanks Ric, your reply to me was most helpful.
>
> Jon.
What was the reply?
TIA
Regards,
OldFart
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mai
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 08:57 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>> This solution could be reverting the problem causing glibc change, or
>> maybe changing it to do forward memcpy's while still using the new SSE
>> instructions, or something more spec
On 11/17/2010 09:09 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 +0100,
>> Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> For those who do not know it yet, recent Fedora glibc updates include
>>> an optimized memcpy (which gets us
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 08:57 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> This solution could be reverting the problem causing glibc change, or
> maybe changing it to do forward memcpy's while still using the new SSE
> instructions, or something more specific to the flash plugin, as long
> as it will automaticall
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 08:13 +0100
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > * F12 critical path/update testing issues. (does it matter this
> > close to EOL?)
>
> Now Fedora n-1 is F13 and we're already seeing the same sort of
> issues there (e.g. the KDE 4.5.3 (non-critpath) bugfix update has
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 +0100,
> Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> For those who do not know it yet, recent Fedora glibc updates include
>> an optimized memcpy (which gets used on some processors) which breaks the
>> 64 bit a
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2010-11-17)
===
Meeting started by nirik at 18:30:00 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-11-17/fesco.2010-11-17-18.30.log.html
Meeting summary
-
Both taken (thanks Jussi).
Jiri
On 11/17/2010 01:02 PM, Jiri Popelka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have two easy python modules to review.
>
> python-cups - Python bindings for the CUPS API, known as pycups
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648986
>
> python-smbc - Python bindings for the libsmb
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 +0100,
Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> For those who do not know it yet, recent Fedora glibc updates include
> an optimized memcpy (which gets used on some processors) which breaks the
> 64 bit adobe flash plugin.
I saw memcpy / memmove issues affecting squa
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 14:14 -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 02:02 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 13:12 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
> >>> Quick question. I always had NFS starting on startup on a particular
> >>> rawhide box. Today it didn't, and I notice that /etc/rc2|3.d/
On 09:20:18 pm Wednesday, November 17, 2010 Marius Andreiana wrote:
> On Wed , Nov 17, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky <
>
> sochotni...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 11/17/2010 06:52 PM, Marius Andreiana wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Trying to clarify this here instead of bugzilla...
> > >
> >
Hi guys,
I just got an e-mail from Adobe that:
1) They have a fix
2) The fix has been send to QA/QE
They say that they cannot commit to any dates, but that they are taking
the issue seriously.
I told them that if they want volunteers trying out their fix, we can help.
Cheers,
Magnus Glantz
--
On 11/17/2010 02:02 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 13:12 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
>>> Quick question. I always had NFS starting on startup on a particular
>>> rawhide box. Today it didn't, and I notice that /etc/rc2|3.d/S390nfs was
>>> missing aswell. Did something remove these lin
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
