Re: gcc -ffunction-sections -Wl,--gc-sections

2011-03-24 Thread Adam Goode
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:06, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 15:00 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: >> Hi, >> >> just tried -ffunction-sections -Wl,--gc-sections on F15 xulrunner and got >> libxul.so 24947928 -> 23631640 (5.28% gain) and it still works. >> >> ld.gold --icf is a different

F-15 Branched report: 20110324 changes

2011-03-24 Thread Branched Report
Compose started at Thu Mar 24 13:15:45 UTC 2011 Broken deps for x86_64 -- Io-language-extras-20080330-4.fc15.x86_64 requires libevent-1.4.so.2()(64bit) byzanz-0.2.2-1.fc14.x86_64 requires libpanel-applet-2.so.0()(64bit)

Re: Outage: Upgrading nagios - 2011-03-25 18:00 UTC

2011-03-24 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
Ugh. I put in the wrong date: The outage will be 2011-03-25 1800 UTC and last 2 hours. On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 16:26, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > There will be an outage starting at  2011-03-25 18:00  UTC, which will last > approximately X hours. > > To convert UTC to your local time, take a look a

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On 03/24/2011 07:31 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > drago01 wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Kofler >> wrote: >>> Adam Williamson wrote: In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to 'unins

libedit update in F15 & Rawhide

2011-03-24 Thread Jerry James
I just built a new libedit snapshot (20110227) for Rawhide and F-15 to pick up some bug fixes. This rebuild doesn't involve an soname change, but I thought I should give a heads-up anyway, for two reasons. First, I previously did an update to the 20100424 snapshot on February 7, the same day as t

Outage: Upgrading nagios - 2011-03-24 18:00 UTC

2011-03-24 Thread Stephen Smoogen
There will be an outage starting at 2011-03-24 18:00 UTC, which will last approximately X hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2011-03-24 18:00 UTC' Reason for outage: Moving from EL5 nagios to EL6 nagi

Re: AutoQA Comments in Bodhi

2011-03-24 Thread Luke Macken
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 03:00:52PM -0600, Tim Flink wrote: [...] > Two bugs were found in Bodhi's tag handling logic and we're hoping for > fixes in the next day or so. Once those fixes are in and we've verified > that the tests are pulling in packages correctly, we'll re-enable > AutoQA's Bodhi co

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Henrique Junior
On 24.03.2011 19:23, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: >> In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just >> gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to >> 'uninstall'. :) > Did they really manage to stuff even the resources into the binary? Wow, > ve

Fedora 15 schedule to slip an additional week

2011-03-24 Thread Jared K. Smith
The Fedora 15 development cycle is well under way, and making good progress. Yesterday I met[1] with Release Engineering, QA, the Fedora Program Manager, and we decided that in order to accommodate some late-breaking changes, we're going to need to slip the Fedora 15 release schedule by a week in

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Kai Engert
On 24.03.2011 19:23, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: >> In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just >> gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to >> 'uninstall'. :) > Did they really manage to stuff even the resources into the binary? Wow, > ve

[Test-Announce] 2011-03-25 @ 17:00 UTC - F-15-Beta blocker bug review #3

2011-03-24 Thread James Laska
# F15-Beta Blocker Review meeting #3 # Date: 2011-03-25 # Time: 17:00 UTC [1] (13:00 EDT, 10:00 PDT, 10:00 MST) # Location: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net Greetings! The third Beta blocker review meeting will be this Friday at 17:00 UTC in #fedora-bugzappers. We'll spend time reviewing p

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Josh Boyer
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Joshua C. wrote: > I think this discussion goes in the wrong direction. Firefox 4 is (for > me) a working browser that I want to use. Without a proper rpm the > tarball is the only solution left. Spot's solution circumvents the > xulrunner nightmare and Remi's idea

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Joshua C.
2011/3/24 Kevin Kofler : > drago01 wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Kofler >> wrote: >>> Adam Williamson wrote: In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to 'uninstall'. :) >>> >>>

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Kevin Kofler
drago01 wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Kofler > wrote: >> Adam Williamson wrote: >>> In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just >>> gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to >>> 'uninstall'. :) >> >> Did they really manage to stuff even

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Kevin Kofler
Przemek Klosowski wrote: > Sorry I was being too tentative. I meant to point out that the 755 perms > don't seem to do anything useful (except possibly for ld.so, which I > still don't quite understand what it is), and have definite negative > effects (abrt noise). Therefore, I was going to suggest

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread drago01
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: >> In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just >> gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to >> 'uninstall'. :) > > Did they really manage to stuff even the resources into the bi

[Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

2011-03-24 Thread Tom Callaway
Here are the changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines for this week: --- The Packaging:PHP guidelines have been updated to reflect that PEAR documentation provided by upstream are installed in %{pear_docdir}, should stay there, and must be marked as %doc. Additionally, the definition of pear_d

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Kevin Kofler
Adam Williamson wrote: > In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just > gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to > 'uninstall'. :) Did they really manage to stuff even the resources into the binary? Wow, very un-unixy! ;-) Kevin Kofler -- deve

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Kevin Kofler
Adam Williamson wrote: > So, I just ran into an interesting issue talking over Fedora patches > with the upstream glew maintainer. glew installs its shared libraries > 'manually', not using autotools / libtools; upstream installs them with > permissions of 0644, and we patch this to 0755. After tal

Re: [Test-Announce] Power Management Test Day on Thursday (2011-03-24)

2011-03-24 Thread Ville Skyttä
On 03/22/2011 06:15 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > The Fedora 15 Test Day schedule continues to roll, and this week it's > the turn of power management: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-03-24 I would like to participate but the live CD .iso (linked to in the above page) downloads at

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Przemek Klosowski
On 03/24/2011 12:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> FWIW, on my F14 all the .so libs in /lib are executable, and all but >> three segfault (and trigger abrt) when executed. Besides the already >> mentioned libc-2.13.so and ld-2.13.so, only libpthread-2.13.so >> runs successfully to print a legal not

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 18:39 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > but it is also hard to uninstall without leaving residual files, which also > implies that upgrades sometimes leave old versions of the files sitting > around. In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just gives you

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Reindl Harald
http://rpms.famillecollet.com/ http://rpms.famillecollet.com/fedora/14/remi/i386/repoview/ http://rpms.famillecollet.com/fedora/14/remi/x86_64/repoview/ Never install any software without a RPM if there is no really good reason and "firfox 4 is available" is really no reason even if that would me

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Kevin Kofler
Genes MailLists wrote: >Or you can simply download it direct from mozilla.org and install it > in /usr/local/ I don't think bypassing package management is something we want to recommend. Not only is stuff installed that way not built according to Fedora guidelines, which leads to issues li

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Tom Lane
Mamoru Tasaka writes: > gmyth built, now gstreamer-plugins-bad-free is waiting for new-repo > on chain-build. Thank you, looks like those both went through fine. Meanwhile I've identified the collectd failure, and it's indeed not related to mysql (bz #690558). regards, t

Orphaned: collectd

2011-03-24 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
collectd is a high performance monitoring / stats collection daemon. It is quite widely used judging by the number of bugs and feedback we get for it. I just orphaned collectd in Fedora 15 & Rawhide. I did the original packaging, but haven't really been involved with it for a long time; Alan Peve

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 11:59 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > On 03/24/2011 03:28 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > On 03/24/2011 06:52 AM, John Reiser wrote: > >>> they say on Debian and Ubuntu, > >>> all shared libs have 0644 permissions. > >> > >> What they say is incorrect. > >> > >> I have Ubuntu

Re: Proposed special F15 schedule meeting

2011-03-24 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 07:59 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:28:00PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 12:16 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Hey, all. I'd like to propose a special F15 schedule meeting for later > > > today or tomorrow; we'd need

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:31:14AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Adam Williamson writes: > > So, is it true that the convention is 0644 in Debian and 0755 in Red > > Hat-land? If so, does anyone know why the difference, and if this needs > > to stay different forever? Also, I presume neither of us is p

Re: gcc -ffunction-sections -Wl,--gc-sections

2011-03-24 Thread Jan Kratochvil
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:06:09 +0100, Adam Jackson wrote: > For example, if I'm the X server, I have a bunch of symbols exported > from the binary that the drivers are expected to call, but that are > never called from the server itself. Does marking a function > __attribute__((visibility("default")

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Mamoru Tasaka
Tom Lane wrote, at 03/25/2011 12:23 AM +9:00: > =?UTF-8?B?TWFyY2VsYSBNYcWhbMOhxYhvdsOh?= writes: >>> Kevin Kofler writes: Probably needs BR flex-static. > >> I've applied BR and build ser >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2940159 > > Thanks for that. As of now we have 75

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Sergio Belkin
2011/3/24 Tom Lane : > Sergio Belkin writes: >> FWIW Should We not my dependant package the rest of packages because >> have been already rebuilt? > > If you have a package that uses libmysqlclient.so, and it's not already > listed in "koji list-tagged dist-f15-mysql", Yes it is listed: koji lis

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Tom Lane
"Jason L Tibbitts III" writes: > Please do not wait on zoneminder. It was broken before this due to an > unrelated issue which should be fixed up soon. Unless this Mysql bump > introduces some significant incompatibility problem everything should be > fine when I get the latest snapshot packaged

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Tom Lane
Sergio Belkin writes: > FWIW Should We not my dependant package the rest of packages because > have been already rebuilt? If you have a package that uses libmysqlclient.so, and it's not already listed in "koji list-tagged dist-f15-mysql", please go ahead and build it there with "fedpkg build --ta

Re: gcc -ffunction-sections -Wl,--gc-sections

2011-03-24 Thread Adam Jackson
On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 15:00 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > Hi, > > just tried -ffunction-sections -Wl,--gc-sections on F15 xulrunner and got > libxul.so 24947928 -> 23631640 (5.28% gain) and it still works. > > ld.gold --icf is a different optimization but that one requires gold. > > Are there so

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Sergio Belkin
> FWIW I meant FWIU :) -- -- Sergio Belkin  http://www.sergiobelkin.com Watch More TV http://sebelk.blogspot.com LPIC-2 Certified - http://www.lpi.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Sergio Belkin
2011/3/23 Dan Horák : > Dan Horák píše v St 23. 03. 2011 v 17:30 +0100: >> Tom Lane píše v St 23. 03. 2011 v 12:27 -0400: >> > Marcela Maslanova writes: >> > > Because many packages in F-15 have broken dependencies there will be >> > > needed mass rebuild. >> > >> > Of course, all these packages

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Przemek Klosowski
On 03/24/2011 03:28 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote: > On 03/24/2011 06:52 AM, John Reiser wrote: >>> they say on Debian and Ubuntu, >>> all shared libs have 0644 permissions. >> >> What they say is incorrect. >> >> I have Ubuntu 10.10 i686: >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1421892 2011-01-21 15:08 /lib/libc-2.1

Re: Systemd Status

2011-03-24 Thread Michał Piotrowski
Hi, 2011/3/24 Liang Suilong : > Fedora 15 switches to systemd as default init system. The developer still > works for coding and fixing the bugs. We should appreciate that developers > give us such a fast init system to improve boot time. However we do not know > what it changes from old version t

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Jason L Tibbitts III
> "TL" == Tom Lane writes: TL> Do we need to wait around for somebody to fix these stragglers, or TL> can we go ahead and release dist-f15-mysql into the general TL> f15-testing pool? Please do not wait on zoneminder. It was broken before this due to an unrelated issue which should be fixed

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Tom Lane
=?UTF-8?B?TWFyY2VsYSBNYcWhbMOhxYhvdsOh?= writes: >> Kevin Kofler writes: >>> Probably needs BR flex-static. > I've applied BR and build ser > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2940159 Thanks for that. As of now we have 75 packages in dist-f15-mysql, with the following dependen

Systemd Status

2011-03-24 Thread Liang Suilong
Fedora 15 switches to systemd as default init system. The developer still works for coding and fixing the bugs. We should appreciate that developers give us such a fast init system to improve boot time. However we do not know what it changes from old version to new one. The changelog has just one s

[Bug 690513] New: RFE: Please build perl-SOAP-Lite for EPEL6.

2011-03-24 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: RFE: Please build perl-SOAP-Lite for EPEL6. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690513 Summary: RFE: Please build perl-SOAP-Lite for EPEL6. P

[Bug 202210] Errorneously detected perl provides

2011-03-24 Thread bugzilla
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=202210 --- Comment #12 from Marcela Mašláňová 2011-03-24 10:00:27 EDT --- I suppose this is bug in packaging. According to our guideli

gcc -ffunction-sections -Wl,--gc-sections

2011-03-24 Thread Jan Kratochvil
Hi, just tried -ffunction-sections -Wl,--gc-sections on F15 xulrunner and got libxul.so 24947928 -> 23631640 (5.28% gain) and it still works. ld.gold --icf is a different optimization but that one requires gold. Are there some serious Bugs why Fedora is not using it? Thanks, Jan -- devel mail

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On 03/24/2011 04:36 AM, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:36:33 -0400 > Genes MailLists wrote: >> On 03/23/2011 07:58 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >>> Jochen Schmitt wrote: > If you want to get firefox4 on Fedora 14 now, the only way is to use the private firefox4 repository on > >

Re: Proposed special F15 schedule meeting

2011-03-24 Thread Paul W. Frields
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:28:00PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 12:16 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Hey, all. I'd like to propose a special F15 schedule meeting for later > > today or tomorrow; we'd need representation from QA and releng at a > > minimum, ideally also d

Re: mass rebuild of mysql packages in F-15

2011-03-24 Thread Marcela Mašláňová
On 03/24/2011 01:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Kevin Kofler writes: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> ser's problem is >>> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lfl >>> which looks to me to be a flex incompatibility unrelated to mysql. > >> Probably needs BR flex-static. > > Yup, you're right. It's been FTBFS for awhile:

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Alexander Kurtakov
On 10:33:31 AM Wednesday, March 23, 2011 Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 16:41 -0500, Adam Miller wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 10:35:55PM +0100, Joshua C. wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > fedora is known for offering the "latest and greates software" and > > > "being on the edg

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

2011-03-24 Thread Joshua C.
2011/3/24 Pete Zaitcev : > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:36:33 -0400 > Genes MailLists wrote: >> On 03/23/2011 07:58 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> > Jochen Schmitt wrote: > >> >> If you want to get firefox4 on Fedora 14 now, the only way is to use >> >> the private firefox4 repository on > >>    Or you can

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Ville Skyttä
On 03/24/2011 06:52 AM, John Reiser wrote: >> they say on Debian and Ubuntu, >> all shared libs have 0644 permissions. > > What they say is incorrect. > > I have Ubuntu 10.10 i686: > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1421892 2011-01-21 15:08 /lib/libc-2.12.1.so [...snip more libc examples...] libc is prob

Re: Shared library permissions in Debian-land and Red Hat-land

2011-03-24 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 09:52:24PM -0700, John Reiser wrote: > > they say on Debian and Ubuntu, > > all shared libs have 0644 permissions. > > What they say is incorrect. Well, given that libc.so and ld.so are shared libraries with with meaningful e_entry, so you can actually run /lib/ld-2.*.so