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
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)
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
# 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
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
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'. :)
>>>
>>>
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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")
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
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
"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
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
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
> 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
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
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
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
> "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
=?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
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
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
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
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
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
>
>
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
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:
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
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
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
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
52 matches
Mail list logo