W dniu 25.06.2011 23:43, Adam Williamson pisze:
> On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 22:06 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>> W dniu 25.06.2011 18:58, Adam Williamson pisze:
>>> On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 13:56 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Hi,
currently the existence of RPATHS is only checked when one
On 06/15/2011 09:55 PM, seth vidal wrote:
> Heck, I'd be willing to accept ANY bittorrent server that can be both
> tracker and primary seed and doesn't require a special apache module to
> do it.
Late to the party with this response but here it is anyway.
I'd suggest switching to magnet links. T
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 14:41, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
> Seems like the abrt retrace server is not part of Fedora infrastructure
> yet and is constantly overloaded and I haven't had a single instance
> where it did what it is supposed to do yet. What is the status of this?
abrt retrace ser
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:55 PM, seth vidal wrote:
>
> Heck, I'd be willing to accept ANY bittorrent server that can be both
> tracker and primary seed and doesn't require a special apache module to
> do it.
>
> The biggest virtue of the old bittorrent client is that it is simple,
> stand alone a
Chris Adams hiwaay.net> writes:
> ...
> I think there is some misunderstanding about what the discussion is
> supposed to be about. The supporting open source code is already in
> Fedora. The feature request is simply to modify grubby/anaconda to set
> up the boot entries to include the suppor
On 12/06/2010 10:55 AM, Matt Domsch wrote:
> Fedora Fails To Build From Source Results for x86_64
> using rawhide from 2010-12-01
>
...
> kanatest-0.4.8-3.fc12 [u'631023 NEW'] (build/make) robmv
Fixed, updates in bodhi
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproje
On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 19:24 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> > Note that your patch isn't the best fix; it would be better to use the
> > --disable-rpath configure parameter. I meant to push a build this week
> > which would fix this but didn't get around to it yet...
>
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/u
On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 22:06 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> W dniu 25.06.2011 18:58, Adam Williamson pisze:
> > On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 13:56 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> currently the existence of RPATHS is only checked when one does a local
> >> rpm build. mock and koji still le
On 25/06/11 18:52, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Camilo Mesias said:
>> In a sense, part of it isn't under user control. There is a secret in
>> there, held against the user, and possibly known by the manufacturer
>> or other third parties. There is also a black box of code that could
>>
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 02:11:09 +0530
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
> Seems like the abrt retrace server is not part of Fedora
> infrastructure yet and is constantly overloaded and I haven't had a
> single instance where it did what it is supposed to do yet. What is
> the status of this?
It curr
Hi
Seems like the abrt retrace server is not part of Fedora infrastructure
yet and is constantly overloaded and I haven't had a single instance
where it did what it is supposed to do yet. What is the status of this?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedor
W dniu 25.06.2011 18:58, Adam Williamson pisze:
> On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 13:56 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> currently the existence of RPATHS is only checked when one does a local
>> rpm build. mock and koji still let it slide. As a result we have these bugs:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat
On 06/19/2011 08:27 PM, Damian L Brasher wrote:
> I noted in Bug 644711 that perhaps it would be more efficient to review
> one of the dependencies - is this necessarily the case?
Not necessarily but I think it is in your self interest to do you. What
is important is doing enough reviews or what
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 19:24:47 +0200
drago01 wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 13:56 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> currently the existence of RPATHS is only checked when one does a
> >> local rpm build. mock and koji sti
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 10:41:36 -0600
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
>
>> I welcome posts back on the technical topic of trusted boot. ;)
>
> Right.
>
> So can we have specifics about what it's good for? Not how it is
> implemented, but what the purpos
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 13:56 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> currently the existence of RPATHS is only checked when one does a local
>> rpm build. mock and koji still let it slide. As a result we have these bugs:
>> https://bugzil
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 10:41:36 -0600
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I welcome posts back on the technical topic of trusted boot. ;)
Right.
So can we have specifics about what it's good for? Not how it is
implemented, but what the purposes are.
And who the "trusted" entities are (can be) in the chain of
On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 13:56 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> currently the existence of RPATHS is only checked when one does a local
> rpm build. mock and koji still let it slide. As a result we have these bugs:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703636
> https://bugzilla.redhat.
Once upon a time, Camilo Mesias said:
> In a sense, part of it isn't under user control. There is a secret in
> there, held against the user, and possibly known by the manufacturer
> or other third parties. There is also a black box of code that could
> do anything.
You already have that; it is c
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 17:26:08 +0100
Camilo Mesias wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > ...snip...
> >
> > Can we move this back to technical, Fedora development related
> > discussion?
>
> I am slightly disappointed with this response, after all, to quote the
> origin
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Camilo Mesias wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > ...snip...
> >
> > Can we move this back to technical, Fedora development related
> > discussion?
>
> I am slightly disappointed with this response, after all, to quote the
> original
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> ...snip...
>
> Can we move this back to technical, Fedora development related
> discussion?
I am slightly disappointed with this response, after all, to quote the
original message
"Fesco decided that we should probably have a broader discussi
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:38:15AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 07:17:45PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > virt-mem-0.3.1-9.fc12 (build/make) rjones,virtmaint
>
> This is a dead.package, or if it's not then it's supposed to be dead.
>
Please follow the steps on:
http:/
On 2011/06/25 15:32 (GMT+0200) Jochen Schmitt composed:
> I have a spcial question about secirity update of Firefox 4 on F-15.
> On
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Diskussionen-um-Versionspolitik-von-Firefox-1268009.html
> you could read, that upstream doensn't release the security updat
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
> Hallo,
>
> I have a spcial question about secirity update of Firefox 4 on F-15.
>
> On
>
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Diskussionen-um-Versionspolitik-von-Firefox-1268009.html
> you could read, that upstream doensn't release the s
Hi,
fedora already updated to firefox 5 in fedora 15.
btw only german speaking persons could read your reference ;-)
Johannes
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
> Hallo,
>
> I have a spcial question about secirity update of Firefox 4 on F-15.
>
> On
>
> http://www.heise.de/
Hallo,
I have a spcial question about secirity update of Firefox 4 on F-15.
On
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Diskussionen-um-Versionspolitik-von-Firefox-1268009.html
you could read, that upstream doensn't release the security update
fireforx-4.0.1. Instead
users should update to Firefo
...snip...
Can we move this back to technical, Fedora development related
discussion?
thanks,
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi,
currently the existence of RPATHS is only checked when one does a local
rpm build. mock and koji still let it slide. As a result we have these bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=703636
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716572
I provided a patch for the first one and ev
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 22:21 +0200, nodata wrote:
>> 2. This seems like Trusted Computing, which got shot down in flames.
>
> Who shot it and why ?
I don't know about Trusted Computing but this does remind me of the
Pentium III processor se
Rahul Sundaram gmail.com> writes:
>
> On 06/24/2011 09:55 PM, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote
> > Rahul,
> >
> > Seems he is using references to support contentions...like a scholarly
> > journal article. With respect, just as you are free to criticize on
> > these mailing lists, he is free to speak on
31 matches
Mail list logo
