On 07/01/2011 04:04 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/30/2011 08:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, updates-testing is 'you get to keep both halves' territory.
>
> wasn't it stable that broke things (sealert stopped working for example
> after a stable update) - and then something from up
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 06:34:35PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:27:47PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
>
> > Portreserve is also useful to reserve (not let the OS make use of)
> > ports that are needed by an embedded management controller that
> > intercepts delivery of pa
On 06/30/2011 10:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 22:04 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 06/30/2011 08:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Well, updates-testing is 'you get to keep both halves' territory.
>>
>> wasn't it stable that broke things (sealert stopped working
> I have been having problems with my Lenovo T61 and Rawhide. Currently
> the system will do all kinds of watchdog resets when I am booting the
> 3.0 kernels but not with the 2.6.38 kernel. I am trying to figure out
> how to best capture and debug them as they tend to scroll off the
> screen faster
On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 22:04 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/30/2011 08:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> >
> > Well, updates-testing is 'you get to keep both halves' territory.
>
> wasn't it stable that broke things (sealert stopped working for example
> after a stable update) - and then s
I have been having problems with my Lenovo T61 and Rawhide. Currently
the system will do all kinds of watchdog resets when I am booting the
3.0 kernels but not with the 2.6.38 kernel. I am trying to figure out
how to best capture and debug them as they tend to scroll off the
screen faster than I ca
On 06/30/2011 08:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Well, updates-testing is 'you get to keep both halves' territory.
wasn't it stable that broke things (sealert stopped working for example
after a stable update) - and then something from updates testing was
supposed to fix it? But it never made
On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 01:23 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 21:06:17 +0200, JM (Jiri) wrote:
>
> > >Whats the way forward from here in F15?
> > >
> > >gene/
> > >
> >
> > 1. bumping the version of the report-gtk package should do the trick - I
> > already contacted t
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 21:06:17 +0200, JM (Jiri) wrote:
> >Whats the way forward from here in F15?
> >
> >gene/
> >
>
> 1. bumping the version of the report-gtk package should do the trick - I
> already contacted the maintainer and ask him to do - as this seems to
> work for rawhide:
>
>
On 06/30/2011 07:37 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/30/2011 12:16 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
>>> - I was afraid, that it would be against some Fedora policy ;) Then just
>>> the rawhide..
>>
>>
>> Okay if this isn't coming to F15, can you p
On 06/30/2011 12:16 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
>> - I was afraid, that it would be against some Fedora policy ;) Then just
>> the rawhide..
>
>
> Okay if this isn't coming to F15, can you provide the sufficient
> instructions on how to revert
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
>> - I was afraid, that it would be against some Fedora policy ;) Then just
>> the rawhide..
>
>
> Okay if this isn't coming to F15, can you provide the sufficient
> instructions on how t
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> Actually I'd prefer to know how to move forward to the new way ...
run rawhide!
-jef
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 06/30/2011 12:16 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
>> - I was afraid, that it would be against some Fedora policy ;) Then just
>> the rawhide..
>
>
> Okay if this isn't coming to F15, can you provide the sufficient
> instructions on how to revert
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
> - I was afraid, that it would be against some Fedora policy ;) Then just
> the rawhide..
Okay if this isn't coming to F15, can you provide the sufficient
instructions on how to revert the libreport packages from F15 updates
testing so that
On 06/24/2011 01:00 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> DEBUG: ERROR: The file '/usr/lib/monodevelop/AddIns/NUnit/nunit.core.dll'
> referenced in the manifest could not be found.
You'll probably need to patch the manifest to tell it where the
nunit.core.dll lives. Grep the source code for
"/usr/lib/monodeve
Hi,
as far as I remember the versions of firefox and thunderbird have
allways been sinchronuos at their latest stable version. So I'd like to
know for personal interest if there are reasons that would deny updating
thunderbird packages to version 5.
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Regards
Heiko Adams
Am 30.06.2011 15:36, schrieb Jakub Jelinek:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 03:31:24PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 03:19:10PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> as far as i can see fedora is built with "-fstack-protector" and not
>>> "-fstack-protector-all" - is there a specific r
On 06/29/2011 02:07 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 10:01 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 09:59 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>>>
>>> Le Lun 27 juin 2011 15:12, Miloslav Trmač a écrit :
>>>
Placing trust in the manufacturer of the hardware puts the user i
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 03:31:24PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 03:19:10PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > as far as i can see fedora is built with "-fstack-protector" and not
> > "-fstack-protector-all" - is there a specific reason for not using
> > the "all" variant
>
>
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 03:19:10PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> as far as i can see fedora is built with "-fstack-protector" and not
> "-fstack-protector-all" - is there a specific reason for not using
> the "all" variant
Sure, it is expensive to set up the canary even when it is obvious
it isn't
On 06/30/2011 02:05 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 01:44:15PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> On 06/30/2011 01:35 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 01:12:13PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 06/28/2011 12:57 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 08:58
hi
as far as i can see fedora is built with "-fstack-protector" and not
"-fstack-protector-all" - is there a specific reason for not using
the "all" variant or is it safe to rebuild server-packages with it?
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/downloads/files/ssp.txt
> The GCC options for SSP ar
On 06/29/2011 06:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 13:11 +0200, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
>> On 06/29/2011 12:18 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> On 06/29/2011 03:20 PM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
Hi!
I'm going to replace the report library with the new libreport. Today I
pla
On 27.06.2011 11:28, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:15:52PM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> I did a find_bind_mount() function as part of:
>>> http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=ddf6fb86
>
> Note, be careful with st_dev, because:
>
> * after
>
Dne 27.6.2011 03:00, Peter Gordon napsal(a):
[CC-ed to Matej Cepl, marked in PkgDB as a co-maintainer.]
I have just forgot to remove myself. Scribes is good, but it is PyGtk
app and its author shows clear preference not to port it to Gnome 3. So,
if you are friend of the ancient regime, this
26 matches
Mail list logo
