On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 02:29 +0300, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 08:48 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 03:24:58 PM Jesse Keating wrote:
> >> I thought there was a hard rule about not having nvrs go backwards, and
> >> if a bad build was put out, it should be fixed with
On 07/28/2011 08:48 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 03:24:58 PM Jesse Keating wrote:
>> I thought there was a hard rule about not having nvrs go backwards, and
>> if a bad build was put out, it should be fixed with epoch or other such
>> NVR things to make sure the upgrade pat
I intend to orphan and dead.package pdfedit. If anyone wants to take it feel
free. It has a unmaintained and buggy qt3 interface. Perhaps someday
upstream will create a new qt4 one, but I'm done holding my breath.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWR
On Wed, 27.07.11 21:59, Marc-André Lureau (marcandre.lur...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> 2011/7/27 Miloslav Trmač :
> > (And of course, the thing to standardize would not be "bin", but a
> > subdirectory structure as defined by the GNU standards for --prefix.)
>
> I agree, it is precisely what
On Wed, 27.07.11 16:56, James Antill (ja...@fedoraproject.org) wrote:
> > > It looks more like the first victim of systemd using cgroups as a
> > > replacement for setsid() etc. ... pam_systemd being the first return
> > > volley in that war. *sigh*.
> >
> > systemd is not using cgroups as repla
On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 03:24:58 PM Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 7/26/11 1:14 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > Yes, It got untagged. See last week's thread on this list:
> > Subject: rpm builds failing with "Installed (but unpackaged) file(s)
> > found"
>
> I thought there was a hard rule about not
Hi,
I filed a report for what I believe to be a rather obvious but
serious bug concerning the gmime package [1]. Unfortunately, the
package does not seem to get any attenation from maintainers. I
have tried to contact Alexsander Larsson by email, offering to
co-maintain the package, but no luck so
On 07/28/2011 12:36 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>>
>
>> I don't follow your thought here - if you have a bin64/ and a bin/
>> etc and you have your shell initscripts decide (e.g. using uname -m)
>> which of those to include in your PATH I think it does work ... provided
>> you have (obviously) b
Awesome, works great!
Thanks a lot!
johannes
On 07/28/2011 05:36 PM, 80 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i cooked few patches for you:
> * remove hunspell ==> basically, you just need to remove all
> references to the bundled hunspell in texstudio.pro and use system
> headers instead of bundled ones.
> * force
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28/07/11 15:46, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 09:09 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
>> On 07/28/2011 01:41 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>> On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>>
>
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>> "SO" == Stanislav Ochotnicky writes:
>>>
>>
>> SO> I believe you forgot to set whenisgood to use timezones :-)
>>
>> My understanding is that you have to log in in order to set your
>> timezone, or that c
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:41:47AM -0400, James Antill wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 09:19 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On 7/27/11 2:03 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > In this case, the bad rpm-build broke koji builds, and since Rawhide
> > > may eat babies, it can happen that Rawhide users n
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 02:00:28PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 7/27/11 1:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > Depends on the PATH-Order
> >
> > if something is intended to be first in PATH and any attacker is able
> > to write there his "ls" would win against "/bin/ls"
>
> So, the attacker can wri
On 7/28/11 9:02 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 09:29:40AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On 7/26/11 8:48 AM, Till Maas wrote:
>>> I hereby propose to change this in the future and explicitly CC
>>> comaintainers to make them aware that their package is orphaned.
>>
>> This can easil
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 09:29:40AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 7/26/11 8:48 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > I hereby propose to change this in the future and explicitly CC
> > comaintainers to make them aware that their package is orphaned.
>
> This can easily be done by just mailing
> -ow...@fedor
On 7/28/11 8:41 AM, James Antill wrote:
> Sisyphean task ... IMO.
So was moving us off of CVS. *shrug*
>> > There are multiple ways to throw
>> > baby-eating updates over the wall for testing before they get into
>> > rawhide. Stop treating it like a dumping ground.
> But at some poin
Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "SO" == Stanislav Ochotnicky writes:
>>
>
> SO> I believe you forgot to set whenisgood to use timezones :-)
>
> My understanding is that you have to log in in order to set your
> timezone, or that choosing a timezone was something the responder h
> "SO" == Stanislav Ochotnicky writes:
SO> I believe you forgot to set whenisgood to use timezones :-)
My understanding is that you have to log in in order to set your
timezone, or that choosing a timezone was something the responder had to
do. When I created the form, "Use timezones" was c
On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 09:19 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 7/27/11 2:03 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > In this case, the bad rpm-build broke koji builds, and since Rawhide
> > may eat babies, it can happen that Rawhide users need downgrade manually
> > while they have to wait for the fixed rpm-b
Hi,
i cooked few patches for you:
* remove hunspell ==> basically, you just need to remove all
references to the bundled hunspell in texstudio.pro and use system
headers instead of bundled ones.
* force the use of xdg-open for viewers, this patch should be
upstreamed or at least, fix function x11d
Am 28.07.2011 15:34, schrieb Marian Ganisin:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:36:08AM -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
>>> c) there's a spec about ~/.local/bin already accepted by a friendly
>>> project
>>
>> This is STILL a security risk, even if somebody calls it a standard.
>
> This is STILL a claim wi
* Marek Goldmann [2011-07-28 10:41]:
>
> On 25 lip 2011, at 17:30, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>
> >>> I created an unfinished, skeletal feature page here:
> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Java7
> >>> Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to help build it. I'm
> >>> announcing it here in
On 07/28/2011 03:50 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> My understanding of the history of /usr/local's nomenclature is that it
> was intended to be "local" to the machine (and thus not NFS mounted).
I always understood it to be site local rather than machine local - the FHS
states that it may be used fo
Summary of changes:
ac3976a... bump and rebuild as it got compiled with the old perl on pp (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedorapro
commit ac3976ac9acc9563e368636273be3a836b3102fa
Author: Karsten Hopp
Date: Thu Jul 28 16:55:32 2011 +0200
bump and rebuild as it got compiled with the old perl on ppc
perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib.spec |5 -
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Compress-
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 08:54 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 08:41 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> > On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> >> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> >
> >>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
> >>> lo
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 10:24 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> Maybe a more nuanced logo, e.g.
>
> "rawhide: tries hard to NOT eat babies"
We could have one of those workplace accident signs - "Rawhide Hasn't
Eaten A Baby For (XX) Days"...
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 10:35 -0400, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> As it stands, ~/bin and ~/.local/bin are only appropriate for binaries
> that are not arch-specific.
Ahem. s/binaries/executables/
--
Braden McDaniel
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.or
On 25 lip 2011, at 17:30, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>>> I created an unfinished, skeletal feature page here:
>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Java7
>>> Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to help build it. I'm
>>> announcing it here in case whoever maintains Java 6 in Fedora, or
>>> som
On 07/28/2011 10:35 AM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> Really, sharing of $HOME can (and does) happen among much *more*
> disparate architectures than x86 and x86_64. We don't have to think
> about this as much these days now that MIPS and SPARC have waned in
> popularity; but the idea that we might st
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:34:34 +0200
Marian Ganisin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:36:08AM -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > > c) there's a spec about ~/.local/bin already accepted by a
> > > friendly project
> >
> > This is STILL a security risk, even if somebody calls it a standard.
>
> This
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 08:41 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> > On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
> >> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
> >> login to a 32 bit (or other arch) - bin now makes now sens
On 07/28/2011 04:54 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:51:12 -0700, AW (Adam) wrote:
>
>> And how would we stop that? by...encouraging people not to use it as a
>> dumping ground. What's the best way to achieve that? Try and change the
>> perception of it as a dumping ground...
>
On 07/28/2011 09:09 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 01:41 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
>>> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>
This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
login to a 32 bit (or
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:35:27 +0100
"Bryn M. Reeves" wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 01:22 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:00:28 +0100
> > "Bryn M. Reeves" wrote:
> > It is nevertheless an *added* avenue to do some phishing. And for
> > what benefit?
>
> No, it's not; at the very most
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/27/2011 10:52 AM, Stijn Hoop wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 12:43:09 +0200 Nicolas Mailhot
> wrote:
>> Le mercredi 27 juillet 2011 à 12:26 +0200, Stijn Hoop a écrit :
>>> and even better is the fact that I can now put that area
>>> somew
On 07/28/2011 01:22 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:00:28 +0100
> "Bryn M. Reeves" wrote:
> It is nevertheless an *added* avenue to do some phishing. And for what
> benefit?
No, it's not; at the very most it's making something very slightly less
noticeable but even that is a weak
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:36:08AM -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > c) there's a spec about ~/.local/bin already accepted by a friendly
> > project
>
> This is STILL a security risk, even if somebody calls it a standard.
This is STILL a claim without any proof, even if somebody repeats it
every tim
On 07/28/2011 03:07 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> The source of /usr/local was NFS-mounted /usr, with /usr/local being on
> the local system.
This only partially applies - The source of /usr/local was to override
system programs and system libraries in /usr with locally installed
files (below /usr/lo
Excerpts from Jason L Tibbitts III's message of Thu Jul 28 02:03:21 +0200 2011:
> So, that was pretty good response; only one reply here, but several
> names were added to the wiki page. There seem to be enough people
> interested to begin moving forward.
Yeah, it would be nice to make our lives
On 07/28/2011 01:41 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
>> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
>>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
>>> login to a 32 bit (or other arch) - bin now makes now sense at all. You
>
Once upon a time, Bryn M. Reeves said:
> I just assumed it was by analogy to /usr/local - a per-user directory for
> local
> installation with a structure mimicking /usr.
But the user already has the whole home directory. On RPM-managed
systems, the different between /usr and /usr/local is that
On 07/28/2011 08:41 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
>> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
>>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
>>> login to a 32 bit (or other arch) - bin now makes now sense at all. You
>
On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
>> login to a 32 bit (or other arch) - bin now makes now sense at all. You
>> need arch specific bins (bin, bin64 etc).
>
> Curre
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:00:28 +0100
"Bryn M. Reeves" wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 12:54 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:24:48 +0100
> > "Bryn M. Reeves" wrote:
> >> There are already quite a few things that may place executables
> >> under . prefixed paths in home. Java web start (ja
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=725608
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 07/28/2011 12:54 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:24:48 +0100
> "Bryn M. Reeves" wrote:
>> There are already quite a few things that may place executables
>> under . prefixed paths in home. Java web start (javaws) for instance
>> will install an entire jre under .java/deployment
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:24:48 +0100
"Bryn M. Reeves" wrote:
> On 07/27/2011 03:14 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:54:09 +0200
> > Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> If you don't hide ~/.local and ~/.config then users who are less
> >> savvy than us might wonder what thzat stuff is
commit c93703221f60fd90deb59bb6c7e54077b70d85c7
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Thu Jul 28 13:54:03 2011 +0200
Correct changelog
perl-RPM-VersionCompare.spec |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-RPM-VersionCompare.spec b/perl-RPM-VersionCompare.spec
i
On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 06:17 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>
>>
>> However, I find ~/.local an odd name. To whom or what is it 'local'? If
>> you have home directories mounted via NFS and log into two different remote
>> hosts via SSH - the only base is "loc
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-RPM-VersionCompare:
ff00cb097c8aec91b03e1514838d0614 RPM-VersionCompare-v0.1.1.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.fedorap
On 07/28/2011 06:17 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>
> However, I find ~/.local an odd name. To whom or what is it 'local'? If
> you have home directories mounted via NFS and log into two different remote
> hosts via SSH - the only base is "local" to, is the user. But if you start
> a program whi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/07/11 17:40, Roman Rakus wrote:
> Hi all,
> from the discussion here, I'm tempted to revert the change. Any objections?
+1 ... at least the there is some common consensus, also across distributions.
kind regards,
David Sommerseth
-BEGIN P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/07/11 15:54, Lennart Poettering wrote:
[..snip..]
> If you don't hide ~/.local and ~/.config then users who are less savvy
> than us might wonder what thzat stuff is and delete it and nothing will
> stop them and then all their configuration is l
On 07/27/2011 03:14 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:54:09 +0200
> Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> If you don't hide ~/.local and ~/.config then users who are less savvy
>> than us might wonder what thzat stuff is and delete it and nothing
>> will stop them and then all their configur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/07/11 16:24, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27.07.11 16:05, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Lennart Poettering
[...snip...]
>> d) there i
On 07/27/2011 10:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 27.07.2011 21:59, schrieb Marc-André Lureau:
>> I don't understand the security risks. If something is allowed to
>> write to ~/.local/bin (or ~/bin etc..), then surely it's able to read
>> elsewhere or do something else nasty. Could someone det
On 07/27/2011 04:05 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>> I think the right approach here is to prep a patch for the spec and make
>> the dir official given that a) it probably makes sense to have a
>> standardized dir like this,
> I can't rea
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:51:12 -0700, AW (Adam) wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 20:39 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > Take off your pink glasses. Rawhide *is* a dumping ground. It breaks
> > users' installations regularly because of package maintainers using it
> > as exactly that, a dumping gr
> Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> I can't really see who is the expected user of ~/.local/bin . From my
> POV the whole point of ~/.local is to store data that is hidden from
> users - it is "application" data, not "user data".
I am. I'm using that for years and I'm very happy that bin/ doesn't clutter m
60 matches
Mail list logo
