On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:30:30PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > What's unique about the method described there is that the Mac
> > configures the interface with the same IP address it previously had if
> > the lease is still valid, while NetworkMan
On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>
> NM already keeps DHCP information around based on the network you're
> connecting to, so we don't need to ARP a bunch of servers just to
> determine whether the DHCP server we wanted is still there. dhclient is
Cool - so is NM already pretty opt
Bojan Smojver rexursive.com> writes:
> I'm guessing these things take time to propagate:
Bodhi still telling me I don't have commit access to cvsgraph...
--
Bojan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Dan, that works on wireless networks. On wired networks the ARP technique
determines *which* of the valid leases you should attempt to restore. So on
a wired network you:
1. ARP the known DHCP server IPs to discover the subnet.
2. ARP the IP from the valid lease on that subnet to avoid collision.
3
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 11:46 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/30/2011 10:37 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Sat, 30.07.11 10:31, Genes MailLists (li...@sapience.com) wrote:
> >
> http://cafbit.com/entry/rapid_dhcp_or_how_do
> >>>
>
> >
> > IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can d
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 21:39:24 +0100
Niels de Vos wrote:
> Watch out, this is very dangerous! You are comparing strings, not
> versions:
> >>> print '4.6.2' >= '4.6.12'
> True
Thanks... I was testing with to low numbers... :(
> The better way would be to use distutils.version:
> >>> from distutils
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 09:38:29PM +0200, Thomas Spura wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 19:44:41 +0300
> Jussi Lehtola wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > I tried using
> > %global gccver %(gcc -dumpversion)
> > %if %{gccver} >= 4.6.0
> > foo here
> > %endif
> >
> > to conditionalize usage of quadru
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 02:23 -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> So, just so I understand, the requirement/assumption is that all
> machines will be online and pulling bits down directly from GNOME? That
> won't map at all to enterprise or non-fully connected environments. It
> needs to be possible to inst
I got this message about broken dependencies too -- tesseract and recode.
Well, I'd wait.
--
Elder Marco
GNU/Linux User: #471180
"Contra o positivismo, que pára perante os fenômenos e diz: 'Há apenas
fatos', eu digo: 'Ao contrário, fatos é o que não há; há apenas
interpretações'. "(Nietzsche)
Hi!
Today I found Fedora Specific RPM packages for ClipGrab, a GUI tool for
Downloading
Youtube Videos. The thing is, the binary file that the original developers
give away
for general linux use didn't work for me and I wasn't able to compile it by
source,
so I went to RPMFind but didn't found any
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 13:53 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=256138
>
> does this mean that F15 will get a rebased 2.6.40 sooner or
> later in stable repos to avoid troubles with the new versioning
> and will not stuck at 2.6.38 the whole life cycl
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 19:44:41 +0300
Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I tried using
> %global gccver %(gcc -dumpversion)
> %if %{gccver} >= 4.6.0
> foo here
> %endif
>
> to conditionalize usage of quadruple precision support in a spec file
> that ships on multiple distros, but the compariso
I just found out about the package "brandy" and was saddened to realize
that I missed the orphan-deprecation announcement. I'd like to take this
one.
Oddly, I see that the dead.package file states that:
This package was retired on 2011-07-25 due to it being unable to
build this pa
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:50:51 -0500
Richard Shaw wrote:
> I'm just guessing here, but I think because of the dots it's returning
> a string instead of a number which makes the >= comparison invalid. Is
> there another gcc option that will give you a "dotless" version
> number?
>
> I would try some
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 20:05:12 +0300
Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On 07/30/2011 07:44 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
>
> > Is there a way to check if the gcc version is sufficient with some
> > rpm macro?
>
> Do you actually need to have it as a macro? Often cases like this can
> be handled with plain shell
On 07/30/2011 07:44 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> Is there a way to check if the gcc version is sufficient with some rpm
> macro?
Do you actually need to have it as a macro? Often cases like this can
be handled with plain shell code in %prep, %build, etc. Or by patching
the build system to do the
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:03:05 -0500
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:11:34 -0500,
> Richard Shaw wrote:
> > This is my first time to get a message like this. Do I need to do
> > anything yet or is this a branching issue that will likely resolve
> > itself?
>
> I suspect it i
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Jussi Lehtola
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I tried using
> %global gccver %(gcc -dumpversion)
> %if %{gccver} >= 4.6.0
> foo here
> %endif
>
> to conditionalize usage of quadruple precision support in a spec file
> that ships on multiple distros, but the comparison give
Hi,
I tried using
%global gccver %(gcc -dumpversion)
%if %{gccver} >= 4.6.0
foo here
%endif
to conditionalize usage of quadruple precision support in a spec file
that ships on multiple distros, but the comparison gives the error
parseExpressionBoolean returns -1
Is there a way to check
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:11:34 -0500,
Richard Shaw wrote:
> This is my first time to get a message like this. Do I need to do
> anything yet or is this a branching issue that will likely resolve
> itself?
I suspect it is something related to the first build of F16. I got warnings
for most (or
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 16:11:34 GMT, Richard Shaw wrote:
> This is my first time to get a message like this. Do I need to do
> anything yet or is this a branching issue that will likely resolve
> itself?
I got notifications about broken dependencies on /usr/bin/pkg-config.
I'd wait until tomorrow
This is my first time to get a message like this. Do I need to do
anything yet or is this a branching issue that will likely resolve
itself?
Thanks,
RIchard
-- Forwarded message --
From:
Date: Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:49 AM
Subject: Broken dependencies: pysdm
To: pysdm-ow...@fedo
On 07/30/2011 12:52 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 30.07.2011 04:29, schrieb Genes MailLists:
>> wasn't there some kind of issue in vm's ?
>> Maybe I'm not remembering correctly
>
> no - performance sucks if the VM is stored on a BTRFS formatted disk
> this is a completly other problem and it
On 07/30/2011 10:37 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sat, 30.07.11 10:31, Genes MailLists (li...@sapience.com) wrote:
>
http://cafbit.com/entry/rapid_dhcp_or_how_do
>>>
>
> IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can do the ARP magic, too.
>
> Lennart
>
Seems like a pretty reasonable t
Am 30.07.2011 04:16, schrieb Dave Jones:
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:16:43AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> > i have running 2.6.40-4.fc15.x86_64 #1 SMP in my testing-virtual-machine
> since
> > some minutes, boot looked fine, after a minute a got a btrfs-stack-trace
> >
> > hope this he
On Sat, 30.07.11 10:31, Genes MailLists (li...@sapience.com) wrote:
> >> http://cafbit.com/entry/rapid_dhcp_or_how_do
> >
>
> Hmm ... the complaint of changing IP does not seem to make sense - as I
> read the article - the MAC simply remembers server info and instead of a
> blind dhcp (which cau
On 07/30/2011 04:48 AM, Ryan Rix wrote:
...
> Reading the hackernews comments on it makes me wonder if this is a very good
> idea. It may work for people in certain usecases, but in the case of Fedora
> probably not so much
>
> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2756952
> http://news.ycombina
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 02:23 -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> David: on the subject of your followup...my advice, by the way, is that
> life is too short to continue to try to explain why GNOME Shell is
> unusable for folks like you and I. I'd just switch to XFCE and be done
> with it. My machines are a
On Fri 29 July 2011 13:10:34 Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote:
> Interesting message in another list.
>
> for me fedora is very slow to get dhcp address.
Reading the hackernews comments on it makes me wonder if this is a very good
idea. It may work for people in certain usecases, but in the case of Fe
29 matches
Mail list logo
