On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Daniel Drake wrote:
>> Summary: GNOME hardcodes DPI to 96 regardless of X configuration.
>
> This is very broken.
Gnome: Reliving Window's horrible past, one emulated bug at a time.
At least we can be thankful that unlike windows, gnome doe
Richard Shaw wrote:
> I was afraid that would be the answer :) Ah, another mailing list to
> subscribe to... If it weren't for gmail I'd already be buried under a
> mountain of emails!
http://www.gmane.org/
Connect with your favorite NNTP (Usenet newsgroup) client. (I use KNode.
Gmane mailing li
Daniel Drake wrote:
> Summary: GNOME hardcodes DPI to 96 regardless of X configuration.
This is very broken.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Felix Miata wrote:
> I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and
> KDE devs have decided they're controlling a playgound rather than software
> for users to be productive with
What does KDE have to do with this? KDE honors your screen's physical DPI by
default. (It
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> However, it now has a text scaling factor in gsettings that I was not
> aware of. So I guess I just need to find an appropriate factor that
> makes fonts look OK on the XO.
One problem faced here is that (as noted earlier) Cantarell behaves
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Jef Spaleta wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>> Or
>> http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gnome-settings-daemon/branches/gnome-2-24/plugins/xsettings/gsd-xsettings-manager.c?view=markup#249
>> (line 249)?
>
> I'm not sure that's relevant for
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> Or
> http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gnome-settings-daemon/branches/gnome-2-24/plugins/xsettings/gsd-xsettings-manager.c?view=markup#249
> (line 249)?
I'm not sure that's relevant for the current codebase. But even so if
you look at 73-75 the h
Hi,
Can somebody help me figure out how to do a smolt query for filesystem
device information? The question has come up on bug 54 whether
/boot on md is a corner case or not. Smolt seems ready-made to answer
questions like this. If I print my desktop's smolt profile I get:
/dev/md0 /
Tim Flink wrote:
> At the Fedora 16 Beta Go/No-Go Meeting yesterday, the Fedora 16 Beta
> release was declared GOLD! Fedora 16 beta will be released on Tuesday,
> October 4, 2011.
>
> Major thanks to everyone who made this happen. There is no way that we
> could have gotten all this done without
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:59:58PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Nicolas Mailhot
> wrote:
> > Someone Gnome-side decided to not trust xorg dpi and added a new heuristic
> > to
> > 'correct' it
>
> I know this is part of a rant.. but any chance you could quantify t
On 30/09/11 17:12, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2011/09/30 11:09 (GMT-0400) Peter Robinson composed:
>
>> can you provide an
>> explanation of the changes and the rationale behind them?
>
> I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and
> KDE devs have decided they're contr
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:12:45PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and
> KDE devs have decided they're controlling a playgound rather than software
> for users to be productive with, expecting those who don't like their silly
>
On 2011/09/30 11:09 (GMT-0400) Peter Robinson composed:
> can you provide an
> explanation of the changes and the rationale behind them?
I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and
KDE devs have decided they're controlling a playgound rather than software
for use
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> There's also a mono list::
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono
>
> -Toshio
I was afraid that would be the answer :) Ah, another mailing list to
subscribe to... If it weren't for gmail I'd already be buried under a
mou
I'll be introducing exiv2-0.22 to rawhide next week, testing of affected
packages is underday, and so far, so good... so I don't anticipate problems.
repoquery --repoid=rawhide-source --archlist=src \
--whatrequires exiv2-devel | sort
darktable-0:0.9.2-1.fc17.src
geeqie-0:1.0-11.fc17.src
geg
At the Fedora 16 Beta Go/No-Go Meeting yesterday, the Fedora 16 Beta
release was declared GOLD! Fedora 16 beta will be released on Tuesday,
October 4, 2011.
Major thanks to everyone who made this happen. There is no way that we
could have gotten all this done without everyone's hard work and
assis
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 15:47 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
>>
>> There's nothing to do apart from waiting for enough complains to pile up the
>> people in charge get past their reality denial phase.
>>
>
> This thread could have let to so
There's also a mono list::
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono
-Toshio
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 09:53:02AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> I'm trying to package moonlight for possible inclusion at RPM Fusion
> but I'm having some issues.
>
> 1. pkg-config problem:
>
> I'm curren
I'm trying to package moonlight for possible inclusion at RPM Fusion
but I'm having some issues.
1. pkg-config problem:
I'm currently working on version 2.4.1 moonlight since it's the latest
stable. It apparently is supposed to work with mono 2.6 but 2.10 is
what F15 has, hopefully 2.6 is only a
On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 15:47 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
> There's nothing to do apart from waiting for enough complains to pile up the
> people in charge get past their reality denial phase.
>
This thread could have let to something constructive... but not so much
anymore now, I guess. Good
# F16 Final Blocker Review meeting #1
# Date: 2011-09-30
# Time: 17:00 UTC [1] (13:00 EDT, 10:00 PDT)
# Location: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
I apologize for the late notice on this - we usually don't start on the
blocker review meetings until the week after beta. However, we already
ha
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Nicolas Mailhot
wrote:
> Someone Gnome-side decided to not trust xorg dpi and added a new heuristic to
> 'correct' it
I know this is part of a rant.. but any chance you could quantify that
point with a link to a commit, blog post, mailing list discussion,
somethin
Le Ven 30 septembre 2011 12:00, Daniel Drake a écrit :
> Can anyone help me understand this behaviour?
There's nothing to understand – this is a new major GNOME release, with
developers that know better than everyone else, and solve problems by ignoring
past experience and hardcoding their own
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/30/2011 01:38 PM, Gregor Tätzner wrote:
> so many creative ideas ;)
>
> But I think such a program would be confusing to users: When
> someone wants to install unison, he expects the package will
> install unison and a menu entry. And not a unis
On 09/30/2011 11:07 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> Perl has been rebuilt _without_ GDBM in F17 as perl-5.14.1-191.fc17 and
> it's available in build root now.
>
> -- Petr
>
The new gdbm-1.9.1-1 has just landed in Fedora Rawhide. Please, re-build
your package(s) if depends on gdbm.
Also python and perl
Compose started at Fri Sep 30 08:16:02 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 requires libicuuc.so.46
389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 requires libicui18n.so.46
389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 require
On 2011/09/30 13:14 (GMT+0100) Daniel Drake composed:
> Felix Miata wrote:
>> Sounds to me like your F14 is using correct DPI while your F16 is forced to
>> 96. Does your F14 have /etc/X11/xorg.conf file or a non-empty
>> /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/?
> Bad DPI could certainly be a cause. However,
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> Sounds to me like your F14 is using correct DPI while your F16 is forced to
> 96. Does your F14 have /etc/X11/xorg.conf file or a non-empty
> /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/?
Bad DPI could certainly be a cause. However, xdpyinfo reports the
correct val
Am Freitag, 30. September 2011, 11:10:27 schrieb Tom Callaway:
> On 09/28/2011 11:00 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > I checked the source code, and unison sends a header which contains
> > the current major version number of the software (where "major
> > version" is a string, currently "2.40").
commit 3638c5f428d5ae33d0a1d35ae8166288b0eddf77
Author: Petr Sabata
Date: Fri Sep 30 13:15:07 2011 +0200
0.37 bump
.gitignore |1 +
perl-YAML-LibYAML.spec | 40 +++-
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 33 insertions(+),
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-YAML-LibYAML:
8ce120ca473c58eb0abf28fa19fdb460 YAML-LibYAML-0.37.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.fedoraproject.org/mai
On 2011/09/30 11:00 (GMT+0100) Daniel Drake composed:
> I'm working on bringing OLPC up-to-date with all the great efforts
> with GNOME 3, systemd, etc.
> On the OLPC XO laptops we have quite a strange screen - it is small
> (152mm x 114mm) but very high resolution (1200x900 i.e. 201 dots per
> i
Hi,
I'm working on bringing OLPC up-to-date with all the great efforts
with GNOME 3, systemd, etc.
On the OLPC XO laptops we have quite a strange screen - it is small
(152mm x 114mm) but very high resolution (1200x900 i.e. 201 dots per
inch).
Previously, on Fedora 14, we had to adjust the defaul
On 09/28/2011 11:00 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I checked the source code, and unison sends a header which contains
> the current major version number of the software (where "major
> version" is a string, currently "2.40"). If the major versions of
> each end don't exactly match, unison aborts
On 2011-09-21, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2011-09-21, Petr Pisar wrote:
>>
>> That means Perl, Pyhon and other default-build-root packages will
>> disable support for GDBM temporarily. So if your package needs GDBM
>> support in those languages, please wait until new GDMB and other
>> packages (Perl,
35 matches
Mail list logo
