On 30/01/12 00:59, Henrique Junior wrote:
> I've started talking to Greg KH, the guy who implemented openSUSE
> Tumbleweed. Here is what he said:
Oh great. Thank you for doing something constructive here.
I'm concerned about bundled libs and requirements of libraries. If I
remember right, up to
- Original Message -
> From: "Brendan Jones"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:44:21 AM
> Subject: Re: Rolling release Fedora - fantastic idea
>
> On 01/30/2012 12:59 AM, Henrique Junior wrote:
> > I've started talking to Greg KH, the guy who impleme
- Original Message -
> On 01/27/2012 12:21 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>
> >
> > Yes, we are of course trying to push the patches upstream, but it
> > is a bit problematic, since the upstream says, that this is an
> > FHS-specific issue and they only want to do general solutions -
> > see
Mike Pinkerton wrote:
> I accept your premises that the historical reasons for this division
> of binaries are no longer compelling, that the present variety of
> locations is confusing and works against cross-distro compatibility
> and that simplification is a good thing in itself. I encourage yo
On 01/29/2012 12:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> The target doesn't change, the purpose of any TC or RC is always to test
> it against the release criteria using the validation tests. There is a
> link to the trac ticket, which usually describes the changes between TC
> and RC builds, in each a
On 01/24/2012 08:36 PM, Rudy Sicard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My name is Rudy Sicard. I submitted a review request 781624 (one week
> ago but freshly updated) and I am seeking a sponsor.
Welcome to Fedora and do read
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group
Rahul
--
de
On 01/30/2012 01:49 AM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
I think we have all missed the point, this is not about a rolling release for
Fedora, it'a about FUDuntu using this list to gain attention for their project.
If it is about Fedora it is then about reducing their workload.
I'll pass on either, the o
I think we have all missed the point, this is not about a rolling release for
Fedora, it'a about FUDuntu using this list to gain attention for their project.
If it is about Fedora it is then about reducing their workload.
I'll pass on either, the original thread on this topic should be revive
On 01/30/2012 12:59 AM, Henrique Junior wrote:
I've started talking to Greg KH, the guy who implemented openSUSE
Tumbleweed. Here is what he said:
1 - What were the changes in the infrastructure necessary for the operation of
openSUSE Tumbleweed?
None.
2 - The Tumbleweed has led to a great "
On 01/30/2012 01:17 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:23:07 -0500
Genes MailLists wrote:
On 01/28/2012 12:23 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:15:11 -0600
Andrew Wyatt wrote:
...snip...
...
I think the way forward is the one I outlined in:
http://lists.fedorapr
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:23:07 -0500
Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 01/28/2012 12:23 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:15:11 -0600
> > Andrew Wyatt wrote:
> >
> > ...snip...
> >
>
> ...
>
> >
> > I think the way forward is the one I outlined in:
> > http://lists.fedoraproject.or
On 01/29/2012 11:57 PM, Noah Hall wrote:
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Robert 'Bob' Jensen
wrote:
- "Brendan Jones" wrote:
On 01/28/2012 01:10 AM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
Point in time release from your stable repository as Fedora 17, 18,
19.
This model been working for us for a
I've started talking to Greg KH, the guy who implemented openSUSE
Tumbleweed. Here is what he said:
> 1 - What were the changes in the infrastructure necessary for the operation of
> openSUSE Tumbleweed?
None.
> 2 - The Tumbleweed has led to a great "cost" in manpower to be maintained?
Nope, it'
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 29.01.2012 23:57, schrieb Noah Hall:
>> Fuduntu is not the best. Neither is Fedora. I, myself, am a Rawhide
>> user. I'd love for Fedora become rolling simply because messing around
>> with preupgrade and reinstalling is oh so tedious
Am 29.01.2012 23:57, schrieb Noah Hall:
> Fuduntu is not the best. Neither is Fedora. I, myself, am a Rawhide
> user. I'd love for Fedora become rolling simply because messing around
> with preupgrade and reinstalling is oh so tedious and a waste of my
> time.
why are you doing it instead a yum
On dom, 2012-01-29 at 22:57 +, Noah Hall wrote:
> I'd love for Fedora become rolling simply because messing around
> with preupgrade and reinstalling is oh so tedious and a waste of my
> time. Why do you think more people are using Ubuntu for development?
Whatever their reasons might be, Ubunt
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> Or a keyword that would exclude the ticket from the compiled list
>> automatically? If a second search on all tickets with that keyword
>> results in hundreds or thousands of ticket numbers, that should raise
>> an
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Robert 'Bob' Jensen
wrote:
>
> - "Brendan Jones" wrote:
>
>> On 01/28/2012 01:10 AM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
>
>
>
>> >
>> > Point in time release from your stable repository as Fedora 17, 18,
>> 19.
>> > This model been working for us for a short while now.
>> >
I am late to the game but wanted to thank Harald and Kay for their
efforts, and to encourage them to go even further.
History has brought us to a point where there are at least 7 standard
places to put binaries (not counting ~/bin):
/bin
/opt
/sbin
/usr/bin
/usr/sbin
/usr/local/bin
/usr/loc
On 01/29/2012 10:56 PM, Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote:
- "Brendan Jones" wrote:
On 01/28/2012 01:10 AM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
Point in time release from your stable repository as Fedora 17, 18,
19.
This model been working for us for a short while now.
You guys are already set up for su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2012 04:08 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> On 01/27/2012 08:10 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>> The packages, which are about to land in rawhide, are at this
>> moment available via the ‘f17-usrmove’ koji tag. They are ready
>> for testing now. Any tes
- "Brendan Jones" wrote:
> On 01/28/2012 01:10 AM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
> >
> > Point in time release from your stable repository as Fedora 17, 18,
> 19.
> > This model been working for us for a short while now.
> >
> > You guys are already set up for success, IMHO much more so than some
>
On 01/28/2012 01:10 AM, Andrew Wyatt wrote:
I read the list thread concerning a Fedora rolling release distribution,
and I found it interesting enough to compel me to join the list and
weigh in.
First, I think a rolling release Fedora is a fantastic idea. I'm certain
that it's possible, since I'
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Or a keyword that would exclude the ticket from the compiled list
> automatically? If a second search on all tickets with that keyword
> results in hundreds or thousands of ticket numbers, that should raise
> an alarm-bell.
If you set release to rawhide and add the Future
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 09:23:19 -0800, AW (Adam) wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 20:43 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > Then you have misunderstood it, unfortunately. I'm not against EOL ticket
> > cleanup procedures in general. I'm against closing tickets repeatedly
> > after it has been shown t
On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 20:43 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Then you have misunderstood it, unfortunately. I'm not against EOL ticket
> cleanup procedures in general. I'm against closing tickets repeatedly
> after it has been shown that an issue is still present in the current dist
> and nobody h
Compose started at Sun Jan 29 08:15:14 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[aunit]
aunit-2010-3.fc16.i686 requires libgnat-4.6.so
aunit-2010-3.fc16.x86_64 requires libgnat-4.6.so()(64bit)
[autotrust]
autotrust-0.3.1-7.f
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:23:34 +0100, TJ (Tim) wrote:
> gphpedit has been FTBFS for a while, due to the fact that its dependency
> gtkhtml2 was also FTBFS and is now orphaned.
It's also a couple of releases behind. The web page lists several newer
ones made in 2010.
> As a consequence (and due to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:10:00 -0600, AW (Andrew) wrote:
> First, I think a rolling release Fedora is a fantastic idea. I'm
> certain that it's possible, since I've been pulling packages from 15,
> 16, and Rawhide downstream to Fuduntu which still has a lot of 14 left
> at it's core with much su
* Genes MailLists [29/01/2012 09:51] :
>
> Possibly - but without the support from at least some of the Fedora
> core team (fesco, board, key redhatters etc) and possibly some on the RH
> business side recognizing some potential benefit in the enterprise
> setting, this is quite likely not to go
30 matches
Mail list logo
