Re: filesystem

On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 18:10 -0800, darrell pfeifer wrote: > If you want to respect people who are testing, then maybe there is > something better than "we don't have to exercise any care and we don't > care, wink, wink, grin." > > > There isn't anything in my request that seems difficult to do.

Re: filesystem

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 17:53, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 17:47 -0800, darrell pfeifer wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 17:15, Adam Williamson > > wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:27 -0800, darrell pfeifer wrote: > > > As far as I've seen on the lis

Re: filesystem

On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 17:47 -0800, darrell pfeifer wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 17:15, Adam Williamson > wrote: > On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:27 -0800, darrell pfeifer wrote: > > As far as I've seen on the list, the /usr move stuff was > supposed to > > be con

Re: filesystem

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 17:15, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:27 -0800, darrell pfeifer wrote: > > As far as I've seen on the list, the /usr move stuff was supposed to > > be confined by tagging to f17-usermove so it wouldn't affect rawhide > > until the big switch was pulled. >

Re: filesystem

On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:27 -0800, darrell pfeifer wrote: > As far as I've seen on the list, the /usr move stuff was supposed to > be confined by tagging to f17-usermove so it wouldn't affect rawhide > until the big switch was pulled. Yes. We just pulled the big switch. :) -- Adam Williamson Fedo

Re: filesystem

On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 16:49:12 -0800 darrell pfeifer wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 16:33, Jason L Tibbitts III > wrote: > > > > "dp" == darrell pfeifer writes: > > > > dp> As far as I've seen on the list, the /usr move stuff was > > dp> supposed to be confined by tagging to f17-usermove so i

Re: filesystem

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 16:33, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > "dp" == darrell pfeifer writes: > > dp> As far as I've seen on the list, the /usr move stuff was supposed to > dp> be confined by tagging to f17-usermove so it wouldn't affect rawhide > dp> until the big switch was pulled. > > Well

Re: filesystem

> "dp" == darrell pfeifer writes: dp> As far as I've seen on the list, the /usr move stuff was supposed to dp> be confined by tagging to f17-usermove so it wouldn't affect rawhide dp> until the big switch was pulled. Well, yes, but the big switch has actually been pulled. - J< -- devel ma

filesystem

As far as I've seen on the list, the /usr move stuff was supposed to be confined by tagging to f17-usermove so it wouldn't affect rawhide until the big switch was pulled. Trying to update from koji (which will appear in rawhide tomorrow) gives - Upgrade 2 Packages T

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:39 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > mount will not mount hfsx volumes, journaled or not. False. -t hfsplus does work in F16, but is confusing because hfsx != hfs+. In any case, journaled fs is read only. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproj

[389-devel] Please review: Ticket #281 - TLS not working with latest openldap

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/281 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/281/0001-Ticket-281-TLS-not-working-with-latest-openldap.patch -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel

Review Swap

I'd like a review about sparkleshare package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787293 Does somebody like to swap reviews? Thanks in advance -- Nikos Roussos about -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/list

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Feb 3, 2012, at 12:47 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: > Right. The code explicitly rejects any attempt to resize a partition > on a disk with sector size != 512. Due to this confusion with > jhdr_size, at least for now, I do not plan to change that bit. > > Maybe someone who is motivated and capab

[perl-Devel-CheckLib] Update to 0.96.

commit 5c498234e331c8091794c219335baedadf703af0 Author: Jose Pedro Oliveira Date: Fri Feb 3 19:49:38 2012 + Update to 0.96. .gitignore |1 + perl-Devel-CheckLib.spec |9 + sources |2 +- 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-

File Devel-CheckLib-0.96.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by jpo

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Devel-CheckLib: 150053ea0ddcbe2d8bcbe0ebd6209ec0 Devel-CheckLib-0.96.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

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

Chris Murphy wrote: > On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:56 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: > >> Matthew Garrett wrote: >>> There's various issues with the hfsplus utilities we ship at the moment, >>> including the fact that fsck.hfsplus crashes on 64-bit. I'd like to >> >> Glad you're looking at this. I noticed that

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 11:06:56AM -0800, John Reiser wrote: > PowerPC Macintosh hardware will run for some more years. > The monetary cost for a used machine (1GB RAM, >1GHz CPU) > is nearly zero. A "dead" Apple OS has the benefit of no new bugs. > Preventing the install of Fedora on such a box

Re: new comps group proposal: Virtualization Host

Alan Pevec (ape...@gmail.com) said: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Daniel P. Berrange > wrote: > > You don't mention the eisting 'Virtualization' group there, which > > is historically what people have installed when wanting a virtualization > > host. Admittedly this does include some deskto

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:12 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > There is yet another variant called HFSX which is case-sensitive, but also > has more feature potential than HFSJ. Correction, according to the following URL, HFSX can be case sensitive or insensitive. http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?p

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

> Are you sure you mean HFS? The original maximum volume size for Mac OS > Standard (HFS) format, was 2GB. The maximum number of allocation blocks is > 65,536. For a 100GB disk, your allocation block would need to be 1.6MB. > Considering Mac OS X 10.7, today's current Apple operating system, is

Fedora Kernel Meeting 02-03-2012 Minutes

== #fedora-meeting: Fedora Kernel meeting == Meeting started by jwb at 18:00:34 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-02-03/fedora-kernel.2012-02-03-18.00.log.html . Meeti

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:56 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: > Matthew Garrett wrote: >> There's various issues with the hfsplus utilities we ship at the moment, >> including the fact that fsck.hfsplus crashes on 64-bit. I'd like to > > Glad you're looking at this. I noticed that recently, too. > I wanted t

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Feb 2, 2012, at 6:45 PM, John Reiser wrote: >> Does anyone object [to dropping support for HFS]? > > Plain HFS has no journal, so there are workloads where HFS is faster > than HFS+ which has a journal. Mac OS Extended or HFS+ or HFS Plus, does not inherently have a journal. There is a sep

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Feb 2, 2012, at 5:25 PM, David Lehman wrote: > > My understanding is that the so-called "Apple Bootstrap" filesystem > required for ppc Macs to boot is HFS. That's what anaconda uses for it. > If we could be using HFS+ instead, fine. PPC Macs could only boot using HFS+ since Mac OS X 10.0 s

Re: Bodhi critical path updates policy adjustment

On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:10 +0100, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > On 02/02/2012 05:18 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Adam Williamson wrote: > >> We'll keep it around, but I'll update the wiki pages to note that > >> it's kinda 'dormant' for now. I'm hoping that with Bodhi 2.0 > >> we'll be able to re

[389-devel] Please review: Ticket #280 - extensible binary filters do not work

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/280 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/280/0001-Ticket-280-extensible-binary-filters-do-not-work.patch -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel

[389-devel] Please review: Ticket #279 - filter normalization does not use matching rules

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/279 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/279/0001-Ticket-279-filter-normalization-does-not-use-matchin.patch -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel

Re: Branching F17

On 03/02/12 16:51, Kevin Fenzi wrote: I'm not sure I understand the question. ;) Neither do I, and I wrote it. <>^<> - Whatever the current method of migrating should be announced (devel-announce at least). Thats the crumb, was hoping for. Hopefully that happens before branching. k

Re: Branching F17

On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:39:05 + Frank Murphy wrote: > On 03/02/12 16:11, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > From: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Schedule > > > > 2012-02-07 Branch Fedora 17 from Rawhide-- Branch Freeze > > > > kevin > > > > Do we then use that with our /usrmove test boxes. > > O

Re: Branching F17

On 03/02/12 16:11, Kevin Fenzi wrote: From: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Schedule 2012-02-07 Branch Fedora 17 from Rawhide-- Branch Freeze kevin Do we then use that with our /usrmove test boxes. Or is Branched to be kept with current-rawhide boxes? -- Regards, Frank Murphy, frie

[Bug 787216] perl-Module-Build in el6

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=787216 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added --

Re: Branching F17

On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:55:34 -0600 Mike Chambers wrote: > Seeing the TC's for F17 Alpha start to come out (and see how currently > based on rawhide), when does the branch get done and set? > From: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Schedule 2012-02-07 Branch Fedora 17 from Rawhide-- Branch F

Re: Branching F17

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 09:55:34 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: > Seeing the TC's for F17 Alpha start to come out (and see how currently > based on rawhide), when does the branch get done and set? It's scheduled for February 7th. You can schedules at: http://rbergero.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:56:51PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: > >> Can you point me to the latest upstream sources? > > git://cavan.codon.org.uk/hfsplus-tools.git - it needs clang to build. Thanks. I built it, and when using that version of fsck.hfs, my new parted test pas

Branching F17

Seeing the TC's for F17 Alpha start to come out (and see how currently based on rawhide), when does the branch get done and set? -- Mike Chambers Madisonville, KY "Best little town on Earth!" -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/d

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:56:51PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: > Can you point me to the latest upstream sources? git://cavan.codon.org.uk/hfsplus-tools.git - it needs clang to build. -- Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedo

[Bug 787172] perl-WWW-Mechanize-1.72 is available

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=787172 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug 787216] New: perl-Module-Build in el6

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: perl-Module-Build in el6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787216 Summary: perl-Module-Build in el6 Product: Fedora EPEL Version

[perl-Tree-XPathEngine] Initial import (#787199)

commit c9ebac94ae637e748db319cb2af104713f6cccb4 Author: Petr Šabata Date: Fri Feb 3 16:07:07 2012 +0100 Initial import (#787199) .gitignore |1 + perl-Tree-XPathEngine.spec | 45 sources|1 + 3 file

Re: Bodhi critical path updates policy adjustment

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/02/2012 05:18 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: >> We'll keep it around, but I'll update the wiki pages to note that >> it's kinda 'dormant' for now. I'm hoping that with Bodhi 2.0 >> we'll be able to re-design the process and util

File Tree-XPathEngine-0.05.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by psabata

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Tree-XPathEngine: a378a4c7c853b6c20d499b3a4e169efc Tree-XPathEngine-0.05.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

OT: sorry, testing

ignore this please -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Test-Announce] Fedora 17 Alpha Test Compose 1 (TC1) Available Now!

As per the Fedora 17 schedule [1], Fedora 17 Alpha Test Compose 1 (TC1) is now available for testing. (Lives are not currently available.) Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5054 . Please see the following pages for download links (includ

Re: Does anyone still need to create legacy HFS filesystems?

Matthew Garrett wrote: > There's various issues with the hfsplus utilities we ship at the moment, > including the fact that fsck.hfsplus crashes on 64-bit. I'd like to Glad you're looking at this. I noticed that recently, too. I wanted to use fsck.hfsplus in a test to verify that parted's newly-r

Unity in openSUSE >> Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)

Hi all, First of all, I would like to apologize for opening a new topic, but I wasn't signed on the list, so I can't really reply to the original thread, "Unity For Fedora (As in OpenSUSE or Arch)"[1] by Manuel Escudero. I would like to clarify a few things: * Unity is not available for openSUS

rubygem-xml-simple license change

Hi all, due to license change in Ruby, I have updated the license of rubygem-xml-simple after clarification with its author. -- Regards, Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Fedora 17’s unified filesystem (/usr-move)

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:25, Frank Murphy wrote: > On 02/02/12 18:47, Kay Sievers wrote: >> >> The former dracut ‘usrmove’ module has been renamed to ‘convertfs’. We >> need to carry that option for quite some time through future releases > > Does this mean that ‘convertfs’ will be build into dra

Re: Fedora 17’s unified filesystem (/usr-move)

On 02/02/12 18:47, Kay Sievers wrote: The former dracut ‘usrmove’ module has been renamed to ‘convertfs’. We need to carry that option for quite some time through future releases Does this mean that ‘convertfs’ will be build into dracut-*? Does the user\tester have to keep doing "--force --ad