On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 19:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 7:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >>
> >> I think the problem is GRUB2's own install script/app, doesn't do a great
> >> job of accounting for disks partit
On Mon 13 Feb 2012 04:55:03 AM PST, Jon Ciesla wrote:
Have you filed a bug against that package to alert the maintainer?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com
If not, that would be a great first step.
Done. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790249
I found out Lubomir is the maintainer. I co
On Feb 13, 2012, at 7:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> I think the problem is GRUB2's own install script/app, doesn't do a great
>> job of accounting for disks partitioned where the 1st partition comes less
>> than 35KB after the MBR
Just wanted to make note of the current status of proven testers. As
decided by FESCo late last year, proven tester feedback now has exactly
the same status as non-proven tester feedback, effectively rendering it
pointless to be a proven tester.
I have added a note about this to the proven tester
Hello,
Just as the subject, I made a text table. It's simple. The column name
explains itself. I think it is usefull for somebody.
The table also contains two columns:
'is_fedora_kvm_support?' and 'is_ubuntu_kvm_support?'. The two columns
tell us whether fedora/ubuntn kvm could virtualize
the ar
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:25 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Feb 13, 2012, at 9:16 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > I did Fedora 16 Respin iso install with all latest packages, including
> > latest Anaconda package, and still had this issue.
> >
> > There were two ntfs partitions (W
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 19:36 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:
>
> Hi,
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/
> we got boot.iso
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/x86_64/os/images/
> we got macbo
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 12:49 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:36:21 +
> Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/
> > we got boot.iso
> > on
On Feb 13, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 03:47 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
>> Fedora DE vs KDE spin download ratio compared to past release ratios would
>> be more suggestive of a trend, if it exists.
>
> Not necessarily - I always used the standard DVD to install an
On 02/13/2012 03:47 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Fedora DE vs KDE spin download ratio compared to past release ratios would be
> more suggestive of a trend, if it exists.
Not necessarily - I always used the standard DVD to install and use
KDE and frankly never used the KDE spin - not once.
gen
On Feb 13, 2012, at 9:16 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I did Fedora 16 Respin iso install with all latest packages, including
> latest Anaconda package, and still had this issue.
>
> There were two ntfs partitions (Windows 7 + data partition) and 30 GB
> of free space.
>
> From 30GB
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=789784
--- Comment #3 from Jóhann B. Guðmundsson 2012-02-13
16:19:23 EST ---
Unfortunately I am not however Jon ( limburgher ) has bee
Matthias Clasen wrote:
> While we hope to complete this for the desktop spin, we don't expect all
> spins to be free of ConsoleKit users in time for F17. Therefore, we need
> to make sure that CK continues to function - which is why we've put
> pam-ck-connector into the gdm pam stacks today. Spins
I'm going to reply to both in one go here:
drago01 wrote:
>> Why must a desktop resemble the windows 95 UI paradigm?
Because that is what all current computer users are used to! And an
"inconvenient" fact often ignored in usability studies is that the vast
majority of your users will NOT be n
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=789784
--- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-02-13 15:46:03
EST ---
Jóhann, if you are PP, feel free to commit this.
--
Config
On Feb 13, 2012, at 1:38 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> The LQ poll proves it was the latter.
I don't like Gnome 3 either. From the largely outsider perspective and new to
linux in general, I get the impression Gnome dev is on a mission, of unknown
origin, and could absolutely care less about any
drago01 wrote:
> The poll is scientifically useless and you know that; and the one Olav
> linked shows the opposite by the way.
The one Olav linked to said only "GNOME" rather than "GNOME 3" or "GNOME
Shell" and as such people who are still sticking with GNOME 2 will have
voted for GNOME too. Se
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:36:21 +
Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:
>
> Hi,
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/
> we got boot.iso
> on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/x86_64/os/images/
> we got
The lightweight tag 'perl-Class-Load-0.17-1.fc18' was created pointing to:
1e3ce9f... Update to 0.17
--
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/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
The lightweight tag 'perl-Class-Load-0.17-1.fc17' was created pointing to:
1e3ce9f... Update to 0.17
--
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/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
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=695597
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
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=695589
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary of changes:
1e3ce9f... Update to 0.17 (*)
(*) 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.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mail
python-mwlib is currently deprecated. We dropped it about a year or two
ago because of hellish dependencies. Some of the issues have been
cleaned up so it's now up for re-review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790154
This email is being sent because of this policy:
https://fedora
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2012-02-13)
===
Meeting started by sgallagh at 18:00:33 UTC. The full logs are available
at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-02-13/fesco.2012-02-13-18.00.log.html
.
Meeting summary
-
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote:
Hi,
on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/
we got boot.iso
on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/x86_64/os/images/
we got macboot.img and efiboot.img
what happened to boot.iso ? .
To start one
drago01 wrote:
Why must a desktop resemble the windows 95 UI paradigm? You call that
unconventional I call that progress.
Not even Microsoft is staying with the 95 UI.
@Kevin, Windows 8 will look more like Gnome Shell than KDE. What then?
Will we see millions of Windows users flock to Mac? I
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
>> There still seems to be problems. I rebuilt it locally with an updated
>> F16 and now I get:
>> $ rpm -qp --requires
>> /home/andrea/rpmbuild/SRPMS/tecnoballz-0.92-13.fc16.src.rpm
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Matej Cepl wrote:
>> Kevin?
>>
>> I am usually close to being on your side in most flamewars here, but
>> changing the release policy based on the vote of 627 people on a random
>> website? Really?
>
> It's not just that website. Survey the Fe
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
> There still seems to be problems. I rebuilt it locally with an updated
> F16 and now I get:
> $ rpm -qp --requires
> /home/andrea/rpmbuild/SRPMS/tecnoballz-0.92-13.fc16.src.rpm
> autoconf
> SDL_image-devel
> SDL_mixer-devel
> mikmod-deve
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Panu Matilainen
wrote:
> On 02/11/2012 02:52 PM, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>> a reporter just submitted this bug against tecnoballz:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789544
>>
>> After closer inspection, I see that the RPM doesn't requ
As part of the ckremoval feature [1], things have been steadily ported away
from ConsoleKit api to logind.
While we hope to complete this for the desktop spin, we don't expect all spins
to be free of ConsoleKit users in time for F17. Therefore, we need to make sure
that CK continues to function
Matej Cepl wrote:
> Kevin?
>
> I am usually close to being on your side in most flamewars here, but
> changing the release policy based on the vote of 627 people on a random
> website? Really?
It's not just that website. Survey the Fedora blogs a bit to see how many
people switched away from GNOM
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 12:44 -0500, Omair Majid wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 12:35 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
> > meeting today at 18:00UTC (1:00pm EST) in #fedora-meeting on
> > irc.freenode.net.
> >
>
> [snip]
>
> > For more co
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting today at 18:00UTC (1:00pm EST) in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.
Links to all tickets below can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
= Followups =
#topic #799 Issues with maintainer responsiveness
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:47 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 11:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Let me put it this way, then: Fedora is released on a six month cycle,
> > which is far faster than is usually considered desirable for server
> > usage. It has a 13 month lifet
Hi, folks. To try and help avoid slips this release cycle, I'll be
notifying this list more systematically of outstanding blocker bugs as
we approach RC spin dates and release dates. Starting now!
We are due to compose the first Fedora 17 Alpha release candidate this
Thursday. In order to spin a r
On 2012-02-09, Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> Result is pcre library has changed SONAME from libpcre.so.0 to
> libpcre.so.1. Other librararies (pcrecpp, pcreposix) delivered with this
> package remain compatible.
>
> Because pcre library is part of minimal build root I choosed following
> strategy to avoid
On 02/13/2012 09:42 AM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 15:29 +0100, Laurent Rineau wrote:
>> Le mardi 07 février 2012 14:21:53 Laurent Rineau a écrit :
>>> From release 4.0, the CGAL libraries will be released under LGPLv3+ for the
>>> foundations, and GPLv3+ for the high level pack
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:59 PM, David Lehman wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 22:56 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> Between TC1 and release of F16 Alpha, something must have changed to the
>> worse with regard to installing GRUB to a partition's primary sector.
>> Partitioning hasn't changed. TC
Dne 11.2.2012 16:42, Steve Grubb napsal(a):
On Monday, February 06, 2012 09:31:50 AM Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
Ruby 1.9.3 has finally made it into Rawhide, there are still few more
packages that need to be built, but otherwise the transitions was
successful.
Please note again, that soname has been
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=789571
Nicolas Mailhot changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 15:29 +0100, Laurent Rineau wrote:
> Le mardi 07 février 2012 14:21:53 Laurent Rineau a écrit :
> > From release 4.0, the CGAL libraries will be released under LGPLv3+ for the
> > foundations, and GPLv3+ for the high level packages (instead of LGPLv2 and
> > QPL respectively).
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=789571
Nicolas Mailhot changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
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=789977
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Le mardi 07 février 2012 14:21:53 Laurent Rineau a écrit :
> From release 4.0, the CGAL libraries will be released under LGPLv3+ for the
> foundations, and GPLv3+ for the high level packages (instead of LGPLv2 and
> QPL respectively).
In the CGAL.spec file, I mentionned "License: LGPLv3+ and GPLv3
On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 11:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Let me put it this way, then: Fedora is released on a six month cycle,
> which is far faster than is usually considered desirable for server
> usage. It has a 13 month lifetime, which is far shorter than is usually
> considered desirable f
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Upstream synfig has updated ETL to 0.04.14. The new version of synfig and
> synfigstudio depend on the recent update of that package. Is it possible to
> update it?
Have you filed a bug against that package to alert the main
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:25:08PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
>> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> >> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:25:08PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the biggest compat by just symlinking
> >> /bin to /usr/bin?
> >
> >
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the biggest compat by just symlinking
>> /bin to /usr/bin?
>
> Yeah, that's the end goal, but we need rpm to support replacing
> dir
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for
perl-CGI-Application-Structured-Tools:
72cb59cfe6d6c78d1cb1fc77aaa7ecca CGI-Application-Structured-Tools-0.015.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproje
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:41PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Hmm, you are aware that you reach the biggest compat by just symlinking
> /bin to /usr/bin?
Yeah, that's the end goal, but we need rpm to support replacing
directories with symlinks first. Thus we don't rush the change.
Cheers,
On 13.2.2012 01:12, Kevin Kofler wrote:
IMHO, not only should the KDE spin become the default, but the Xfce spin
should replace the GNOME spin (which of course needs to stop calling itself
the "Desktop spin") on the mirrors. GNOME is no longer a major desktop! Xfce
is now the second most popular
On 02/10/2012 07:12 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>> Given all that, it seems only logical to conclude that Fedora really
>> _isn't_ primarily intended for use as a production server.
>
> Bingo, which is why it's important for people like me who do it to
> realize what they're getting into and take some re
Alright to answer my own question: It was already orphaned in the last
round before f16. So it's probably worth reviving!
But I think the associated workload with reviving a package could be
lowered, just to make it easier for contributors!
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Johannes Lips wrote:
>
56 matches
Mail list logo
