On 2012-04-17, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> it seems to be the right time to do an unification/reorganization of
> Oracle (Berkeley) DB packages in rawhide.
[...]
> What I'm planning to do is getting rid of db4 package. But before that
> I want to clean-up compat-db for a bit.
>
Is it possible to handle
Hey guys,
Cutting this sub-thread off at the pass :)
I think it's obvious that we in the ARM project can do a better job at
engagement, cohesion, and we can learn and improve in many ways. I would
like to suggest that we steer this thread back toward the more abstract
question at hand: that of se
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 01:34:00AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 04/19/2012 01:22 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > No, because it's not a requirement. In theory an SA could be perfectly
> > suited for PA promotion without any real involvement with the Fedora
> > community. It'd just be massively m
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 09:46:16PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> On 04/18/2012 06:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >Not really. The proposed criteria provide strong guidance. If you meet
> >them all then you're probably fine. But the point isn't to be slaves to
> >these criteria. It's to be active
On 04/19/2012 01:22 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:42:58AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
>> Hi Matthew,
>>
>> On 04/18/2012 09:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>
>>> Right now I don't think ARM's doing a great job of that [being part of
>>> the Fedora community]. Your meetings h
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:42:58AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> On 04/18/2012 09:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > Right now I don't think ARM's doing a great job of that [being part of
> > the Fedora community]. Your meetings happen on the phone and aren't
> minuted.
>
> I am
On 04/18/2012 10:12 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 09:57:19PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 04/18/2012 07:13 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The kernel team may have their view skewed by how likely they think it
is that a given architecture will be likely to force additional
r
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 09:57:19PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> On 04/18/2012 07:13 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >The kernel team may have their view skewed by how likely they think it
> >is that a given architecture will be likely to force additional
> >rebuilds. So yes, the point of this docum
On 04/18/2012 07:13 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Huh? The whole point of this item is that it's architecture
neutral- the kernel team for security reasons believes it important
that all kernel builds take less than 4 hours from start to finish.
Why would a new architecture change that number? The
On 04/18/2012 06:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Not really. The proposed criteria provide strong guidance. If you meet
them all then you're probably fine. But the point isn't to be slaves to
these criteria. It's to be active particpants in the Fedora development
community.
It's a big if for any
Hi Matthew,
On 04/18/2012 09:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Right now I don't think ARM's doing a great job of that [being part of
> the Fedora community]. Your meetings happen on the phone and aren't
minuted.
I am sorry that you feel that way. I think it is important to add some
context to th
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 05:20 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > One angle on this that didn't get pointed out, I guess because
> > anaconda
> > team apparently isn't reading, is that at least one person on the
> > anaconda team - I forget who - hates liveinst with a passion and has
> > been proposing for
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 07:04:24PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> On 04/18/2012 06:42 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> [snip]
> >>What if some forms of the hardware are desktop capable, others are
> >>not, but the community only has an interest in supporting headless
> >>installations?
> >
> >Then it'
On 04/18/2012 06:42 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
[snip]
What if some forms of the hardware are desktop capable, others are
not, but the community only has an interest in supporting headless
installations?
Then it's not fit to be a primary architecture.
Okay, please add examples like this wherev
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 05:34:11PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> On 04/16/2012 02:20 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >If you manage that then I think most of the problems you're worried
> >about go away. It'll be obvious to everyone whether or not you're ready
> >to be a primary architecture at any
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 06:18:34PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> On 04/04/2012 03:26 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >>Can we quantify what the overall experience is that must be
> >>consistent? I understand Anaconda installations is considered a
> >>part of this... except when it's not for EC2 ima
On 04/04/2012 03:26 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Can we quantify what the overall experience is that must be
consistent? I understand Anaconda installations is considered a
part of this... except when it's not for EC2 images. What I'm
looking for is "These 10 things are partof the Fedora experien
On 04/03/2012 08:31 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
Look at it this way - if an arch is following the process to become primary,
but during that process actually becomes *less* viable, or for whatever
reason farther from being reasonable as a PA, the process needs to be
such that that's something people s
On 04/16/2012 02:20 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
I think a better way to think about this might be lie the packaging
guidelines - they provide a set of technical constraints, but they don't
tell you how to be part of the packaging community. I see SAs in the
same kind of way. Secondary architecture
If you need a build of httpd 2.4.x to test some applications against the
latest version of Apache web server, I have build backports of rawhide
packages
F16: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/fedora/16/devs/x86_64/repoview/
F17: http://rpms.famillecollet.com/fedora/17/devs/x86_64/repoview/
This tempo
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 17:55 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi after read documentation
> http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/16/html/Installation_Guide/ap-rescuemode.html
>
> seems that assume that lvm is active on process, but booting with
> boot.iso , lvm is not activated in boot process.
>
Hi after read documentation
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/16/html/Installation_Guide/ap-rescuemode.html
seems that assume that lvm is active on process, but booting with
boot.iso , lvm is not activated in boot process.
so without do lvm vgchange -a y
we can't see any /dev/mapper/...
S
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 02:21:36PM +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> it seems to be the right time to do an unification/reorganization of
> Oracle (Berkeley) DB packages in rawhide. The current situation is that
> there are three of them:
>
> compat-db - shipping old libdbs for compatibil
2012/4/18 Mark Wielaard :
> On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 13:41 -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:24:18PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
>> > Is something wrong? I just re-checked the updates I pushed and I did
>> > push updates of the same EVR to both F15 and F16...
>> >
>> +1, I think s
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 09:27:23AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
> >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 02:21:36PM +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> >>> So the plan is:
> >>> 1) remove 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7 fro
You have recently requested to change your Fedora Account System email
to this address. To complete the email change, you must confirm your
ownership of this email by visiting the following URL (you will need to
login with your Fedora account first):
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/user
Compose started at Wed Apr 18 08:15:05 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[389-ds-base]
389-ds-base-1.2.11-0.1.a1.fc18.x86_64 requires libdb-5.2.so()(64bit)
[aeolus-conductor]
aeolus-conductor-0.4.0-2.fc17.noarch requires ruby
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Mark Bidewell wrote:
>
> However, no GUI for installation is less than userfriendly
>>
>
> did you give the VM 768MB or more RAM?
>
> It might not really need it anymore, but last I checked Anaconda
> checked for it befo
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Mark Bidewell wrote:
However, no GUI for installation is less than userfriendly
did you give the VM 768MB or more RAM?
It might not really need it anymore, but last I checked Anaconda
checked for it before switching into gui install mode.
Paul
--
devel mailing list
devel
After trying the F17 Alpha with no success, I tried the F17 Beta. I
installed in the VMWare Fusion Technical Preview (which supports Linux 3D
Graphics). On install I was dumped into the text installer which installed
a basic 211 package installation. Improved from the Alpha is that I could
get a
Compose started at Wed Apr 18 08:15:05 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[aeolus-conductor]
aeolus-conductor-0.4.0-2.fc17.noarch requires ruby(abi) = 0:1.8
[aeolus-configserver]
aeolus-configserver-0.4.5-1.fc17.noarch require
On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 13:41 -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:24:18PM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > Is something wrong? I just re-checked the updates I pushed and I did
> > push updates of the same EVR to both F15 and F16...
> >
> +1, I think something is wrong with the repor
hi,
yum repo conf accepts overwrite_groups, but kickstart repo config does not
seem to accept --overwrite_groups
shouldn't that be easy to add ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> One angle on this that didn't get pointed out, I guess because
> anaconda
> team apparently isn't reading, is that at least one person on the
> anaconda team - I forget who - hates liveinst with a passion and has
> been proposing forever to kill it and replace it with a choice on the
> live image
> In addition, I had fixed the script to properly support
> updates-testing
> repositories eons ago (should not compare fn-1-updates-testing with
> fn-
> updates), but my patch (attached) was never merged because the script
> was to
> be obsoleted by AutoQA anyway according to Jesse Keating.
AutoQ
> > Having this implemented manually would be great. In the future I'd
> > like to replace it with automatic process managed by AutoQA. AutoQA
> > would say Bodhi "this update can be only pushed together with this
> > other update, because the first one depends on the second one". The
> > maintaine
Dne 17.4.2012 20:51, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 10:04 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Tue, 2012-04-03 at 09:55 -0800, Jef Spaleta wrote:
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
How bout adding/changing the icon for installing? Can we not include some
37 matches
Mail list logo
