The .spec file clearly states Version 8.1, sorry for the noise.
-Ilyes
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read a recent Fedora rawhide report and found that mesa is now at
> 8.1 (master @ upstream), but then couldn't fetch the Fedora branch
> using fedpkg, as I usual
Hi,
I read a recent Fedora rawhide report and found that mesa is now at
8.1 (master @ upstream), but then couldn't fetch the Fedora branch
using fedpkg, as I usually do.
$ fedpkg switch-branch f17(OK)
$ fedpkg switch-branch master(OK, still has the mesa-20120424 snapshot)
$ fedpkg switch-
I get a kernel panic when I boot up into the preupgrade. It seems like this
could be the lack of hard drive space left. does this sound accurate?
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> 29.04.2012 15:00, Ian Malone wrote:
>
> On 29 April 2012 01:05, Richard Vickery
> wrote:
>
So I watch the jabberd2 ml. They just released 2.2.15. Someone asked for
them to provide a tarball in the downloads section [1]. So the upstream
has uploaded one there. Originally the upstream asked what purpose
uploading a tarball would provide, the main reason they gave was the
inclusion of t
> >
> > Does that imply that new installs will be easily switched from firewalld
> > to static iptables? I always do new install but I want to keep my firewall
> > static, with my current iptables script.
>
> Once we actually go to firewalld by default, then yes, at least as long
> as lokkit and
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 02:51:52PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>>>
>>> Alright, I'm then proceeding with the packaging.
>>>
>> I've opened this ticket with the Fedora Packag
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 02:51:52PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>>
>> Alright, I'm then proceeding with the packaging.
>>
> I've opened this ticket with the Fedora Packaging Committee. I don't know
> that it belongs there but next time w
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2012-04-30)
===
Meeting started by limburgher at 17:01:21 UTC. The full logs are
available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-04-30/fesco.2012-04-30-17.01.log.html
.
Meeting summary
Compose started at Mon Apr 30 08:15:04 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[389-admin]
389-admin-1.1.28-1.fc18.i686 requires libicuuc.so.48
389-admin-1.1.28-1.fc18.i686 requires libicui18n.so.48
389-admin-1.1.28-1.fc18.
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 02:51:52PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>
> Alright, I'm then proceeding with the packaging.
>
I've opened this ticket with the Fedora Packaging Committee. I don't know
that it belongs there but next time we meet we'll discuss it and send it to
a different group if that's wh
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 02:51:52PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks Rex for the heads up :)
>
> Yes, the goal is to just package the software, the source code won't
> likely be changed - so it wouldn't constitute a derivative work (in
> the sense of a forked source code).
>
> @Toshio :
Hi,
Thanks Rex for the heads up :)
Yes, the goal is to just package the software, the source code won't
likely be changed - so it wouldn't constitute a derivative work (in
the sense of a forked source code).
@Toshio :
> Are there specific trademark licensing terms? I think we'd want to know
>
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 07:47:32AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>
> > What's the position of Fedora regarding using the same trademarked
> > program names (even if the source code is under an open source
> > license) ?
>
> There's lots of software in fedora already with names tha
Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> What's the position of Fedora regarding using the same trademarked
> program names (even if the source code is under an open source
> license) ?
There's lots of software in fedora already with names that are trademarked,
so that alone is no cause for concern.
-- rex
--
de
Hi,
I'm reposting this e-mail, slightly edited and with a much more clear
subject, highlighting the issue.
Hi,
Zotero is a referencing tool that helps the user collecting,
maintaining and generating citations from research papers and so on.
Since version 3.0, Zotero has also been available as a
Compose started at Mon Apr 30 08:15:04 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[LuxRender]
LuxRender-blender-0.8.0-13.fc17.x86_64 requires blender(ABI) = 0:2.61
[aeolus-conductor]
aeolus-conductor-0.4.0-2.fc17.noarch requires ruby(
On 04/29/2012 06:25 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 04/29/2012 06:13 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 04/27/2012 07:36 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:13:47AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm going to add a switch to allow packages to control the behavior
anyway. Whether rpm
Hi,
On 04/29/2012 05:13 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 04/27/2012 07:36 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:13:47AM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I'm going to add a switch to allow packages to control the behavior
anyway. Whether rpm upstream defaults to the traditional behav
commit 7a400893faaf28d0491d6d6925614c2c05b3dcd3
Author: Daniel P. Berrange
Date: Mon Apr 30 10:54:55 2012 +0100
Update to 0.008 release
perl-Glib-Object-Introspection.spec |5 -
sources |2 +-
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
---
dif
2012/4/29 Michael Schwendt :
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:31:43 +1000, GG (Guido) wrote:
>
>> > That's no new responsibilities. Sponsors have always been expected to do
>> > that. With pkgdb, it requires "watch*" access to the packages. Else
>> > it requires subscribing to the scm-commits list and filt
t I hope Tim or someone will be able to lead it.
This is a reminder of the upcoming QA meeting. Please add any topic
suggestions to the meeting wiki page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20120430
The current proposed agenda is included below.
== Proposed Agenda Topics ==
1. Previous meet
There is still plenty of such packages all around the internet. I have a
few packages I am using but haven't have the motivation to push them
through the review and i am not even sure if they could go through, but
I am positive that somebody would benefit from them.
Vit
Dne 27.4.2012 15:29,
Hello
GSoC 2012 selection process is over ! We had a high demand
from the students and since we are offering some limited slots we
couldn't accept all the good students.
Therefore we are planning to launch a program for returning students
(who didnt select for GSoC with Fedora).
The structure of
29.04.2012 15:00, Ian Malone wrote:
On 29 April 2012 01:05, Richard Vickery wrote:
On 2012-04-26 10:50 AM, "Michał Piotrowski" wrote:
Hi,
W dniu 9 kwietnia 2012 17:46 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
Hi,
Is it possible to upgrade now from F16 to F17 with preupgrade?
Has anyone tr
24 matches
Mail list logo
