Bill Nottingham writes:
> Package man-pages-ko (orphan)
I have taken ownership of this one.
Regards,
--
Daiki Ueno
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Bruno Wolff III writes:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 20:13:18 -0400,
>Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm still hoping to kill libpng-compat (and libtiff-compat) before we
>> branch F18.
> Should libpng12 obsolete libpng-compat?
Doh. I didn't think about that, but you're probably right.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 20:13:18 -0400,
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm still hoping to kill libpng-compat (and libtiff-compat) before we
branch F18.
Should libpng12 obsolete libpng-compat?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 10:23:57 -0700
Adam Williamson wrote:
> We'll be running through the beta blockers and nice-to-haves. An
> updated list of blocker bugs should soon be available: tflink is still
> working on a replacement for the current blocker bugs page, but he
> says he'll have something up
I just did
/usr/bin/mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 /tmp/freeimage-3.10.0-10.fc18.src.rpm
after having flushed /var/cache/mock, so that current packages would get
pulled down. Or so I thought. When the build failed and I went to find
out why, I discovered that it had supplied me with an ancient l
Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Ter, 2012-07-31 at 22:42 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> I'm looking into these:
>>
>> Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> > Package komparator (fails to build)
> can't resolve this fail
>
> g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I/usr/include/kde
> -I/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/include -I. -DQT_THR
On 08/02/2012 06:15 PM, José Matos wrote:
On 07/11/2012 06:23 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
Dear all,
A new fedora-review is being brought to you.
For me it fails like this:
$ fedora-review -v -n octave-odepkg
Exception down the road...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/pyt
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 05:54:46PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> "nomodeset" doesn't help or change anything unfortunately..
Try with noapic?
--
Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:12:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> It really depends on those file paths, and if the files move, it
> breaks. Previously discussed below, and the status is still now
> essentially the same as it was then:
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-JSON-XS:
6a1eafeadc1680a806ec2eb1798f6084 JSON-XS-2.33.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/mailman/listi
# F18 Alpha Blocker Review meeting #1
# Date: 2012-08-03
# Time: 17:00 UTC [1] (13:00 EDT, 10:00 PDT)
# Location: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
Thanks to jreznik for the reminder that it's that time again: time to
start in on blocker review meetings for Fedora 18. Crack your knuckles,
eve
On 07/11/2012 06:23 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> A new fedora-review is being brought to you.
For me it fails like this:
$ fedora-review -v -n octave-odepkg
Exception down the road...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/review_
commit efaa4364498f9d9a18773ef283df6cce9d3fd6a1
Author: Petr Šabata
Date: Thu Aug 2 17:15:45 2012 +0200
Bundle 0.714 IO modules to fix dependency breakage
perl-SOAP-Lite-0.715-IO-modules.patch | 425 +
perl-SOAP-Lite.spec |9 +-
2 fil
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 11:15:09AM -0400, Nalin Dahyabhai wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:12:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 11:04:34AM -0400, Nalin Dahyabhai wrote:
> > > Whether it does or not, I'm rebuilding the candidate update without this
> > > change, si
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:12:52PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 11:04:34AM -0400, Nalin Dahyabhai wrote:
> > Whether it does or not, I'm rebuilding the candidate update without this
> > change, since I'd rather not introduce dependency breakage after
> > release.
>
>
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 11:04:34AM -0400, Nalin Dahyabhai wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:00:17AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-11388/krb5-1.10.2-5.fc1
> >
> > triggers:
> >
> > Error: Package: 1:libguestfs-1.18.5-2.fc17.i686 (updates)
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746941
--- Comment #74 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
Latest upstream release: 3.18
Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 3.17
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Mojolicious/
Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
s
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746941
Upstream Release Monitoring
changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|perl-Mojolicious-3.17 is|perl-Mojolicious-3.18 is
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:03:08PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:00:17AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-11388/krb5-1.10.2-5.fc1
> >
> > triggers:
> >
> > Error: Package: 1:libguestfs-1.18.5-2.fc17.i686 (updates
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:00:17AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-11388/krb5-1.10.2-5.fc1
>
> triggers:
>
> Error: Package: 1:libguestfs-1.18.5-2.fc17.i686 (updates)
>Requires: /lib/libkrb5.so.3
>Removing: krb5-libs-1.10
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:00:17AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-11388/krb5-1.10.2-5.fc1
>
> triggers:
>
> Error: Package: 1:libguestfs-1.18.5-2.fc17.i686 (updates)
>Requires: /lib/libkrb5.so.3
>Removing: krb5-libs-1.10
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-11388/krb5-1.10.2-5.fc1
triggers:
Error: Package: 1:libguestfs-1.18.5-2.fc17.i686 (updates)
Requires: /lib/libkrb5.so.3
Removing: krb5-libs-1.10.2-2.fc17.i686 (@updates-testing)
Not found
Updated
On 08/02/2012 03:36 PM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 08/02/2012 08:29 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
Maybe it would be better formulated as:
[!]: MUST: Buildroot MUST NOT be present (NOTE: this is not true for
EPEL5)
[!]: MUST: Package MUST NOT run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
at the
On 08/02/2012 08:29 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
Maybe it would be better formulated as:
[!]: MUST: Buildroot MUST NOT be present (NOTE: this is not true for
EPEL5)
[!]: MUST: Package MUST NOT run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
at the beginning of %install
What do you think?
That wo
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 08:23 -0600, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> On 08/02/2012 12:02 AM, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 23:52 -0600, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> >> Where would you like bug reports?
> >>
> >> I tried it against one of my own review tickets. It found a number of
> >>
On 08/02/2012 12:02 AM, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 23:52 -0600, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
Where would you like bug reports?
I tried it against one of my own review tickets. It found a number of
issues however almost all of them except one was wrong.
For example it complained
Hi there,
Just to remind you that we are having our next planning meeting today,
Thursday, at 6PM UTC, #fedora-meeting.
This time is going to be used for our weekly meetings.
The current agenda is:
# hotel
# founding
# design
# other tasks
# open floor
Hope to see you later today,
--
Kévin Ra
> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 11:17 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Kamil Paral
> > wrote:
> > > Something like this? [1] [2]
> >
> > Yup! Something a lot like that! I did look over the AutoQA wiki
> > before
> > posting but didn't know enough about rpmguard to know that
28 matches
Mail list logo
