-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
El Tue, 21 Aug 2012 15:40:10 -0400 (EDT)
Dave Anderson escribió:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> >
> > > Is there something I need to change so that a simple "fedpkg
> > > build" will work again?
> >
> > I believe you need a new version of fe
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:23:48PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 16:12 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > because upstream split the prompt stuff out from the bash_completion
> > script. Perhaps the git packagers could consider providing git-prompt.sh
> > in a more perman
I wrote:
This is definitely planned. I mailed Adam (the other Adam) today to
point out that this was broken by the 1.7.12 update. I don't have
time to work on a fix though. But certainly, git-prompt.sh should be
placed in a more permanent location in the next build.
I placed git-prompt.sh
Hey, folks - it's probably obvious from the lack of any publicity or a
wiki page, but the Fedora Jam test day that's on the schedule for today
is delayed, since F18 isn't really in shape for building a test spin. We
will come up with a specific date later. See the trac ticket -
https://fedoraho
On 08/23/2012 12:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Surely F18 could define %systemd_post_enable as a synonym for
> %systemd_post. The entire point of this thread is to make things
> simpler for packager maintainers, not load them down with cross-branch
> differences. (If I wanted to have a version-depende
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848997
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p...@city-fan.org
--- Comment #5 from Pau
Tom Callaway writes:
> 3) We'll adjust the guidelines like this:
> If your service is explicitly enabled by default in Fedora 16 or 17, and
> you wish to have a shared spec file, you will need to add a
> conditionalized call to the "%systemd_post_enable" macro, as follows:
> %post
> %if %{define
On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 16:12 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hey folks - just in case you haven't all figured this out yet, if
> you're using the neat little trick of putting a few lines in your
> ~/.bashrc so that when you're in a directory containing a git repo, the
> prompt will display what b
Hi everyone,
my name is Jos de Kloe, I am working for the Dutch Met. Office (KNMI) as
a scientist and doing a lot of programming work, mainly in python and
fortran.
For this reason I am interested in adding some python modules to Fedora
that can handle some fileformats commonly used in meteo
On 08/22/2012 06:22 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 22.08.12 19:17, Tom Lane (t...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>>
>> Lennart Poettering writes:
>>> On Wed, 22.08.12 09:25, Kevin Fenzi (ke...@scrye.com) wrote:
I'll add a me too here.
Any word on if the macros can/will be back-port
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847657
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from Fedora
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Rich Mattes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to rebuild one of my packages (mrpt), and I'm running into a TLS
> mismatch error that I am having issues troubleshooting. The offending build
> is at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4412122
The problem s
On 08/23/2012 08:45 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On 2012-08-23 15:12, Jon Ciesla wrote:
things in %doc shouldn't be things that affect run-time operation
True, but there are other considerations in favour of unversioned dirs
such as bookmarkability and general referenceability, consistency with
othe
Rave it wrote:
> For your information.
> I stoped working for the Mate-Desktop project for f18 because
I can understand your frustration, and that you and Dan had trouble
communicating and working together.
I do wish to thank you for the positive contributions you made, and in your
future ende
I said I'll "try",
Thanks.
--
*Yours sincerely,*
*Christopher Meng*
Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project and many others.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 21:22 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> I've filed.
>
> if there aren't any response, I'll try to take the ownership.
You'll have to become a packager before you can take the ownership.
Pierre
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject
I know,of course.I've been told many times,now I manage to avoid saying
like "why not httpd 2.4?" or "why not collectd5?" or blablabla..
Therefore I think there aren't ant conflicts after upgrade.
Thanks.
--
*Yours sincerely,*
*Christopher Meng*
Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project a
Christopher Meng píše v Čt 23. 08. 2012 v 21:00 +0800:
> Hi,
>
> why not update to 3.x?
>
> Do you think major version upgrade is impossible?
when the versions are incompatible then it (almost) is, AFAIK some
parameters have different meaning between v2 and v3, search for zabbix
vs. fping3
Dan
I've filed.
if there aren't any response, I'll try to take the ownership.
:)
--
*Yours sincerely,*
*Christopher Meng*
Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project and many others.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo
Then you may file a bug against the EPEL branch to ask the maintainer to
make an upgrade.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Christopher Meng wrote:
> Sorry I forgot that I mean the 'fping' is the package in EPEL, not Fedora,
> sorry!
>
> --
>
>
> *Yours sincerely,*
> *Christopher Meng*
>
> Ambassa
Sorry I forgot that I mean the 'fping' is the package in EPEL, not Fedora,
sorry!
--
*Yours sincerely,*
*Christopher Meng*
Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project and many others.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/list
Hi,
why not update to 3.x?
Do you think major version upgrade is impossible?
--
*Yours sincerely,*
*Christopher Meng*
Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project and many others.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinf
Summary of changes:
c17745c... 1.3099 bump (*)
(*) 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/mailman
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On 2012-08-23 15:12, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>> things in %doc shouldn't be things that affect run-time operation
>
> True, but there are other considerations in favour of unversioned dirs
> such as bookmarkability and general referenceability, cons
On 2012-08-23 15:12, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> things in %doc shouldn't be things that affect run-time operation
True, but there are other considerations in favour of unversioned dirs
such as bookmarkability and general referenceability, consistency with
other distros, and general cleanliness. But this
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Christopher Meng wrote:
> Ok,I'll try
>
>
> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/fping/
Seems to me that there is some action on the package. I don't know if I
miss something here.
Especially the Changelog is not so dead as you describe it.
https://apps.fedorapr
>
> Ok,I'll try
--
*Yours sincerely,*
*Christopher Meng*
Ambassador/Contributor of Fedora Project and many others.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On 2012-08-23 04:34, Todd Zullinger wrote:
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>>> source /usr/share/doc/git-1.7.12/contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh
>>>
>>> because upstream split the prompt stuff out from the bash_completion
>>> script. Perhaps the
On 2012-08-23 04:34, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> source /usr/share/doc/git-1.7.12/contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh
>>
>> because upstream split the prompt stuff out from the bash_completion
>> script. Perhaps the git packagers could consider providing
>> git-prompt.sh in a
Hi, Meng.
If you would like to help, you can go through [1] to take over the package
ownership.
[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers
cheers,
robin
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Christopher Meng wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I wonder if maintainer of fping is
Hey all,
I wonder if maintainer of fping is available or not.I took a look at the
spec file and see that since f12 rebuild nobody has updated the package.
But I can't say nobody is its maintainer,so I want to find that guy.
Thanks.
--
*Yours sincerely,*
*Christopher Meng*
Ambassador/Contrib
31 matches
Mail list logo
