On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 07:43 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > lack of an upgrade mechanism.
>
> Yum is an upgrade mechanism. Now you may run into issues with SELinux this
> time around, but that is just yet another example of how enabling SELinux by
> default was a major mi
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 07:32 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Let's look at the practical examples. anaconda used to have its own
> > partition inspection code, its own loader stage, and its own network
> > management code and UI. Over the last few years, all of those have ver
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 08:07 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Prepupgrade should be probably taken out from F17 (as there's no newer
> > Fedora that supports preupgrade).
>
> We can't really "take it out" from the shipped release, fedup will have to
> Obsolete it when it's r
OK, thanks for your answers.
I've submitted a new request for each package:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874718
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874719
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874721
Regards,
M.M.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
ht
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Prepupgrade should be probably taken out from F17 (as there's no newer
> Fedora that supports preupgrade).
We can't really "take it out" from the shipped release, fedup will have to
Obsolete it when it's ready. Until then, marking F18 as preupgrade-ok=False
should fix th
Peter Robinson wrote:
> And with it will go Fedora's ability to support a lot of new hardware
> moving forward and I don't believe that's good for anyone. The developers
> have done a lot of work to make it easily handle a vast amount of use
> cases and I think its great the work they've done. The
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 07:49 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> David Cantrell wrote:
> > The scope was not a surprise to us, we knew from the beginning when we
> > started this that the delivery of all newui work would have to be staged
> > across multiple Fedora releases. The key was getting groups lik
David Cantrell wrote:
> The scope was not a surprise to us, we knew from the beginning when we
> started this that the delivery of all newui work would have to be staged
> across multiple Fedora releases. The key was getting groups like Fedora
> QA and FESCo involved early so that they understood
Adam Williamson wrote:
> lack of an upgrade mechanism.
Yum is an upgrade mechanism. Now you may run into issues with SELinux this
time around, but that is just yet another example of how enabling SELinux by
default was a major mistake, and thankfully there are workarounds (doing the
upgrade wit
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Let's look at the practical examples. anaconda used to have its own
> partition inspection code, its own loader stage, and its own network
> management code and UI. Over the last few years, all of those have very
> deliberately been killed and replaced with bits of the main
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 06:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:31:20AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> And Restricted Boot support just needs to go away!
> >
> > Sure, who wants new computers.
>
> Restricted Boot can and should be disabled by the
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:31:20AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> And Restricted Boot support just needs to go away!
>
> Sure, who wants new computers.
Restricted Boot can and should be disabled by the user in the firmware.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
de
I'm making a crude fake EC2 environment on my test machine, and as part of
that, I need a web server listening on 169.254.169.254. I've bound this
address to lo:0. How do I use firewall-cmd to allow http through? It's
blocked by default.
I thought I could do it with the interface=lo:0 argument, b
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 15:19 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Matthew Garrett (mj...@srcf.ucam.org) said:
> > Patches that cleanly decouple Anaconda from the entire software stack
> > that it runs on top of would probably be received with open arms, but
> > nobody who works on it has any idea how
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 09:11:26AM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> OKAY,it sounds interesting,I'd like to join.
All it takes is editing the wiki to add your name.
If there's enough interest (it seems like there's actually a lot -- more
than I anticipated!), it may be worth having our own mailing
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 16:39 -0700, Tim Flink wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 23:00:42 +
> Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:48:31PM -0700, Tim Flink wrote:
> > > On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 20:14:05 +
> > > Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > > "we" are? I see approximately nobody offe
OKAY,it sounds interesting,I'd like to join.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 08:18:37AM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> Is it similar to the minimal install media of some distribution?
Theoretically it could be used to make a minimal spin, yes.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.
Voting for the release name of Fedora 19 has begun. The pool of names
submitted by the community has been narrowed down to 8 possible names,
one of which will become the release name for the successor to Fedora 18
("Spherical Cow").
This vote began on November 9th, 2012, at 00:00 UTC, and wil
Is it similar to the minimal install media of some distribution?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 23:00:42 +
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:48:31PM -0700, Tim Flink wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 20:14:05 +
> > Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > "we" are? I see approximately nobody offering assistance in that
> > > respect.
> >
> > If it would make
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 01:52 +, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> I know everyone is going to hate me for saying this, but wouldn't it make
> sense
> to just forget about F-18 and go for F-19 instead? After all, F-19 feature
> submission deadline will probably be only a few weeks after F-18 release (as
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:48:31PM -0700, Tim Flink wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 20:14:05 +
> Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > "we" are? I see approximately nobody offering assistance in that
> > respect.
>
> If it would make you feel better, I can stop building test images,
> updating test repos,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874846
Bug ID: 874846
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: unspecified
Version: rawhide
Priority: unspecified
CC: mmasl...@redhat.c
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:32 PM, drago01 wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:08 PM, drago01 wrote:
> This, incidentally, also is why running the F17 installer on F19 isn't
> practic
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 20:14:05 +
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:31:18AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > we're still thrashing around trying to figure out how to build and
> > ship the initramfs that fedup needs.
>
> "we" are? I see approximately nobody offering assistance
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:32 PM, drago01 wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:08 PM, drago01 wrote:
This, incidentally, also is why running the F17 installer on F19 isn't
practical.
>>>
>>> Well not practical maybe ... impossible no.
>>
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 20:47 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 08:40 PM, David Lehman wrote:
> > No. It is an inevitable consequence of the feature set demanded of the
> > Fedora OS installer.
> >
> > If thing A must be able to set up and configure thing B and thing B
> > changes
On 11/08/2012 09:26 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 8 November 2012 13:02, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/08/2012 07:56 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
or do you have any other installer you can point to that behaves like
this?
Pointing out how the installer currently works does not change
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:08 PM, drago01 wrote:
>>> This, incidentally, also is why running the F17 installer on F19 isn't
>>> practical.
>>
>> Well not practical maybe ... impossible no.
>> In fact making an isolated image using F17 components
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:08 PM, drago01 wrote:
>> This, incidentally, also is why running the F17 installer on F19 isn't
>> practical.
>
> Well not practical maybe ... impossible no.
> In fact making an isolated image using F17 components and installer to
> use it to install F18 should work. SB wo
On 8 November 2012 13:02, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 07:56 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>
>> or do you have any other installer you can point to that behaves like
>> this?
>>
>> Pointing out how the installer currently works does not change my opinion
>> on the fact that if an in
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Matthew Garrett (mj...@srcf.ucam.org) said:
>> Patches that cleanly decouple Anaconda from the entire software stack
>> that it runs on top of would probably be received with open arms, but
>> nobody who works on it has any idea how to imple
On 11/08/2012 08:40 PM, David Lehman wrote:
No. It is an inevitable consequence of the feature set demanded of the
Fedora OS installer.
If thing A must be able to set up and configure thing B and thing B
changes in ways directly related to said configuration, how can you
reasonably expect thing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874701
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p...@city-fan.org
--- Comment #1 from Pau
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 17:20 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 05:14 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > On 8 November 2012 10:06, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> > wrote:
> >> On 11/08/2012 04:37 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:32:29PM +, "Jóhann B. G
Dan Horák (d...@danny.cz) said:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Minimal_Core
> >
> > Please comment and join if you're interested. This is intended to be a
> > request for comments and input rather than a finish document.
> >
> > Note that "Minimal Core" isn't meant to necessarily imply
Matthew Miller píše v Čt 08. 11. 2012 v 15:15 -0500:
> So, here's a proposal for a semi-informal group linking different
> stakeholders interested in curating the @core package selection:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Minimal_Core
>
> Please comment and join if you're interested. This
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:18:09PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> firewalld isn't in the minimal comps groups. However, it's pulled in
> by anaconda, see pyanaconda/install.py:
> # anaconda requires storage packages in order to make sure the target
> # system is bootable and configurable,
Matthew Garrett (mj...@srcf.ucam.org) said:
> Patches that cleanly decouple Anaconda from the entire software stack
> that it runs on top of would probably be received with open arms, but
> nobody who works on it has any idea how to implement them.
In fact, this is what has been done in anacond
So, here's a proposal for a semi-informal group linking different
stakeholders interested in curating the @core package selection:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Minimal_Core
Please comment and join if you're interested. This is intended to be a
request for comments and input rather than a f
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:31:18AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> we're still thrashing around trying to figure out how to build and ship
> the initramfs that fedup needs.
"we" are? I see approximately nobody offering assistance in that
respect. Anyway, it obviously gets built by Lorax, just lik
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 07:40:47PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Pointing out how the installer currently works does not change my
> opinion on the fact that if an installer ( any installer ) cannot
> run on his own bits isolated from the package set he is about
> install is a design fla
On 11/08/2012 07:56 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
or do you have any other installer you can point to that behaves
like this?
Pointing out how the installer currently works does not change my
opinion on the fact that if an installer ( any installer ) cannot
run on his own bits i
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:10 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
> I assume you are only referring to anaconda here or do you have any
> other installer you can point to that behaves like this?
>
> Pointing out how the installer currently works does not change my opinion
> on the fact that if a
On 11/08/2012 06:37 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:11 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
mailto:johan...@gmail.com>> wrote:Bro...
"It should be sufficient to just tell/point the installer to use new
packages while still retain the same functionality/support as it did
for F17
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 07:30:53PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 11:02 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> > It has been discussed in the past that we should have a repository of
> > the rawhide kernels with debug turned off to encourage more users to run
> > the latest upst
On 11/08/2012 06:37 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 07:56:30PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
long story short, it's firewalld. Its deps are pretty heavy for
something that's supposed to be in minimal. I'm sure twoerner would
wel
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 11:07 -0500, David Cantrell wrote:
> In both of these examples, we could argue either way that they are features
> or not. It's a new upgrade tool, yes, but it's really just moving the
> responsibility of upgrades to somewhere else. So what's the feature? If
> upgrades are
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> It has been discussed in the past that we should have a repository of
> the rawhide kernels with debug turned off to encourage more users to run
> the latest upstream snapshots. That repository now exists. You can
> enable it by dropping
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
> In case anyone noticed minimal install got rather bigger between Alpha
> and Beta - I did too. And I finally got around to figuring out why and
> filing a bug:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874378
>
> long story short, it's firewall
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:11 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:Bro...
"It should be sufficient to just tell/point the installer to use new
packages while still retain the same functionality/support as it did for F17
( unless of course there is some serious fundamental design flaw in the
installer
Two jars are implementing apache-commons-logging and log4j APIs and upstream
decided to license them the same way to avoid any possible problems (I assume).
In any case this shouldn't be a problem for projects using these since both
licenses are liberal enough
--
Stanislav Ochotnicky
Software
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 11:02 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> It has been discussed in the past that we should have a repository of
> the rawhide kernels with debug turned off to encourage more users to run
> the latest upstream snapshots. That repository now exists. You can
> enable it by droppin
It has been discussed in the past that we should have a repository of
the rawhide kernels with debug turned off to encourage more users to run
the latest upstream snapshots. That repository now exists. You can
enable it by dropping
http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/rawhide-kernel-nodebug/fedor
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:48:52PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> No I assume everyone expected the Anaconda developers to handle that
> if not they would have asked for assistance in that regard and
> outlined the steps necessary to do so which I assume would have been
> minimal if neces
Upstream relicensed when they upgraded from 1.1.3 to 1.2 but this was missed
during update of our package
However they have (likely) forgotten one file dual licensed old style GPLv2+ or
AFL. I guess maintainer should get in touch with them. I have fixed license in
the spec file for now
--
Stani
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 06:42 -0600, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
> Regardless of all that, we need to be better about communicating that
> we use a feature-based release scheme as opposed to a time-based
> release scheme. There are trade-offs to both approaches, but at least
> with clear communicati
On 11/08/2012 05:30 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 8 November 2012 10:20, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Your problem is that you are assuming a lot of things without actually
doing any legwork to find out what anaconda does. Anaconda does a lot
of probing of hardware which changes when ke
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 07:56:30PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > long story short, it's firewalld. Its deps are pretty heavy for
> > something that's supposed to be in minimal. I'm sure twoerner would
> > welcome help in pruning the deps if it'
On 8 November 2012 10:20, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> Your problem is that you are assuming a lot of things without actually
>> doing any legwork to find out what anaconda does. Anaconda does a lot
>> of probing of hardware which changes when kernels change. Anaconda
>> requires changes whe
On 11/08/2012 05:14 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 8 November 2012 10:06, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/08/2012 04:37 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:32:29PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Or if I rephrase why could not the community continue to use
An
On 11/08/2012 05:04 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
1) highly user visible changes (beyond artwork or theme changes)
* Possibly. I'm unclear as to precisely what has changed here. If it's
just the default but the user can select custom partitioning and is
able to use LVM there, th
On 8 November 2012 10:06, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 04:37 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:32:29PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>
>>> Or if I rephrase why could not the community continue to use
>>> Anaconda in it's form that it existed in
On 11/08/2012 04:37 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:32:29PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Or if I rephrase why could not the community continue to use
Anaconda in it's form that it existed in F17 until the "new
installer" was *completly* done?
Because nobody in th
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:07:08AM -0500, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 05:44:41AM -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>
> > But the new upgrade process - it should be standalone feature,
> > we missed dracut feature, same for LVM in Anaconda (again, not
> > UI), live medias etc. So mo
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 16:50:25 +0100,
Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
As I said SIGs don't have a leader. You can't force people to do the
work if they don't wish to. You can ask them to communicate changes
and make them more visible for other projects.
That depends on the SIG. It can certainly
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874667
Bug ID: 874667
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
Severity: unspecified
Version: rawhide
Priority: unspecified
CC: mmasl...@redhat.c
On 11/08/2012 04:37 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:32:29PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Or if I rephrase why could not the community continue to use
Anaconda in it's form that it existed in F17 until the "new
installer" was *completly* done?
Because nobody in th
On 11/08/2012 03:58 PM, David Cantrell wrote:
I completely agree! Which is why we were getting early test builds done
during the F-17 cycle and working to get people testing the installer then.
The main problem is that no one_wants_ to test the installer. It's a
utility. A necessary step to g
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:32:29PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Or if I rephrase why could not the community continue to use
> Anaconda in it's form that it existed in F17 until the "new
> installer" was *completly* done?
Because nobody in the community did the work to make the F17 Ana
On 11/08/2012 03:58 PM, David Cantrell wrote:
Not true. As with our other major changes, we new it would be absolutely
impossible to deliver all functionality in a single release.
What exactly prevented the Anaconda from implementing Anaconda 2.0 in a
F19 or later when it was fully complete?
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 05:56:31AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:31:20AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > The new anaconda UI and related features are more or less entirely the
> > > cause of the slip.
> >
> > This shows that those changes sh
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:55:19AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 05:44 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > > On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 06:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > > The new anaconda UI and related feature
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 05:44:41AM -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 06:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > The new anaconda UI and related features are more or less
> > > > entirely the
> > > > cause of the slip.
>
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:00 AM, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:32:57PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:48:26PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > > On 11/08/2012 02:31 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > >What kind of structure would you imagin
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:32:57PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:48:26PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 11/08/2012 02:31 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > >What kind of structure would you imagine such a SIG having?
> >
> > Sorry not following?
> >
> > I as
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 05:56 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >It turns out that software development is hard. It's especially hard
> >when you have a hugely complicated system with no central management and
> >no real incentive for most
On 11/08/2012 04:40 PM, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Matthew Garrett mailto:mj...@srcf.ucam.org>> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:48:26PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 02:31 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >What kind of structur
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:31:20AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > The new anaconda UI and related features are more or less entirely the
> > cause of the slip.
>
> This shows that those changes should not have been done, or at least not in
> this way.
We did that for a l
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:48:26PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 11/08/2012 02:31 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > >What kind of structure would you imagine such a SIG having?
> >
> > Sorry not following?
> >
> > I assume this
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:48:26PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 02:31 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >What kind of structure would you imagine such a SIG having?
>
> Sorry not following?
>
> I assume this ( and related mailinglist ) would be the place where
> they manage an
On 11/08/2012 03:48 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/08/2012 02:31 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Is it not just time to form a "CoreOS" SIG which include Anaconda,
the storage developers, The kernel, Dracut,/Systemd/
On 11/08/2012 02:31 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Is it not just time to form a "CoreOS" SIG which include Anaconda,
the storage developers, The kernel, Dracut,/Systemd/Udev, and
arguably selinux and the network guys as well
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Is it not just time to form a "CoreOS" SIG which include Anaconda,
> the storage developers, The kernel, Dracut,/Systemd/Udev, and
> arguably selinux and the network guys as well to ensure "proper"
> communication of change
On 11/08/2012 02:41 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> You should file this as an RFE against yum since arguably this should be the
> default behavior when users run "yum upgrade" but since the yum maintainers
> have not done that already there has to be some gotcha- you are forgetting
The pr
On 11/08/2012 01:10 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Hi,
I'm upgrading Fedoras by yum [1] for some time. I know that is not
supported method and can have some problems. But the truth is that it
was always less error prone as compared to upgrade using Anaconda or
preupgrade. Even with upgrade from F16
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:21 PM, David Howells wrote:
> David Howells wrote:
>
>> A better way to do this might be to make the header installation discard the
>> "_UAPI" prefix that got added.
>
> As the attached patch.
>
> David
> ---
> commit 75a88e14a97d239a47cbd0fc55fc23416007d733
> Author: D
On 11/08/2012 12:42 PM, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
The other problem is that it continues to make Fedora as a project
look bad
How Fedora looks is in the hands of the beholder.
While you see the delayed release as a negative thing I see it as a
positive and a strong thing since from where
On 11/08/2012 09:21 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
time/feature based distribution
Hmm interesting
Actually feature based release cycle might work and should be something
we should aim at.
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/
Hi,
I'm upgrading Fedoras by yum [1] for some time. I know that is not
supported method and can have some problems. But the truth is that it
was always less error prone as compared to upgrade using Anaconda or
preupgrade. Even with upgrade from F16 to F17, which I originally
thought would be i
On 11/08/2012 05:56 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
It turns out that software development is hard. It's especially hard
when you have a hugely complicated system with no central management and
no real incentive for most of the skilled workers to cooperate on
sections of the project that influence eac
[snip]
>
> The other problem is that it continues to make Fedora as a project look
> bad. I've talked to people who use Fedora (who aren't involved in the
I disagree.
It is far better to have the release slipped in order to fix blocker bugs. We
have a nice QA and this improves the Fedora quality
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 05:44 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > > On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 06:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > > The new anaconda UI and related features are mo
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:47:58AM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > Maybe we could have a release criterion which states that the minimal
> > install doesn't have anything which pulls in the X libraries (or Wayland)?
> > That's not a _completely_ arbitrary line in the sand. Probably the issue
> > h
Hot problems:
ID Components Count
---
61505 kernel 372
61549 kernel 264
29592 wireshark215
2317
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 05:44 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 06:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > The new anaconda UI and related features are more or less
> > > > entirely the
> > > > cause of the slip.
> > >
>
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 11:42 +0100, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
> M. Edward (Ed) Borasky píše v St 07. 11. 2012 v 22:06 -0800:
> > I've now done half a dozen F18 multi-boot installs and I must say it's
> > a miracle I haven't over-written something I wanted to keep. The thing
> > that would make it usable
- Original Message -
> On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 06:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > The new anaconda UI and related features are more or less
> > > entirely the
> > > cause of the slip.
> >
> > This shows that those changes should not have been done, or at
> > le
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky píše v St 07. 11. 2012 v 22:06 -0800:
> I've now done half a dozen F18 multi-boot installs and I must say it's
> a miracle I haven't over-written something I wanted to keep. The thing
> that would make it usable for me would be very simple - just put the
> partition names on
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
