On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 08:42 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> In fact in some area it takes me 1 min to finish loading the
> page..
Bugzilla has been veeery slow for the last week or two. Painfully slow.
Incredibly efficiency-destroying slow, if you're oh say a full-time QA
person and so spend
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 16:48 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:02:20PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >>> The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so ther
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 17:46 +1100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 12:53 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > In bohdi, people have reported that -59 fixed the problem going
> > forward. But
> > people already affected need to relabel.
>
> Looks like I got caught with this one. However, t
- Original Message -
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 02:57 -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> > Packaging two parallel versions of interpreters brings not only the
> > burden of maintaining them, but also the work to make them not
> > conflict. E.g. renaming binaries, checking shebangs all the time,
>
On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 12:53 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> In bohdi, people have reported that -59 fixed the problem going
> forward. But
> people already affected need to relabel.
Looks like I got caught with this one. However, the updated and a
relabel isn't working for me. My USB attached HDD
So the point of view on SC matters.
If you live the EL/EPEL world and have some Fedora, SC make a lot of sense.
If you only use Fedora, Fedora moves fast enough to likely not have a ton
of use for them. I think that's been hit.
As for Puppet, I've proposed several ideas on how to improve Puppet
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 00:02 +0530, narendr...@dell.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There is a request to disable to PIRQ (PCI Irq Routing Table) fallback
> in upstream biosdevname. This change would result in network device
> naming changing to ethN on systems where SMBIOS type 41 and type 9
> records are
In fact in some area it takes me 1 min to finish loading the page..
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:02:20PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>>> The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
>>> older package, but it's sti
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:02:20PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
> > older package, but it's still in the tree. Is there a reason?
> Yes, virtualization
On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:02 PM, "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
>> older package, but it's still in the tree. Is there a reason?
>
> Yes, virtualization.
>
> I
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
> older package, but it's still in the tree. Is there a reason?
Yes, virtualization.
I actually thought grub had been removed, so I removed the dependency
on
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:20:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> As I said in the meeting yesterday, I think the definition of a Feature
>> needs to be cleared up before we can really tackle this one. Feature to
>> me is something important en
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 12:02:52AM +0530, narendr...@dell.com wrote:
> There is a request to disable to PIRQ (PCI Irq Routing Table) fallback in
> upstream biosdevname.
Why?
--
Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraprojec
The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
older package, but it's still in the tree. Is there a reason?
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 2012-12-06 22:12, Ralph Bean wrote:
> What package in particular are you trying? For instance,
> https://bugz.fedoraproject.org/nethack works for me.
qt, python-zope-interface4 were the ones I tried.
> An idea: packages that have do not have rawhide builds are not indexed
> by the fedora-pack
commit 5cb144298f7e21894d728473418c79dce430c96c
Author: Paul Howarth
Date: Thu Dec 6 20:23:31 2012 +
Fix renamed Win32 excludes
perl-Net-DNS.spec | 13 -
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Net-DNS.spec b/perl-Net-DNS.spec
index e71ea2a
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:20:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> As I said in the meeting yesterday, I think the definition of a Feature
> needs to be cleared up before we can really tackle this one. Feature to
> me is something important enough that it shouldn't be auto-accepted. If
> there is some
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:01:32PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> Hello,
>
> http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/ URLs no longer work, they
> redirect to https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/error which appears
> to be some kind of a 404 Not Found page. Known issue?
Sorry for the troubles.
I switched
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/527
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/527/0001-Ticket-527-ns-slapd-segfaults-if-it-cannot-rename-th.patch
--
Mark Reynolds
Red Hat, Inc
mreyno...@redhat.com
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.o
Hello,
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/ URLs no longer work, they
redirect to https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/error which appears
to be some kind of a 404 Not Found page. Known issue?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 12/06/2012 04:20 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
As I said in the meeting yesterday, I think the definition of a Feature
needs to be cleared up before we can really tackle this one. Feature to
me is something important enough that it shouldn't be auto-accepted. If
there is some other class of thing pe
Hi,
There is a request to disable to PIRQ (PCI Irq Routing Table) fallback in
upstream biosdevname. This change would result in network device naming
changing to ethN on systems where SMBIOS type 41 and type 9 records are not
present.
Also, if we chose to disable PIRQ table fallback, I thin
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 08:11:01AM -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>> At FUDCon Milan, we discussed using Trac to manage Spin process - it's
>> actually very similar process. And for tracking stuff I think it's more
>> suitable than Bugzilla -
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:50:01AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Don't think it makes more sense then the percentage in wiki. I
> remember migration from Ruby 1.8.7 to Ruby 1.9.3. We needed to
> adjust every ruby package in fedora and rebuild them. Some of them
> were piece of cake, some needed patch
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 08:11:01AM -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> At FUDCon Milan, we discussed using Trac to manage Spin process - it's
> actually very similar process. And for tracking stuff I think it's more
> suitable than Bugzilla - custom states, better overviews + use Wiki just
> for featu
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:14:19AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Trackign them in bugzilla makes so much sense and seems so blatantly
> obvious now that you said it... its kinda hard to understand why
> that hasn't been done from the start. Please make it so :)
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/tic
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 14:01 -0600, David Lehman wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 12:09 -0600, Ian Pilcher wrote:
> > On 10/19/2012 10:01 AM, David Lehman wrote:
> > > This is the main piece of functionality that's still missing: allocating
> > > devices from preexisting VGs.
> > >
> > > You can crea
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> Also, there was dissent already in the "auto-approving" of leaf-features
>>> during the meeting discussion so I am not sure that auto-accepting of
>>> Features in general given a lack of response is ever going to actually
>>> happen. I perso
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884686
--- Comment #4 from Miro Hrončok ---
Got it, thnks a lot :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mail
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Mark Bidewell wrote:
> I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
> which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
> the current dependency model is that it becomes I want a new version of
> Libreoffice so
Dne 6.12.2012 17:02, Tomas Mraz napsal(a):
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 09:07 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
* 896 - Refine Feature Process (notting, 18:07:50)
* AGREED: Feature process modification: features are announced on
devel-announce by f
Note that two versions of a product that is already being maintained anyway
could be a candidate, but of course this is something _for_ the OS, not
part of it (RHEL, not Fedora in the exemple I have in mind).
- Original Message -
> From: "Fernando Nasser"
> To: "Development discussions
And _maintain_ them, with all security fixes.
The problem with duplication is above all one of scalability of
maintenance.
- Original Message -
> From: "Aleksandar Kurtakov"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 11:14:01 AM
> Subject: Re
Quoting Adam Williamson (2012-12-06 16:06:04)
> On the other hand, we've been proselytizing the Java heretics for over a
> decade now, and the Ruby ones for a while, and neither shows any signs
> of conversion or just plain going away, so we may have to call it an
> ecumenical matter and deal with
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
The original use case for SCLs is to provide a way to deliver newer versions
of SW in stable distributions like RHEL/CentOS than those available in the
core system and make sure system packages and collection packages don't
collide in any way (names, lib
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884686
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Does that mean taht perl package should provide perl(ExtUtils::ParseXS)?
No.
> Because it is not.
>
True.
Because the module is provided by perl-ExtUtils-ParseXS whic
On 6. 12. 2012 at 11:08:43, Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > Well, not exactly, you would still need to upgrade all packages that the
> > new version of Libreoffice depends on and all packages these updated
> > packages depend on and so on ... The only difference is tha
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 09:07 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> >> * 896 - Refine Feature Process (notting, 18:07:50)
>> >>* AGREED: Feature process modification: features are announced on
>> >
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Bidewell"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 5:50:03 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson <
> awill
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
Well, not exactly, you would still need to upgrade all packages that the new
version of Libreoffice depends on and all packages these updated packages depend
on and so on ... The only difference is that these updated packages would need
to be a part of t
- Original Message -
> From: "Adam Williamson"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 5:06:04 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
On 6. 12. 2012 at 10:50:03, Mark Bidewell wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run
> > > organisation
> > > not devoting enough cycles to maintain
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:50:03AM -0500, Mark Bidewell wrote:
> I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
> which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
> the current dependency model is that it becomes I want a new version of
> Libreo
- Original Message -
> From: "Nicolas Mailhot"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 4:30:32 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly ru
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:30:32PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
> not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
> (as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
> they bui
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 09:07 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >> * 896 - Refine Feature Process (notting, 18:07:50)
> >>* AGREED: Feature process modification: features are announced on
> >> devel-announce by feature wrangler once wrangler v
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884686
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
CC|
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
> > not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
> > (as in wishful thinking)
Le mercredi 05 décembre 2012 à 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand a écrit :
> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> >> Three things:
> >>
> >> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
> >>doesn't fit all.
Product: Security Response
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884354
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(vda...@
Product: Security Response
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884354
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ---
Created attachment 658787
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=658787&action=edit
Template for reproducer
Could show the attack vector? Attached is small code showing h
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
> not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
> (as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
> they built on t
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884686
Bug ID: 884686
Summary: Please make perl-ExtUtils-ParseXS available for F17
and F18
Product: Fedora
Version: 18
Component: perl-ExtUtils-ParseXS
Se
2012/12/5 Matthew Miller :
> There is a perpetual problem facing all Linux distributions around how fast
> to move with software updates. In Fedora, of course, our default speed is
> petal-to-the-metal. This is part of who we are and why we are awesome.
> However, it also sometimes makes life diffi
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
(as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
they built on top of those collections is end-of-lifed
I completely fail to see
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> * 896 - Refine Feature Process (notting, 18:07:50)
>>* AGREED: Feature process modification: features are announced on
>> devel-announce by feature wrangler once wrangler verifies feature
>> page content (+:9, -:0) (notting, 18:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 02:57 -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> Packaging two parallel versions of interpreters brings not only the
> burden of maintaining them, but also the work to make them not
> conflict. E.g. renaming binaries, checking shebangs all the time, etc.
> With SCLs, this is much simpler
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:39 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 23:24 -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Ville Skyttä
> > > wrote:
> > > IMO if a maintainer of a shared lib package goes as far as
> > > submitting a
> >
Compose started at Thu Dec 6 08:15:09 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[ansible]
ansible-fireball-0.9-1.fc19.noarch requires python-keyczar
ansible-node-fireball-0.9-1.fc19.noarch requires python-keyczar
[cp2k]
cp2k
Compose started at Thu Dec 6 09:16:22 UTC 2012
New package: erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc18
Erlang mmap interface
New package: plug-1.1-6.fc18
Linux software for Fender Mustang amplifiers
Updated Packages:
anaconda-18.35-1.fc18
-
* Tue De
- Original Message -
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 09:39:03PM -0500, John Dulaney wrote:
> > a feature, especially a crit path feature, is not ready for prime
> > time.
> > Obviously, if a feature is not %100 by feature freeze, then it
> > needs to be
> > dropped. I would even venture to sugge
> On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 23:24 -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Ville Skyttä
> > wrote:
> > IMO if a maintainer of a shared lib package goes as far as
> > submitting a
> > koji build without noticing a soname bump in it, the
> >
On 12/06/2012 12:50 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 6.12.2012 10:14, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 12/05/2012 09:38 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
One approach: a convention where each feature gets a tracking bug,
and then
various tasks can be marked as blocking that. *Then*, each release
can have
a trac
Dne 5.12.2012 22:14, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
I cant seem to find any specific fpc ticket where they discussed this,
but I am pretty sure it was brought up before there. I'd check with
them...
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/141
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/143
But I am afraid not eve
Dne 6.12.2012 10:14, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 12/05/2012 09:38 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
One approach: a convention where each feature gets a tracking bug,
and then
various tasks can be marked as blocking that. *Then*, each release
can have
a tracking bug for accepted features themselves,
Dne 5.12.2012 21:20, Bill Nottingham napsal(a):
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2012-12-05)
===
Meeting started by notting at 18:07:27 UTC. The full logs are available
at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-12-05/fesco
On 12/05/2012 09:38 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
One approach: a convention where each feature gets a tracking bug, and then
various tasks can be marked as blocking that. *Then*, each release can have
a tracking bug for accepted features themselves, and the tool to produce the
chart can simply be po
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 12/05/2012 02:39 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> I can't make the meeting. It conflicts with the Board meeting.
>>
>>> Current items on the agenda:
>>>
>>> 1) Current Problem packages
>>>
>>> 2) F18 ARM VFAD - additional feedback, blockers?
>>>
On 12/05/2012 09:06 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Tried running it on a system with a
bunch of stuff from rpmfusion yet, for instance?
Yes.
--
Miroslav Suchy
Red Hat Systems Management Engineering
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo
70 matches
Mail list logo
