Re: fedup performance

On 07/03/2013 07:42 AM, Alex G. wrote: On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote: Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8 core server, with a conventional disk drive. Took 2-3 hours, not including d/l. I update my laptop which has an ssd (and MORE packages). Took

Re: fedup performance

On 2013-07-02 22:25, Alex G. wrote: On 07/03/2013 12:15 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On 2013-07-02 21:42, Alex G. wrote: On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote: Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8 core server, with a conventional disk drive. Took 2-3 hours,

Re: fedup performance

On 07/03/2013 12:15 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On 2013-07-02 21:42, Alex G. wrote: >> On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote: >>> Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8 >>> core >>> server, with a conventional disk drive. Took 2-3 hours, not >>> including d/l. >

Re: fedup performance

On 2013-07-02 21:42, Alex G. wrote: On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote: Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8 core server, with a conventional disk drive. Took 2-3 hours, not including d/l. I update my laptop which has an ssd (and MORE packages). Took

Re: fedup performance

On 07/02/2013 08:28 PM, Neal Becker wrote: > Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8 core > server, with a conventional disk drive. Took 2-3 hours, not including d/l. > > I update my laptop which has an ssd (and MORE packages). Took 10-15 minutes. > I think this m

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On 07/01/2013 02:43 PM, Johannes Lips wrote: > Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> Since this topic comes up every few months, and no one's pointed >> out the obvious answer yet, I'll say it: >> >> * Instead of making up more rules, make the tooling better so >> we don't have to repeat update descriptions

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On 2013-07-02 21:32, Michael Catanzaro wrote: On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 14:54 -0700, Dan Mashal wrote: There is already a perfect example of this. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-11846/selinux-policy-3.12.1-57.fc19 Dan I went through updates-testing looking for placeholder te

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On 07/01/2013 01:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On 2013-07-01 1:28, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> Since this topic comes up every few months, and no one's pointed >> out the obvious answer yet, I'll say it: >> >> * Instead of making up more rules, make the tooling better so >> we don't have to repe

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On 2013-07-02 18:44, Chris Murphy wrote: On Jul 2, 2013, at 6:28 PM, John Reiser wrote: On 07/02/2013 Matthew Garrett wrote: GNOME runs fine without hardware 3D support, but the llvmpipe code that makes that possible segfaults on ARM. Gnome3 Desktop is unusable on i686 with RV280 video ca

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 14:54 -0700, Dan Mashal wrote: > > There is already a perfect example of this. > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-11846/selinux-policy-3.12.1-57.fc19 > > Dan I went through updates-testing looking for placeholder text (and will never be doing that again

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 14:54 -0700, Dan Mashal wrote: > > There is already a perfect example of this. > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-11846/selinux-policy-3.12.1-57.fc19 > > Dan Thanks for pointing it out. I've filed more negative karma against this update, but it needs ev

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Jul 2, 2013, at 6:28 PM, John Reiser wrote: > On 07/02/2013 Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> GNOME runs fine without hardware 3D support, but the llvmpipe code that >> makes that possible segfaults on ARM. > > Gnome3 Desktop is unusable on i686 with RV280 video card driven by llvmpipe. > XFCE a

fedup performance

Not d/l speed related. I just want to share. I update a very fast 8 core server, with a conventional disk drive. Took 2-3 hours, not including d/l. I update my laptop which has an ssd (and MORE packages). Took 10-15 minutes. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On 07/02/2013 Matthew Garrett wrote: > GNOME runs fine without hardware 3D support, but the llvmpipe code that > makes that possible segfaults on ARM. Gnome3 Desktop is unusable on i686 with RV280 video card driven by llvmpipe. XFCE and MATE *do* run just fine using the classic ati driver. ht

License change: PokerTH, GPLv2+ to AGPLv3+ with exceptions

Hey, folks. Another license issue I caught while bumping PokerTH. Somewhere between 0.8.3 and 0.9.4 (I can't be more precise as the earlier 0.9 releases no longer seem to be available and this fact was not noted in the changelog!), upstream changed the license from GPLv2+ to AGPLv3+. In 1.0, an

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > %changelog -f > %changelog -g And, I suppose: %changelog -s %changelog -c %changelog -m %changelog -h %changelog -a %changelog -b ... and so on, right? And every time someone comes up with a new version control system, RPM would grow support for a new protocol

Re: Fedup Performance

On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 18:13 -0400, Herbert Rutledge wrote: > Actually, I sort of knew that she had something to do with food, had > diabetes, and was on TV from the covers of women's magazines on display > at the checkout counter at the Rite Aid. That was pretty much it. > A thousand apologies.

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 11:14:33PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > I agree but it's not exactly maintainer on x86, ARM or otherwise which > was the point I made previously. The LLVM problem isn't necessarily > just an ARM problem. Not disagreeing, but the fact that you're the ones hitting it does

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:49:18PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> Not pretty but we're severely limited by resources and ability and >> there's a reason we don't currently ship the a gnome build. > > LLVM is part of Fedora, and to the ex

Re: Fedup Performance

On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 18:00 -0400, Mark Bidewell wrote: > I am doing an upgrade from F18 to F19 using fedup network and > performance is very slow - 3+ hours on a 20 Mbit connection. There > seems to be about a 10-15 second delay between package downloads. Is > there a reason for this delay? A

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:49:18PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > Not pretty but we're severely limited by resources and ability and > there's a reason we don't currently ship the a gnome build. LLVM is part of Fedora, and to the extent that it contains ARM-specific code it's the ARM porters' r

Re: Fedup Performance

On 2013-07-02 15:00, Mark Bidewell wrote: I am doing an upgrade from F18 to F19 using fedup  network and performance is very slow - 3+ hours on a 20 Mbit connection.  There seems to be about a 10-15 second delay between package downloads.  Is there a reason for this delay? Well, it's *release d

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On 07/02/2013 02:49 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: Yes... that would be great if the LLVM maintainer would step up and help out with the issues oops we don't have one of those [1]! Getting any form of support for LLVM on ARM has been like pushing shit up hill and has been an issue for the 2.5 year

Fedup Performance

I am doing an upgrade from F18 to F19 using fedup network and performance is very slow - 3+ hours on a 20 Mbit connection. There seems to be about a 10-15 second delay between package downloads. Is there a reason for this delay? -- Mark Bidewell http://www.linkedin.com/in/markbidewell -- deve

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:28:03PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> > GNOME runs fine without hardware 3D support, but the llvmpipe code that >> > makes that possible segfaults on A

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:28:03PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > GNOME runs fine without hardware 3D support, but the llvmpipe code that > > makes that possible segfaults on ARM. > > gnome runs fine on ARM as well without llvmpipe suppo

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 04:38:30PM -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: >> >> > In particular, the GNOME image is missing. I would not say it has all >> > the features of the primary architect

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:16:45PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: >> 2013-07-02 22:00, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> > I has them, they may not all work. >> >> In particular, the GNOME image is missing. I would not say it has all >> the features of t

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:21 PM, drago01 wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: >>> 2013-07-02 22:00, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>> On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, J

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: >> 2013-07-02 22:00, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 >>> Matthew Garrett wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>>

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > 2013-07-02 22:00, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > >> On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 >> Matthew Garrett wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>> Fedora ARM has all the features of the primary architectur

Problem with abrt update on F18?

I saw this during the update: Updating : abrt-libs-2.1.5-1.fc18.x86_64 10/76 cp: cannot create regular file â/var/tmp/abrt/ccpp-2013-03-27-09:24:26-2877/environâ: No such file or directory cp: cannot create regular file â/var/tmp/abrt/ccpp-2013-03-27-09:24:26-2877/mapsâ: No such file or directo

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 04:38:30PM -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > > > In particular, the GNOME image is missing. I would not say it has all > > the features of the primary architectures when it doesn't include the > > Fedora default desktop. >

Re: vote for systemd: Nay (now working but still Voting Nay)

Thanks Michal, your answer was really positive and encourage me to proceed further. So I have now an FC18 running within a container under an EL6.4 HOST with kernel 3.9.4 (big smile). Problems starts to unlock themselves as I decided to bypass network.service altogether starting network and ssh

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On 07/02/2013 08:38 PM, Jared K. Smith wrote: On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Kalev Lember > wrote: In particular, the GNOME image is missing. I would not say it has all the features of the primary architectures when it doesn't include the Fedora default

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > In particular, the GNOME image is missing. I would not say it has all > the features of the primary architectures when it doesn't include the > Fedora default desktop. > This is mostly because of a lack of video drivers on ARM hardware, as I

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:16:45PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > 2013-07-02 22:00, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > I has them, they may not all work. > > In particular, the GNOME image is missing. I would not say it has all > the features of the primary architectures when it doesn't include the > Fedora

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

2013-07-02 22:00, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 > Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> >>> Fedora ARM has all the features of the primary architectures >> >> Is this really accurate? >> > > I has them, they ma

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On 2013-07-02 13:07, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/02/2013 08:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 03:00:43PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 >Matthew Garrett wrote: > >On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > >

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On 07/02/2013 08:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 03:00:43PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 >Matthew Garrett wrote: > >On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > >Fedora ARM has all the features of the primary arch

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 03:00:43PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 > Matthew Garrett wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > > Fedora ARM has all the features of the primary architectures > > Is this really accurate? > > I ha

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 20:18:06 +0100 Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > > Fedora ARM has all the features of the primary architectures > > Is this really accurate? > I has them, they may not

Re: Monitoring a mock build?

On 07/02/2013 01:29 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Sandro Mani > wrote: On 02.07.2013 20:22, Richard Shaw wrote: I'm wondering if there's a better method of monitoring a mock build other than: # mock -r --resultdir=/path/to

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:33:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > Fedora ARM has all the features of the primary architectures Is this really accurate? -- Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/

Re: Monitoring a mock build?

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > On 02.07.2013 20:22, Richard Shaw wrote: > > I'm wondering if there's a better method of monitoring a mock build other > than: > > # mock -r --resultdir=/path/to/results > > ^Z > > # bg 1 > # tail -f /path/to/build.log > > I guess I coul

Re: Monitoring a mock build?

On 02.07.2013 20:22, Richard Shaw wrote: I'm wondering if there's a better method of monitoring a mock build other than: # mock -r --resultdir=/path/to/results ^Z # bg 1 # tail -f /path/to/build.log I guess I could use two terminals, but I'd rather just have the one up... Richard Wouldn

Monitoring a mock build?

I'm wondering if there's a better method of monitoring a mock build other than: # mock -r --resultdir=/path/to/results ^Z # bg 1 # tail -f /path/to/build.log I guess I could use two terminals, but I'd rather just have the one up... Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 11:41:48PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote: > Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > As I think I said pretty clearly, there are two streams of > > documentation: the detailed changelogs and the release notes (which > > summarise changes in a human-readable form for a whole release). > >

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

Hi, What about the following idea autogenerate update descriptions for most cases: * If %{release} is 1, it's an upstream version update. By storing the url to the upstream changelog (possibly appropriately parametrized with a %{version} placeholder), bodhi would generate a description such as "T

Re: Fedora 19 status is ALIVE, GA on July 02, 2013

On 2013-07-02 10:26, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/02/2013 05:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: I am still wondering where the QA resources to do this are going to magically spring from. Right now we have to deal with post-19 release emergencies, test updates for 17, 18 and 19, and work on

Re: Fedora 19 status is ALIVE, GA on July 02, 2013

On 07/02/2013 05:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: I am still wondering where the QA resources to do this are going to magically spring from. Right now we have to deal with post-19 release emergencies, test updates for 17, 18 and 19, and work on rather a lot of improvements for the F20 cycle: w

Re: Fedora 19 status is ALIVE, GA on July 02, 2013

On 2013-07-01 6:47, Matthias Clasen wrote: On Sat, 2013-06-29 at 13:59 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 10:05:56AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I like the idea of 19.1 pretty unofficially or untested, which fix > > some issues on mac installs. Which is basically someone run

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

Hi On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Ryan Lerch wrote: > > is it possible for not the maintainer to be able to edit the update text > of updates? I'm thinking, say, a member of the documentation team? > No but feel free to file a RFE against bodhi https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ Rahul -- devel

Re: New package written in Python, without python-*

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 02:45:45AM -0400, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > - Original Message - > > Hi everybody, > > > > I have a question about the name of a new package and would like > > everyone's opinion on this issue, because in our wiki > > (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Pytho

[Test-Announce] Announcing the release of Fedora 19 for ARM!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The Fedora ARM Project is delighted to announce the release of Fedora 19 ("Schrödinger's Cat"). Open the box and take a look for yourself! Fedora is a leading-edge, free and open source operating system that continues to deliver innovative features to

Retire some spacewalk packages in Epel and Fedora

Hi, I plan to retire package spacewalk-admin in epel, because it requires spacewalk-base perl(RHN::SatelliteCert) which are not in epel. And I plan to retire spacewalk-web in both Fedora and Epel, because it require perl(Spacewalk::Setup). I do not have intention to package those

Re: vote for systemd: Nay.

On 07/02/2013 04:08 PM, Jean-Marc Pigeon wrote: I was not expecting to have it fully working at the first attempt in my own container design, Would you be willing to provide some details about your container design? Ideally including the code to allow others to reproduce the problems you saw.

vote for systemd: Nay.

A few weeks ago, I received a bug report regarding a Fedora package of ours, it was a request to have its init configuration migrated to systemd. A quick search within our Fedora repo shows systemd has become available starting with FC14, I guess it is about time we adapt our package. So we did s

Announcing the release of Fedora 19!

The Fedora Project is delighted to announce the release of Fedora 19 ("Schrödinger's Cat"). Open the box and take a look for yourself! Fedora is a leading-edge, free and open source operating system that continues to deliver innovative features to many users, with a new release about every six

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On Mon 01 Jul 2013 05:54:37 PM EDT, Dan Mashal wrote: On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Pierre-Yves Luyten wrote: Not sure if it makes any sense but maybe could we have something like "freeze tag changes until desc is better". I propose this because testers will not _really_ want to -1 karma, an

Re: XEN and Fedora-19 domU

On gio, 2013-06-27 at 13:35 +0200, Marcel J.E. Mol wrote: > Either way is fine for me. I think it just good that xen works ok with f19, > as dom0 or as domU. > Indeed, and it does quite well, as per mine and Konrad's testing, with the fixes proposed in the bugreports Adam was mentioning, one of w

rawhide report: 20130702 changes

Compose started at Tue Jul 2 08:15:03 UTC 2013 Broken deps for x86_64 -- [avgtime] avgtime-0-0.6.git20130201.fc20.x86_64 requires libphobos-ldc.so.60()(64bit) [contour] contour-0.3-2.fc19.x86_64 requires libsolidcontroliface

Re: Fedora Gooey Karma as GSOC project

> Hi, > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 06:48:55PM +0200, Branislav Blaskovic wrote: > > > My proposal [1] is available on fedoraproject wiki page where you can find > > main features of this new tool. > > > If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me here on mailing > > list, off-list o

Reminder: Change Proposals Submission Deadline in two weeks

Hi, Change Proposals Submission Deadline is coming soon, in two weeks [1] - 2013-07-16 - and there are only a few submissions (with only two system wide changes accepted). Help us with Fedora 20 planning and development coordination! See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy for current

Re: find-lang.sh search path

On Mon, 01 Jul 2013 23:28:00 +0200, Antonio Trande wrote: > >> "pl" is the file name without extension (pl.qm). In .spec file: > >> > >> ... %find_lang pl --with-qt %find_lang ru --with-qt ... > >> > >> Are they correct ? > > > > No. > > > > Multiple invocations of %find_lang is a consecutive