No, the EFL is distributed as one big tarball now. All the old releases
could be found here:
http://download.enlightenment.org/releases/
Starting with 1.8.0, they're distributed in:
http://download.enlightenment.org/rel/libs/efl/
... as a single tarball. The spec file in my efl source RPM cre
IIUC, are you building multiple libs into one big RPM?
> All of the EFL subpackages now ship in a single tarball
I don't think we should follow up. This is not allowed IMO.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of C
I have no desire to become a package maintainer for Enlightenment, but I
went through the exercise of repackaging enlightenment, efl, elementary,
emotion-generic-players, evas-generic-loaders, efl-python, econnman,
terminology, and enventor into packages matching the existing Fedora 20
ones.
On 04/01/14 11:56 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
* autoremove (plugin) (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=963345)
I closed this report because the current release of yum includes
documentation of autoremove.
Regards,
Luya
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https:/
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> Inventing new paradigms is always painful. This one seems not
> really worth it. There's far more effective work that could be done
> with yum, for example improving the way yum handles "repodata" to to
> stop downloading such bulky files if they're actually altered i
Adam Williamson wrote:
> So, um, you think that because we've done three big changes in the past
> that means we won't ever do another again? I'm not quite sure how that
> logic works.
We've already broken the distro 3 times, that's 3 times too many! I surely
hope we will never do such a broken "
On Sat, 2014-01-04 at 21:41 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 2014-01-04 21:31, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
> > On 01/04/2014 08:56 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> * yum remove kernel vs dnf remove kernel difference (unfiled? )
> >
> > I found 976704, closed with 'Resolution: --- → UPSTREAM' in August.
On 2014-01-04 21:31, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
On 01/04/2014 08:56 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
* yum remove kernel vs dnf remove kernel difference (unfiled? )
I found 976704, closed with 'Resolution: --- → UPSTREAM' in August.
Not sure what that means, but removing all kernels seem a bit odd an
On 01/04/2014 08:56 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
* yum remove kernel vs dnf remove kernel difference (unfiled? )
I found 976704, closed with 'Resolution: --- → UPSTREAM' in August. Not
sure what that means, but removing all kernels seem a bit odd and at
least the running kernel should be spared,
On Sat, 2014-01-04 at 10:50 +0100, Mattia Verga wrote:
> This is the first time I heard of DNF.
> Looking at the page where differences between DNF and yum are
> explained (http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html) my question
> is: do we really need DNF to replace yum?
>
> Maybe I'm wrong, b
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Mattia Verga wrote:
> Il 04/01/2014 11:20, Panu Matilainen ha scritto:
>
>> On 01/04/2014 11:50 AM, Mattia Verga wrote:
>>>
>>> This is the first time I heard of DNF.
>>> Looking at the page where differences between DNF and yum are explained
>>> (http://akozumpl.gi
Hi
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 3:03 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>
> Do you mean dnf will obsolete yum
> In that "dnf will be called yum"
> If so, can it be extended beyond F22ish if necessary.
> To allow Ales (+team), maybe have time to take
> on board any feedback?
>
dnf was originally introduced in F
On 01/03/2014 10:46 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar wrote:
> The official (unprefixed) fedora image for docker is now available here:
> https://index.docker.io/_/fedora/
>
> It has fedora 20 (via tags 20, heisenbug and latest) and rawhide.
When cross-posting to lists like fedora-devel (where a broad range
o
commit 276e40d12656e324a67cc3f4d9d29fab3b4d7ab5
Author: Ralf Corsépius
Date: Sat Jan 4 11:37:38 2014 +0100
Add R: perl(Module::Pluggable) (RHBZ #1048430).
perl-Email-Abstract.spec |8 +++-
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Email-Abstract.spec b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1048430
Ralf Corsepius changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|tcall...@r
Il 04/01/2014 11:20, Panu Matilainen ha scritto:
On 01/04/2014 11:50 AM, Mattia Verga wrote:
This is the first time I heard of DNF.
Looking at the page where differences between DNF and yum are explained
(http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html) my question is: do we
really need DNF to rep
On 01/04/2014 11:50 AM, Mattia Verga wrote:
This is the first time I heard of DNF.
Looking at the page where differences between DNF and yum are explained
(http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html) my question is: do we
really need DNF to replace yum?
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me t
This is the first time I heard of DNF.
Looking at the page where differences between DNF and yum are explained
(http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html) my question is: do we
really need DNF to replace yum?
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that DNF is no more than yum with
some diffe
On Fri, 3 Jan 2014 15:33:43 -0500
"Jared K. Smith" wrote:
> That was my understand as well (as of about a year ago), but I don't
> know if that's still the current plan or not.
>
> --
> Jared Smith
Do you mean dnf will obsolete yum
In that "dnf will be called yum"
If so, can it be extended beyo
19 matches
Mail list logo
