Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

Dne 10.3.2014 17:10, Toshio Kuratomi napsal(a): > At last week's FESCo meeting, the fact that Products desired to have > divergent configuration was briefly touched on. On Thursday, a few FPC > members had a brainstorming session about it and on Friday, sgallagh and > that brainstorming continued

Re: ostree/fedora atomic and impact on the mirror network

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Colin Walters wrote: > One model I'd like to aim for here is we say "the repository will take up at > most N GB" (where e.g. N=100) and we keep an intelligently-scheduled series > of snapshots, like backup systems do. What happens to a client that is more than 1

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > What's wrong with just dropping the defaults in /etc in the Product's live > kickstart? (Yes, that assumes the Product is delivered as a live image. We For server images, Live isn't so hot. Can anaconda be taught to execute a %product Foo ki

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 04:27 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > The idea is to allow config file divergence via the alternatives system as > > that already provides us with a commandline tool and some structure to > > build on. We'd still have to write a few pieces to complete

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > The idea is to allow config file divergence via the alternatives system as > that already provides us with a commandline tool and some structure to > build on. We'd still have to write a few pieces to complete the picture > but it seemed to be a better starting point than

Re: audio/video software

Adam Williamson wrote: > Kevin was addressing xine specifically. There are plenty of other > playback libraries/frameworks. > > Gstreamer is quite widely used these days, and is very modular. > Gstreamer plugins for unencumbered formats are shipped in the main > Fedora repositories, +1, GStreamer

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said: > At last week's FESCo meeting, the fact that Products desired to have > divergent configuration was briefly touched on. On Thursday, a few FPC > members had a brainstorming session about it and on Friday, sgallagh and > that brainstorming continued with

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Tom Callaway (tcall...@redhat.com) said: > As part of the ongoing effort to update the guidelines for an eventual > change from python2 to python3 as the default python we're promoting use > of %{python2}, %{python2_sitelib}, and %{python2_sitearch} instead of > the unversioned %{python}, %{python

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Stephen Gallagher wrote: > /etc/somefile.conf is a [soft|hard]link that points to one of: > > /etc/packagename.conf/default/somefile.conf > /etc/packagename.conf/cloud/somefile.conf > /etc/packagename.conf/server/somefile.conf > /etc/packagename.con

Re: FreeMedia Infrastructure.

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 23:57 +0530, Vidhun Vinod wrote: > Hello everyone, Hi Vidhun, > I'm currently working on refining the idea of implementing the > infrastructure for fedora FreeMedia. I've had discussions with > bckurera from the fedora team regarding this. I have also written a > blog post r

Re: exclude people from giving karma?

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 20:40 +0100, drago01 wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > > > > Am 10.03.2014 20:18, schrieb drago01: > >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Reindl Harald > >> wrote: > >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 13:25 -0600, Gabriel Ramirez wrote: > On 03/10/2014 12:44 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > I'd rather see us handle things this way: > > > > fedora-release Requires: fedora-release-variant > > > > fedora-release-$PR

Re: exclude people from giving karma?

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 20:18 +0100, drago01 wrote: > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4.2.1.1-1.fc20?_csrf_token=a6a024f6e2d35ad3fb8666c1244e215a6aa2 > > > > how can people pretend "installation went s

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On 10 March 2014 16:46, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 11:31 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > And I think those subpackages probably _should_ conflict, don't you? > > > > > > > Depends. Sgallagh had a desire to mark that a particular system > > implemented multiple products

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 11:31 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > And I think those subpackages probably _should_ conflict, don't you? > > > > Depends. Sgallagh had a desire to mark that a particular system > implemented multiple products (ie server that also had workstation > installed). I'm not s

Re: audio/video software

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 08:04 -0400, LM wrote: > Kevin Kofler wrote: > >Please search the list archives before proposing such a thing. > > I apologize if I've offended you, but I have every intention of > continuing with the project. I simply asked what the status of a > patent unencumbered version

Re: qt-creator arm build timing out

On 09.03.2014 00:41, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Sun, 09 Mar 2014 00:31:20 +0100 Kevin Kofler wrote: I wrote: Sandro Mani wrote: Argh, it timed out again [1]. Any other suggestions? ExcludeArch: %{arm} PS: To be clear, according to the policies, you should: 1. File a bug against your own packag

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On 03/10/2014 06:55 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > That makes sense to me (although maybe there should be a special case for > F20 -> Fedora Workstation to make migration easier?). A close enough heuristic should be to look if the user has gnome-shell installed and install the Workstation config pack

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > It may be that vanilla alternatives is unsuitable but we want something > alternatives-like (an external tool that updates the config file) rather > than something based on rpm metadata (Conflicts which causes you to have > either one or th

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > 2) If we allow switching between products, we probably have to treat > the entire Product configuration of a package as a single unit. ok. > Edits to somefile.conf would change whatever's on the other end of the > link. The alternative

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

My reasoning is that I think it should be easy to turn a Fedora Cloud deployment into a Fedora Server I'd like to see a concrete driver for that goal. I mean, how would that be different than installing the role infrastructure? The overlap between Server and Cloud is an interesting topic b

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 03:16:31PM -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > The idea is to allow config file divergence via the alternatives system as > > Will this handle user customization? IME alternatives is not geared to > handle config fil

Re: packages which require the kernel package

Am 10.03.2014 21:06, schrieb Matthew Miller: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 03:22:02PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> I propose that (in Rawhide) we simply drop the requires line from all of >> the ones that are simply trying to state that they need a kernel version >> greater than the kernel version

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2014 03:58 PM, drago01 wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Kevin Fenzi > wrote: >> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:09:43 -0700 Toshio Kuratomi >> wrote: >> What will fedup updates of Fedora 20 look like? Would there be a flag, e.g. -

Re: packages which require the kernel package

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 03:22:02PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > I propose that (in Rawhide) we simply drop the requires line from all of > the ones that are simply trying to state that they need a kernel version > greater than the kernel version currently in Rawhide (right now, 3.14 rc). Require

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:09:43 -0700 > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >> > What will fedup updates of Fedora 20 look like? Would there be a >> > flag, e.g. --product cloud/workstation/server? If not specified do >> > we fail, or is there a default? >>

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2014 03:16 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi > wrote: >> The idea is to allow config file divergence via the alternatives >> system as > > Will this handle user customization? IME alternatives is

Re: exclude people from giving karma?

Am 10.03.2014 20:40, schrieb drago01: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 10.03.2014 20:18, schrieb drago01: >>> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Reindl Harald >>> wrote: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4.2.1.1-1.fc20?_csrf

Re: RATS replacement with Koji image building

On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:30:16 -0400 (EDT) Kamil Paral wrote: > I've finally had time to watch some DevConf talks I couldn't > personally attend. This one is very interesting: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWwugyV9J0Q&index=20&list=PLjT7F8YwQhr928YsRxmOs8hUyX_KG-S0T > > I believe we could us

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2014 03:25 PM, Gabriel Ramirez wrote: > On 03/10/2014 12:44 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> I'd rather see us handle things this way: >> >> fedora-release Requires: fedora-release-varia

Re: exclude people from giving karma?

Am 10.03.2014 20:35, schrieb Reindl Harald: > > > Am 10.03.2014 20:18, schrieb drago01: >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Reindl Harald >> wrote: >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4.2.1.1-1.fc20?_csrf_token=a6a024f6e2d35ad3fb8666c1244e215a6aa2 >>>

Re: exclude people from giving karma?

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 10.03.2014 20:18, schrieb drago01: >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Reindl Harald >> wrote: >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4.2.1.1-1.fc20?_csrf_token=a6a024f6e2d35ad3fb8666c1244e215a6a

Re: packages which require the kernel package

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 03:22:02PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > There aren't actually a lot: > > autofs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062998 > > I propose that (in Rawhide) we simply drop the requires line from all of the > ones that are simply trying to state that they ne

Re: exclude people from giving karma?

Am 10.03.2014 20:18, schrieb drago01: > On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4.2.1.1-1.fc20?_csrf_token=a6a024f6e2d35ad3fb8666c1244e215a6aa2 >> >> how can people pretend "installation went smoothly, no i

Re: packages which require the kernel package

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > When Fedora is in a container (a la Docker), the kernel comes > from the host, not the installed package set. I noticed a number of packages > which actually have a requirement on the kernel package. This isn't very > helpful, since the inst

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On 03/10/2014 12:44 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'd rather see us handle things this way: fedora-release Requires: fedora-release-variant fedora-release-$PRODUCT[1] Provides: fedora-release-variant The first fedora-release-$PRODUCT package insta

packages which require the kernel package

When Fedora is in a container (a la Docker), the kernel comes from the host, not the installed package set. I noticed a number of packages which actually have a requirement on the kernel package. This isn't very helpful, since the installed package says nothing about the running one, and forcing th

Re: exclude people from giving karma?

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-2922/libreoffice-4.2.1.1-1.fc20?_csrf_token=a6a024f6e2d35ad3fb8666c1244e215a6aa2 > > how can people pretend "installation went smoothly, no issue detected during > basic > document mani

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > The idea is to allow config file divergence via the alternatives system as Will this handle user customization? IME alternatives is not geared to handle config files, customizable shell scripts, etc. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gma

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2014 02:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Mar 10, 2014 11:09 AM, "Matthew Miller" > mailto:mat...@fedoraproject.org>> > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:09:43AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: What will fedup updates of Fedora 2

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2014 02:09 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:09:43AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >>> What will fedup updates of Fedora 20 look like? Would there be >>> a flag, e.g. --product cloud/workstation/server? If not >>> specifie

FreeMedia Infrastructure.

Hello everyone, I'm currently working on refining the idea of implementing the infrastructure for fedora FreeMedia. I've had discussions with bckurera from the fedora team regarding this. I have also written a blog postregarding this. I would like to get some ide

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mar 10, 2014 11:09 AM, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:09:43AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > What will fedup updates of Fedora 20 look like? Would there be a flag, > > > e.g. --product cloud/workstation/server? If not specified do we fail, or > > > is there a defaul

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:08:40PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:00:25 -0700 > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > Perhaps spins should also specify a product identifier. Maybe they > > could have the ability to specify an existing products' identifier if > > they are merely a vari

Re: Possible QA Devel Projects for GSoC 2014

On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 08:23:16 -0400 (EDT) Kamil Paral wrote: > > Fedora has been accepted as a mentoring org for GSoC 2014 and I'm > > planning to sign up as a mentor again this year. I'm trying to > > think of good projects that we could put on the list of suggestions > > of things that we'd like

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:09:43AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > What will fedup updates of Fedora 20 look like? Would there be a flag, > > e.g. --product cloud/workstation/server? If not specified do we fail, or > > is there a default? > The default should be whatever product was installed ont

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:00:25 -0700 Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Perhaps spins should also specify a product identifier. Maybe they > could have the ability to specify an existing products' identifier if > they are merely a variant set of packages top an existing product as > well. But they aren't p

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mar 10, 2014 10:22 AM, "Kevin Fenzi" wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:09:43 -0700 > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > > What will fedup updates of Fedora 20 look like? Would there be a > > > flag, e.g. --product cloud/workstation/server? If not specified do > > > we fail, or is there a default? >

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:22:30AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > The default should be whatever product was installed onto the system > > originally. Going from Fedora 20 to a Product in F21 is probably a > > one-off but I'm not sure what that should look like. I could be > > totally wrong but I

Re: Has support for Pentium III been terminated?

On Dom, 2014-03-02 at 23:23 -0500, Felix Miata wrote: > I have a F20 I switched to Rawhide on host gx150. Shortly after getting KDE > started, the system reboots. Something similar happens in openSUSE: > https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856606 > > Older releases are OK, so hardware s

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:09:43 -0700 Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > What will fedup updates of Fedora 20 look like? Would there be a > > flag, e.g. --product cloud/workstation/server? If not specified do > > we fail, or is there a default? > > > > Or is this getting too far ahead of things? > > > The

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:40:29AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Mar 10, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > At last week's FESCo meeting, the fact that Products desired to have > > divergent configuration was briefly touched on. On Thursday, a few FPC > > members had a brainsto

Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

On Mar 10, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > At last week's FESCo meeting, the fact that Products desired to have > divergent configuration was briefly touched on. On Thursday, a few FPC > members had a brainstorming session about it and on Friday, sgallagh and > that brainstorming co

Re: [Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 04:59:23PM +0100, Matthias Runge wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:39:44AM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Hi > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:00 AM, wrote: > > > > > Change in ownership over the last 168 hours > > > === > >

Re: Using pkgs.fedoraproject.org as redhat-rpm-config "upstream" repo

Having touched the redhat-rpm-config package, I agree with you. ;) Maintaining it in pkgs seems quite sensible. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: ht

Per-Product Config file divergence

At last week's FESCo meeting, the fact that Products desired to have divergent configuration was briefly touched on. On Thursday, a few FPC members had a brainstorming session about it and on Friday, sgallagh and that brainstorming continued with sgallagh, adamw, tflink, notting, and myself. We c

Re: [Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:39:44AM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:00 AM, wrote: > > > Change in ownership over the last 168 hours > > === > > > > 20 packages were orphaned > > > > It is entirely unclear from this report

[perl-Math-Random-MT-Auto] Declare bundled Mersenne Twister

commit a355dcd63ffa3e89c56f5c040afc41df66828365 Author: Petr Písař Date: Mon Mar 10 16:13:34 2014 +0100 Declare bundled Mersenne Twister And modernize the spec file perl-Math-Random-MT-Auto.spec | 37 - 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 d

Re: ostree/fedora atomic and impact on the mirror network

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 02:11:34PM +, Colin Walters wrote: > Now, a few things. First, the current goal of Fedora Atomic > Initiative is just to track Rawhide - I was talking with Dennis > Gilmore at devconf.cz and we felt this made the most sense rather > than trying to jump all the way to re

Re: [Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

Hi On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:00 AM, wrote: > Change in ownership over the last 168 hours > === > > 20 packages were orphaned > It is entirely unclear from this report whether any of the packages in this list remain orphaned or have they all been picked up

[Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

Change in ownership over the last 168 hours === 20 packages were orphaned - libofx [EL-5,devel,epel7,f19,f20] was orphaned by notting A library for supporting Open Financial Exchange (OFX) https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkg

Re: ostree/fedora atomic and impact on the mirror network

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: So, I've been thinking about Colin Walters' ostree project (Fedora Atomic Initiative) -- see . One of the concerns I have is with requirements on the mirror network. Right now, the impact on mirrors of an updat

File XML-LibXSLT-1.89.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by jplesnik

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-XML-LibXSLT: 692d2491b3ebf3465960c270c6a10e8b XML-LibXSLT-1.89.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailm

Re: Orphaning simple scan

I've also requested for acls. Approve please. On Mar 8, 2014 9:24 PM, "Rahul Sundaram" wrote: > > Hi > > I don't have direct access to a personal scanner anymore and don't have the time to handle bug reports without a device to test. I have orphaned simple scan now. Please feel free to take it.

ostree/fedora atomic and impact on the mirror network

So, I've been thinking about Colin Walters' ostree project (Fedora Atomic Initiative) -- see . One of the concerns I have is with requirements on the mirror network. Right now, the impact on mirrors of an update is a few metadata requests plus one per package. It seems l

Re: audio/video software

Kevin Kofler wrote: >Please search the list archives before proposing such a thing. I apologize if I've offended you, but I have every intention of continuing with the project. I simply asked what the status of a patent unencumbered version of libxine was on Fedora on behalf of an educational pro

Re: Orphaning simple scan

Hi Simone On 2014-03-10 12:22, Simone Caronni wrote: permissions granted. Actually we've been updating the package at the same time :) Ha, I pushed some updates as soon as I had the necessary privileges. Thanks! Mind if I also make some cosmetic changes to the spec file? Formatting, remov

Re: Orphaning simple scan

Hello, On 9 March 2014 13:34, David King wrote: > I would like to be a co-maintainer, as I use Simple Scan on a regular > basis, and as a GNOME contributor I am also familiar with the GNOME > schedule that Kalev mentioned. > > I have requested commit privileges in pkgdb. > permissions granted.

GCJ [was: pdftk retired?]

On 03/08/2014 03:37 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: >>> >>> Sorry I am missing something. Why can't we keep the old pdftk that >>> works with itext2? >> >> Check the whole thread - because of GCJ dependency. iText is second >> issue. The first could

F21 System Wide Change: Xorg without root rights

= Proposed System Wide Change: Xorg without root rights = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/XorgWithoutRootRights Change owner(s): Hans de Goede, graphics team The Xorg xserver is a large piece of software which currently runs as root, making it a potential vector for attacks against the s

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Am 10.03.2014 03:35, schrieb Kevin Kofler: > Reindl Harald wrote: >> in fact *nothing* at all should refer to /bin and /sbin after UsrMove >> as the waeking of the package guidelines is a sign of missing courage >> in the context of such invasive changes - well, looks like i need >> to continue fix