Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

Kalev Lember wrote: > This might be a good way forward for Fedora as well to avoid changing > the system-wide llvm ABI mid release. No, most definitely not! Let me introduce you to our old "friend", the symbol conflict. By way of libGL linking LLVM, if some other library uses a private LLVM, and

Re: rawhide report: 20140328 changes

On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:04:29 -0400 Corey Sheldon wrote: > question on binutils for fc21 attempted to update via fc21 and rawide > repos and got a norepomd errordid the baseurl change for fc21 ? no. Sounds like it might be a transitory mirror issue? If it persists, paste the entire output o

Planned Outage: Mass reboots/Upgrades - 2014-04-01 21:00 UTC

Planned Outage: Mass reboots/Upgrades - 2014-04-01 21:00 UTC There will be an outage starting at 2014-04-01 21:00 UTC, which will last approximately 4 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2014-04-01

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:34:22 +0100 Lennart Poettering wrote: > I doubt there are many people even using them anymore, firewalls are > more comprehensive and a lot more powerful, and while every admin knows > firewalls, I figure only very few know tcpd/tcpwrap, and even fewer ever > actively make

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 20:05:21 +0100 Lennart Poettering wrote: > Well, all mails servers as well as sshd have much better ways to do > such filtering. sshd has "Match", The sshd's Match does not have any historic criteria (e.g. sshd does not keep a database of previous login attempts). It is not p

Re: Desktop racing problem in F20

On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:53:23 -0600 Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > Well I have seen all of these in the last 2 weeks on Fedora 19 so I am not > sure what exactly is going on. Thanks for sharing. Perhaps some bad updates went in? If we only see the 3 areas, it may be 3 unrelated bugs. I just asked

[Bug 1072256] perl-Date-Manip-6.43 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1072256 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version|

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:37:24AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > > It might be nice if Fedora adopted the common practice (among other OSes > > with interface assurances) of at least attempting to define stability > > levels. Whose action item woul

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 22:25 -0400, Jens Petersen wrote: > Hi, > > > We'd like to update to Mesa 10.1 in Fedora 20, since the cycle is so > > long before F21 and (among other goodies) it enables OpenGL 3.3 on some > > newer Radeons. This implies rebasing LLVM 3.4, and that's where it gets > > a li

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 16:45 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 03/28/2014 04:37 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > RHEL's Mesa at this point links against a private build of llvm that > > is explicitly _not_ part of The Platform, for exactly this reason: > > it's not something we can commit to supporting for

Re: F21 Self Contained Change: Apache Mesos

Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said: > - Original Message - > > Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said: > > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Apache Mesos = > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ApacheMesos > > > > > > Change owner(s): Timothy St. Clair > > > > > > Apa

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:37:24AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > It might be nice if Fedora adopted the common practice (among other OSes > with interface assurances) of at least attempting to define stability > levels. Whose action item would that be? Agreed, and, FESCo. -- Matthew Miller

[perl-Role-Tiny] Break build-cycle

commit 22172ce5259b1d3edf02b645b3eaad967d96508f Author: Petr Písař Date: Fri Mar 28 14:42:19 2014 +0100 Break build-cycle perl-Role-Tiny → perl-namespace-autoclean → perl-Moose → perl-Test-Spelling → perl-Pod-Spell → perl-File-ShareDir-ProjectDistDir → perl-Path-IsDev → pe

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On 03/28/2014 02:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> - every change in sshd_config has to be confirmed by sshd restart, while >> changing hosts.deny doesn't need >> any other action > > no - try it out! > > make a fatal syntax error in "sshd_config" and in case of a > remote machine make sure you don

[perltidy] Update to 20140328

commit 8f4ac8b8f541f632d325b63153a1ec0e22db6002 Author: Paul Howarth Date: Fri Mar 28 15:31:48 2014 + Update to 20140328 - New upstream release 20140328 - Fixed CPAN RT#94190 and debian Bug #742004: perltidy.LOG file left behind; the problem was caused by the

Broken dependencies: perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu

perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu-0.09004-4.fc20.noarch requires perl(HTML::FormFu::MultiForm) On i386: perl-Catalyst-Controller-HTML-FormFu-0.09004-4.fc20.noarch requires perl(HTML:

[Bug 1064271] perl-Net-SSLeay tests failing on s390(x) with glibc-2.18.90-21.fc21

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064271 --- Comment #27 from Dan Horák --- this function from SSLeay.xs UV get_my_thread_id(void) /* returns threads->tid() value */ { dSP; UV tid = 0; int count = 0; #ifdef USE_ITHREADS ENTER; SAVETMPS; PUSHMARK(SP); XPU

Broken dependencies: perl-GnuPG-Interface

perl-GnuPG-Interface has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: On x86_64: perl-GnuPG-Interface-0.50-1.fc21.noarch requires perl(MooX::late) perl-GnuPG-Interface-0.50-1.fc21.noarch requires perl(MooX::HandlesVia) On i386: perl-GnuPG-Interface-0.50-1.fc21.noarch requires

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 11:38 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Adam Jackson (a...@redhat.com) said: > > Can you (or anyone else) elaborate on the issues you're concerned with > > here? If I'm going to have to play Simon Says about this I'd like some > > opportunity to address (or at least investigat

Fedora Present and Future: a Fedora.next 2014 Update (Part II, “What’s Happening?”)

I promised a while ago that I would provide a text version of my talk at DevConf, for people who couldn't make it and because sitting through a video of me standing up there going on and on doesn't really make for good followup discussion. I posted a link to the first part last week:

Re: EPEL group creation requests.

On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 08:52:20 -0500 Jim Perrin wrote: > With cinnamon and mate being added for epel7, how would one go about > requesting that groups be created for them, similar to the xfce group? epel uses the same comps repo as Fedora: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/comps.git/ Just add i

Attempting to contact three unresponsive maintainers

Greetings, we've been told that the email addresses for three package maintainers are no longer valid. I'm starting the unresponsive maintainer policy to find out if they are still interested in maintaining their packages (and if so, have them update their email addresses in FAS). If they're not

Desktop racing problem in F20

Dear Fedorians: Recently, I was hitting a number of odd behaviours that look like races. Filed a couple of bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082092 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082095 But this feels unsatisfactory, because reproducibility is extremely low for a

Re: Desktop racing problem in F20

On 28 March 2014 10:47, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > Dear Fedorians: > > Recently, I was hitting a number of odd behaviours that look like races. > Filed a couple of bugs: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082092 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082095 > > But this feels u

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 07:39 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > +1 > > And yep, it should go to FESCo - this has much more bigger scope than 10.0.3 > due to LLVM update. You know I'm more than ok with updates to Fn-1 but this > one should be coordinated very well. Can you (or anyone else) elaborate

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

Adam Jackson (a...@redhat.com) said: > On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 07:39 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > > +1 > > > > And yep, it should go to FESCo - this has much more bigger scope than 10.0.3 > > due to LLVM update. You know I'm more than ok with updates to Fn-1 but this > > one should be coordin

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 13:40 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > Fedora *is* a platform, not just a set of packages, however half-assedly > we conform to that vision, so I guess I just feel a bit uncomfortable > not at least putting up a few hoops for this to jump through. :) OpenGTL here is something

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 11:21 -0400, Corey Sheldon wrote: > While Heisenbereg isn't the newbie friendly distro that Mint or Ubuntu > are but many new to Enterprise linux use this and that could seriously > cause some bad blood type issues with end-users I'm also for at least > getting the upstream ap

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On 03/28/2014 04:37 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > RHEL's Mesa at this point links against a private build of llvm that > is explicitly _not_ part of The Platform, for exactly this reason: > it's not something we can commit to supporting for any use beyond > Mesa itself, even in the extreme short term.

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

While Heisenbereg isn't the newbie friendly distro that Mint or Ubuntu are but many new to Enterprise linux use this and that could seriously cause some bad blood type issues with end-users I'm also for at least getting the upstream approval for mid release modding if not FesCO Corey W Sheldon Ow

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 28.03.2014 14:48, schrieb Petr Lautrbach: > On 03/28/2014 02:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> - every change in sshd_config has to be confirmed by sshd restart, while >>> changing hosts.deny doesn't need >>> any other action >> >> no - try it out! >> >> make a fatal syntax error in "sshd_confi

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 28.03.2014 14:39, schrieb Petr Lautrbach: > On 03/20/2014 08:05 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> On Thu, 20.03.14 12:20, Stephen John Smoogen (smo...@gmail.com) wrote: >> I doubt there are many people even using them anymore, firewalls are more comprehensive and a lot more powerful, a

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On 03/20/2014 08:05 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Thu, 20.03.14 12:20, Stephen John Smoogen (smo...@gmail.com) wrote: > >>> I doubt there are many people even using them anymore, firewalls are >>> more comprehensive and a lot more powerful, and while every admin knows >>> firewalls, I figure

Re: F21 System Wide Change: PrivateDevices=yes and PrivateNetwork=yes For Long-Running Services

On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 18:18 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 22:59 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Wed, 26.03.14 13:43, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > > > Note that PrivateNetwork=yes should not be used for: > > > > > > > > 1. Services that actually

Re: F21 System Wide Change: PrivateDevices=yes and PrivateNetwork=yes For Long-Running Services

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/27/2014 06:18 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 22:59 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> On Wed, 26.03.14 13:43, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) >> wrote: >> Note that PrivateNetwork=yes should not be used for: >>

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

Martin Stransky redhat.com> writes: > > On 03/28/2014 11:44 AM, Kẏra wrote: > > First off, thank you so much for this! I have been using it and it is > > stunning. The difference is huge. > > Thanks! > > > It also seems to be the only browser that has supported my HiDPI display > > (perhaps th

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

- Original Message - > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade > wrote: > > 2014-03-27 17:40 GMT-03:00 Adam Williamson : > >> On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 16:02 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > >>> We'd like to update to Mesa 10.1 in Fedora 20, since the cycle is so > >>> long

Re: repo XML file schemas

Are there XML Schemas for the repo files available anywhere please ? Aaron On 28 March 2014 08:32, Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2014-03-27, Aaron Gray wrote: >> The Fedora XML repo file schemas seem to have disappeared. >> >>http://linux.duke.edu/metadata/common"; >> xmlns:rpm="http://linux.duke.edu

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade wrote: > 2014-03-27 17:40 GMT-03:00 Adam Williamson : >> On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 16:02 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: >>> We'd like to update to Mesa 10.1 in Fedora 20, since the cycle is so >>> long before F21 and (among other goodies) it

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

On 03/28/2014 11:44 AM, Kẏra wrote: First off, thank you so much for this! I have been using it and it is stunning. The difference is huge. Thanks! It also seems to be the only browser that has supported my HiDPI display (perhaps that's thanks to gtk3?). That's a great news, I was not aware

Re: Firefox Gtk3 test package

Martin Stransky redhat.com> writes: > > On 01/13/2014 04:16 PM, Christopher Meng wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Martin Stransky redhat.com> wrote: > >> Hi guys, > >> > >> first $SUBJ is available at: > >> > >> http://stransky.fedorapeople.org/FirefoxGtk3/ > >> > >> It's just a src

Re: Heads up: Mesa/LLVM rebase and OpenGTL retirement in F20

Hi 2014-03-27 21:02 GMT+01:00 Adam Jackson : > We'd like to update to Mesa 10.1 in Fedora 20, since the cycle is so > long before F21 and (among other goodies) it enables OpenGL 3.3 on some > newer Radeons. This implies rebasing LLVM 3.4, and that's where it gets > a little awkward: the OpenGTL

EPEL epel beta report: 20140328 changes

Compose started at Fri Mar 28 08:15:03 UTC 2014 Broken deps for x86_64 -- 2ping-2.0-2.el7.noarch requires perl(Digest::CRC) RemoteBox-1.7-1.el7.noarch requires rdesktop RemoteBox-1.7-1.el7.noarch requires perl-Gtk2

Re: RFC: httpd-filesystem proposal

- Original Message - > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:41:55AM +, Joe Orton wrote: > > We're proposing to add an httpd-filesystem subpackage which will > > simplify some dependency problems; particularly for packages which want > > to contain files owned by the "apache" user, but don't nee

Re: repo XML file schemas

On 2014-03-27, Aaron Gray wrote: > The Fedora XML repo file schemas seem to have disappeared. > >http://linux.duke.edu/metadata/common"; > xmlns:rpm="http://linux.duke.edu/metadata/rpm"; packages="14364"> > > duke.edu no longer seem to host them ! > XML name space URI is just an identifier. There

Re: repo XML file schemas

On 03/27/2014 06:54 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: The Fedora XML repo file schemas seem to have disappeared. http://linux.duke.edu/metadata/common"; xmlns:rpm="http://linux.duke.edu/metadata/rpm"; packages="14364"> duke.edu no longer seem to host them ! These are just unique strings, you are not sup