Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On 8/16/15, Josh Boyer wrote: > Which is clearly labeled as a joke. Nobody is seriously proposing this. Of course I'm not a fool ;) -- Yours sincerely, Christopher Meng http://awk.io -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fe

Re: Boost updated to 1.58.0 in rawhide and f23

Rex Dieter wrote: > Rex Dieter wrote: > >> I'm helping to sort out the tagging mess, and submit things in smaller >> batches. > > In 6 batches of ~50 packages each, I have it all submitted for -testing in > bodhi. > > I'll followup with update id's once they get pushed. https://admin.fedorap

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Christopher Meng wrote: > On 8/16/15, Neal Gompa wrote: >> To be fair, Debian's use of "linux" over "kernel" is because they actually >> support another kernel (the FreeBSD kernel). If the Fedora Project wanted >> to add FreeBSD kernel support (which, as far as I

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On 8/16/15, Neal Gompa wrote: > ​To be fair, Debian's use of "linux" over "kernel" is because they actually > support another kernel (the FreeBSD kernel). If the Fedora Project wanted > to add FreeBSD kernel support (which, as far as I know, we don't), then we > would have to talk about how to dea

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On Sáb, 2015-08-15 at 15:33 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Sérgio Basto > wrote: > > On Sáb, 2015-08-15 at 21:22 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: > > On 8/14/15, Wei-Lun Chao wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Is there already any

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Sáb, 2015-08-15 at 21:22 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: > > On 8/14/15, Wei-Lun Chao wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Is there already any discussion about: > > > rename arch name "noarch" to "all" > > > rename arch name "x86_64" to "amd64" >

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On Sáb, 2015-08-15 at 21:22 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: > On 8/14/15, Wei-Lun Chao wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is there already any discussion about: > > rename arch name "noarch" to "all" > > rename arch name "x86_64" to "amd64" > > rename package name "kernel-PAE" to "kernel" > > and even rename p

Re: Same comand names in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:23:50PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > "mock" has a similar problem. That one is simply foolish: The > /usr/bin/mock command *isn't* mock. It's a helper program to summon > the /usr/sbin/mock, which is the "real" mock. Hilarity ensues if you > have PATH set up as ma

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

> "H" == Haïkel writes: H> Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people H> abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager H> group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source H> would just hide this hideous behaviour. I don't know

Re: Same comand names in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:12:17 -0600 > Orion Poplawski wrote: > >> iproute has /usr/sbin/ss >> stripesnoop has /usr/bin/ss >> >> This causes problems: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249328 >> >> It seems like we should have a po

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Parag Nemade wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: >> Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with >> FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. >> I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those >> sp

Retiring python-tgexpandingformwidget

This project is not being developed or maintained upstream (me) and isn't required by any Fedora packages, and hasn't for quite some time. It builds but who knows if it works. I'm retiring it. rob -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listin

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 09:13:18AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The > current logic is: > 1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors > 2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

Though it's always nice to read in the morning that you're a good guy, I have few comments. + some people have been recently given the sponsor bit + some people do actively help our new packagers to grow but it does not appear here + others have done a tremendous works as sponsors in the past and

Re: Synapse package adoption

Ok dude, this afternoon I will work in that El 14/8/2015 21:54, "Christopher Meng" escribió: > I'm gonna unretire it in pkgdb in the next week. > > Or if you want to maintain it, just submit a review request. I'm happy > to review it. > > -- > > Yours sincerely, > Christopher Meng > > http://awk.

Re: F23 Self Contained Change: RPM MPI Requires Provides

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > So the issues I pointed out in my previous mail (conerning > MPI_PYTHON_SITEARCH and MPI_FORTRAN_MOD_DIR) above have been resolved. A > batch of F24 rebuilts has been done by Zbyszek, hitting some build failures > along the way. Most of these a

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On 8/14/15, Wei-Lun Chao wrote: > Hi, > > Is there already any discussion about: > rename arch name "noarch" to "all" > rename arch name "x86_64" to "amd64" > rename package name "kernel-PAE" to "kernel" > and even rename package name "kernel" to "linux" noarch doesn't mean all, and what's 'all'

Re: Validity of i686 as a release blocker

Am 15.08.2015 um 14:50 schrieb Matthew Miller: On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 06:47:44AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Definitely. 10/15 years+ ago, [...] [...] Also, in those days, devs cared about efficiency. Nowadays, they don't care as much, People have been making this exact complaint since t

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

On 8/15/15, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >> Ricky Elrod >> Chitlesh GOORAH Sorry about the mistaken reply, I'm not sure about how many people match the standard of inactive, perhaps another thread needed? I agree we need to wipe off people carefully, but there must be a standard about the wipe. --

Re: Validity of i686 as a release blocker

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 06:47:44AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Definitely. 10/15 years+ ago, [...] [...] > Also, in those days, devs cared about efficiency. Nowadays, they > don't care as much, People have been making this exact complaint since the 1970s. Probably before. -- Matthew Miller

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 05:21:21PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: > And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will > you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out? > > My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no > longer work in Fedora Pr

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

On 15/08/15 11:21, Christopher Meng wrote: And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out? My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege to

Re: F23 Self Contained Change: RPM MPI Requires Provides

On 15.08.2015 13:31, Jan Kurik wrote: On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Orion Poplawski > wrote: On 07/27/2015 04:05 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: On 27.07.2015 23 :56, Sandro Mani wrote: Ok I've now got one full build of all MPI packages [1].

Re: F23 Self Contained Change: RPM MPI Requires Provides

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 07/27/2015 04:05 PM, Sandro Mani wrote: > >> >> >> On 27.07.2015 23:56, Sandro Mani wrote: >> >>> Ok I've now got one full build of all MPI packages [1]. Investigating >>> the output, things are looking good, except for the fact that I

F-23 Branched report: 20150815 changes

Compose started at Sat Aug 15 07:15:02 UTC 2015 Broken deps for armhfp -- [apache-scout] apache-scout-1.2.6-11.fc21.noarch requires mvn(org.apache.juddi:uddi-ws) apache-scout-1.2.6-11.fc21.noarch requires mvn(org.apache.juddi:

rawhide report: 20150815 changes

Compose started at Sat Aug 15 05:15:02 UTC 2015 Broken deps for i386 -- [IQmol] IQmol-2.3.0-6.fc23.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.57.0 IQmol-2.3.0-6.fc23.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.57.0 [ScientificPython]

Re: Rawhide users beware! (Re: DNF 1.1.0 and DNF-PLUGINS-CORE 0.1.10 Released)

On 8/14/15, Vít Ondruch wrote: > And this time, my DNF update transaction failed somewhere :/ I had to > kill the task: > > http://paste.fedoraproject.org/255015/39536100/ Better than mine, I met some FUTEX_WAIT hanging issue from upgrading dnf and 6000+ packages on another old installation of f2

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out? My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege to them is useless: Ricky Elrod Chitlesh GOOR

Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

Hi, On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with > FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. > I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those > sponsors who does not make his duty. > > Here comes this script:

Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets

Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag. I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors who does not make his duty. Here comes this script: https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors It is first versio