Hi
1) maybe you should open a bug for review the package ... ?
2) you must use %license macro for LICENSE text file
3) maybe you could remove %{!?_pkgdocdir: %global
%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}}
i do not understand why _pkgdocdir is versioned
4) you could remove also "Group: Applications/
Hello,
I would like to unretire the package "valabind" and become the owner for the
orphaned package.
With the current release of valabind 0.9.2 it seems to build nicely with
recent vala version in rawhide
and recent versions of Fedora, so I would like to unretire it.
Koji scratch build:
http://
No missing expected images.
Images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151010:
Cloud docker x86_64
No images in 23 Branched 20151010 but not this.
Failed openQA tests: 7 of 52
ID: 5479Test: i386 workstation_live default_install
ID: 5477Test: i386 kde_live default_install
ID:
No missing expected images.
No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151010
No images in Rawhide 20151010 but not this.
Failed openQA tests: 12 of 52
ID: 5491Test: x86_64 universal server_multi_empty
ID: 5487Test: i386 workstation_live default_install
ID: 5486Test: x8
On 11 October 2015 at 12:43, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Haïkel wrote:
>> And what happens if the library is consumed by other packages
>> requiring the new API?
>
> Of course you have to support both the new and the old one.
>
>> Let's keep Ian example:
>> You keep the deprecated function in the new li
Jules Bashizi wrote:
I got admission into some British university and I am to buy a laptop .
wish to know a machine which is good with Linux . any advice on which and
where to get it please !
Take a look at this list of laptops/notebooks tested with the Linux
kernels from 3.14 to 4.1:
http:/
Just replying to this one point:
On 10/11/2015 02:29 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> 3. There is a common credo (which I do not adher to) in Fedora that upstream
>should be followed blindly ("upstream, upstream, upstream").
My interpretation of this is completely different than yours. :)
To me it
Haïkel wrote:
> In short: packagers are not to be trusted, that's the bottom line of
> your argumentation.
Not at all! It is funny that you are accusing me of distrusting packagers
when I have been arguing for years that packagers ARE to be trusted and thus
the restrictions on updates need to go
Compose started at Sun Oct 11 05:15:03 UTC 2015
Broken deps for i386
--
[CableSwig]
CableSwig-3.20.0-13.fc23.i686 requires gccxml
[IQmol]
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0
IQmol-2.3.0-9.f
Compose started at Sun Oct 11 07:15:03 UTC 2015
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[389-ds-base]
389-ds-base-1.3.4.4-1.fc23.armv7hl requires librpmio.so.3
389-ds-base-1.3.4.4-1.fc23.armv7hl requires librpm.so.3
[CableSwig]
Cable
Neal Gompa wrote:
> Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that
> use CMake for the build system for various distros, and I've noticed
> something rather peculiar. Of all the distros I've built packages for
> (Fedora/CentOS, openSUSE, Mageia, Debian, and Ubuntu), only Fe
Neal Gompa wrote:
> Then it sounds like it would make more sense to have a mechanism to
> automatically add the user-visible version number rather than the soname.
> Though, I don't quite understand what the purpose for sonames are in the
> first place, if they aren't really designed for supportin
Haïkel wrote:
> And what happens if the library is consumed by other packages
> requiring the new API?
Of course you have to support both the new and the old one.
> Let's keep Ian example:
> You keep the deprecated function in the new library despite upstream's
> decision. Since we keep shipping
On 10/10/2015 07:39 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 07:20:22AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I know, we are late in the release schedule, but I am considering to
switching at least Inventor to motif on fc23, as well - It's
unimportant enough to most users, but is
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> FWIW - you can pass -m to rpmdev-newspec to get %{buildroot}. That probably
> should be the default, but...
...https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256815#c3
You can make it the default with NEWSPEC_PREFER_MACROS, see the
rpmdev-
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> We don't use %make_build,
https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/rpmdevtools.git/commit/?id=dcf1005d2cca7ce2a541718425f84d65fe8b8d00
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora
16 matches
Mail list logo
