On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Petr Šabata wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 01:09:22PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > rpms/dmenu -- Generic menu for X ( master f23 f22 epel7 el6 )
>
> I'll take this one, finally.
> P
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> http://lists.fedor
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 01:09:22PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> rpms/dmenu -- Generic menu for X ( master f23 f22 epel7 el6 )
I'll take this one, finally.
P
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel
# F24 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2016-02-22
# Time: 17:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Hi folks! We have a few proposed blockers to review, so let's take a
look at them.
If you have time this weekend, you can take a look at the proposed or
accepted blockers befor
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel Monday's QA meeting. I don't think
there's anything urgent to discuss - can anyone think of anything I've
missed? If anyone has a reason we should run the meeting, please do
reply to this mail and we can put it back on again :) Thanks folks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fed
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Matthew Miller wrote:
>> I think what killed it was that lots of people were interested in
>> continuing on Red Hat Linux 7.x and Red Hat Linux 9 indefinitely, but
>> not nearly as many were interested in extended life for the early
>> Fedora
The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
855 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11893
libguestfs-1.20.12-1.el5
620 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2014-1626
puppet-2.7.26-1.el5
469 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/upda
The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
246 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-6828
chicken-4.9.0.1-4.el6
228 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7031
python-virtualenv-12.0.7-1.el6
222 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.o
Matthew Miller wrote:
> I think what killed it was that lots of people were interested in
> continuing on Red Hat Linux 7.x and Red Hat Linux 9 indefinitely, but
> not nearly as many were interested in extended life for the early
> Fedora Core releases. *shrug*
That was a problem, but without the
Hi!
While fixing the FTBFS in openbabel, I rebased it to current git HEAD.
There seem to be some minor ABI changes, as expected with C++ libraries,
so a rebuild of the dependent packages is required. I found the
following consumers:
avogadro
ghemical
gnome-chemistry-utils
IQmol
kalzium
xdrawchem
A
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 09:52:17PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote:
> > If a person is not able to make a click in 7 days (maybe vacation
> > periods could be excluded from the count), why should he be able to do
> > so in the following 21 days?
>
> What vacation period
Am Sun, 21 Feb 2016 23:08:23 +0100
schrieb Jens Lody :
> Am Sun, 21 Feb 2016 21:35:32 +
> schrieb Tom Hughes :
>
> > On 21/02/16 21:31, Jens Lody wrote:
> >
> > > I don't see any hint about verification, if I go to the
> > > download-site from germany:
> > >
> > > https://getfedora.org/de_
Am Sun, 21 Feb 2016 21:35:32 +
schrieb Tom Hughes :
> On 21/02/16 21:31, Jens Lody wrote:
>
> > I don't see any hint about verification, if I go to the
> > download-site from germany:
> >
> > https://getfedora.org/de_CH/workstation/download/
> >
> > There's just a button, that directly downlo
On 02/19/2016 11:33 AM, Björn Esser wrote:
Am 19.02.2016 18:12 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski :
I believe this is the list of broken packages in rawhide.
$ sudo dnf --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=rawhide repoquery --whatrequires
'libglpk.so.36()(64bit)'
Fedora rawhide - x86_64
Am Sun, 21 Feb 2016 10:36:37 -0700
schrieb Kevin Fenzi :
> On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 09:32:46 -0500
> Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>
> > So, I see that someone hacked Linux Mint, and slipped in some
> > trojaned ISO download images.
> >
> > As a curiousity, I went to https://getfedora.org, to see how easy
On 21/02/16 21:31, Jens Lody wrote:
I don't see any hint about verification, if I go to the download-site from
germany:
https://getfedora.org/de_CH/workstation/download/
There's just a button, that directly downloads the iso.
You must have javascript disabled for getfedora.org then - if it
Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote:
> If a person is not able to make a click in 7 days (maybe vacation
> periods could be excluded from the count), why should he be able to do
> so in the following 21 days?
What vacation periods? How do you know when a stranger on another
continent might be on vacatio
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 01:43:54PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 11:31:05AM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Sam Varshavchik
> > wrote:
> > > So, I see that someone hacked Linux Mint, and slipped in some trojaned ISO
> > > download images.
>
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 11:31:05AM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Sam Varshavchik
> wrote:
> > So, I see that someone hacked Linux Mint, and slipped in some trojaned ISO
> > download images.
> Since Fedora looks to be moving to Live USB Creator (maybe Fedora
> Media
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> So, I see that someone hacked Linux Mint, and slipped in some trojaned ISO
> download images.
>
Since Fedora looks to be moving to Live USB Creator (maybe Fedora
Media Writer, TBD) as the primary download for Fedora 24, I wonder if
the new
Missing expected images:
Kde disk raw armhfp
Cloud_atomic disk raw x86_64
Kde live i386
Kde live x86_64
Images in this compose but not Rawhide 20160220:
Cloud_atomic vagrant virtualbox x86_64
Cloud_atomic vagrant libvirt x86_64
Images in Rawhide 20160220 but not this:
Cloud_atomic disk raw x86
On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 09:32:46 -0500
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> So, I see that someone hacked Linux Mint, and slipped in some
> trojaned ISO download images.
>
> As a curiousity, I went to https://getfedora.org, to see how easy it
> is to find instructions for verifying the downloaded images.
>
> I
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 03:42:44AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I really wish Fedora would provide the infrastructure to push security
> updates for EOL releases. I still think that the one thing that killed
> Fedora Legacy was its insane amount of bureaucracy and that with an ACL-less
> free-fo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266751
Bug 1266751 depends on bug 1267179, which changed state.
Bug 1267179 Summary: Review Request: perl-CBOR-XS - Concise Binary Object
Representation (CBOR)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267179
What|Removed
I'll be updating gsl to 2.1 in Rawhide on Monday and rebuilding
dependent packages. See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276893 for some tracking
info. A fair amount of work was done to get everything ready for this
update, but there may be a couple stragglers.
--
Orion Poplawsk
So, I see that someone hacked Linux Mint, and slipped in some trojaned ISO
download images.
As a curiousity, I went to https://getfedora.org, to see how easy it is to
find instructions for verifying the downloaded images.
I couldn't find it. There were many helpful download links, all over
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 01:58:55PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 02/21/2016 11:44 AM, Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote:
>
> >Now, I think that it makes sense to have the POC/Package Admins able to
> >approve and/or decline requests. I think the following 3 improvements
> >would greatly improve th
Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> My personal opinion is that (with a few possible exceptions, perhaps
> critical path, or a subset of that), co-maintainership requests
> shouldn't ever be turned down. That's really not in the spirit of
> Fedora. Which makes me wonder why, for most packages, we even need
On 02/21/2016 11:44 AM, Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote:
Now, I think that it makes sense to have the POC/Package Admins able to
approve and/or decline requests. I think the following 3 improvements
would greatly improve the ACL request experience:
- auto-accept the ACL requests after 7 days of n
On 21 February 2016 at 10:44, Fabio Alessandro Locati
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:10:53AM +, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>> This jumped out at me as particularly worrisome:
>>
>> On 19 February 2016 at 19:15, Fabio Alessandro Locati
>> wrote:
>> > If Christopher will not respond, I can
Compose started at Sun Feb 21 05:15:02 UTC 2016
Broken deps for i386
--
[3Depict]
3Depict-0.0.18-3.fc24.i686 requires libmgl.so.7.4.0
[IQmol]
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0
IQmol-2.3.0
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:10:53AM +, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> This jumped out at me as particularly worrisome:
>
> On 19 February 2016 at 19:15, Fabio Alessandro Locati
> wrote:
> > If Christopher will not respond, I can take care of:
> [snip]
> > Also I can help with the i3 packages as I
This jumped out at me as particularly worrisome:
On 19 February 2016 at 19:15, Fabio Alessandro Locati
wrote:
> If Christopher will not respond, I can take care of:
[snip]
> Also I can help with the i3 packages as I volounteered few weeks ago and
> have been shot down by Christopher becase "no mo
32 matches
Mail list logo
