vhostmd
vpnc
vte
vte291
vte3
wine-desktop
xboxdrv
Thank you, and best regards! :)
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted | Re
Thank you all for you replies, it helped a lot! :)
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 1:54 AM, Ian Kent wrote:
> On 16/05/18 23:17, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote:
> > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Stephen Gallagher <mailto:sgall...@redhat.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I d
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
> I don't think SSSD or FreeIPA *require* it. They offer netgroup
> functionality that can be used with it. Maybe I misunderstood your
> question? Are you just asking which things in the distro interact with NIS
> domains at all?
>
> Perha
Hello people,
I would like to know if you know about any service / tool / application
that still relies on NIS domain to be set in Fedora?
So far, I know only about SSSD/FreeIPA relying on it. Does anybody know
anything else? All replies are welcome. :)
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 3:46 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> If you wish to 'clean out' initscripts, migrate the content
> into the relevant bash, and tcsh packages, and be done with it
>
Yeah, you're right. Good point. Though I would prefer these scripts be
moved into 'setup' package instead, so the
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Akira TAGOH wrote:
> how/what does those scripts "block"?
>
Right now, it depends on the "/usr/sbin/consoletype", which is also part
of initscripts. I hope it will be possible to just switch it to "tty"
utility instead, so the dependency on initscripts can be c
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Akira TAGOH wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:41 AM, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
> wrote:
> > My question was more meant in a sense "are those files still necessary"?
> :)
> > I expect they were created to deal with some problems
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 5:27 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote:
>
> > does anybody know if the files /etc/profile.d/lang.{csh,sh} are still
> used
> > these days, and what for?
>
> by their terms, they are a collection of
Hello people,
does anybody know if the files /etc/profile.d/lang.{csh,sh} are still used
these days, and what for?
Do we still need them in Fedora?
Should they be installed by default these days?
Any info is appreciated! :)
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno,
I'm aware only about one FTBFS related
to these changes:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535860 (upstream is already
aware of this issue)
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline
ill not get texlive automatically installed in case they
didn't have it before.
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 4:01 PM, Michael Cronenworth
wrote:
> On 01/09/2018 04:51 PM, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote:
>
>> Initial NOTE: I have made some bigger changes in Ghostscript package
>>
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 7:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 10:45 +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 9, 2018 11:51:03 PM CET David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote:
> > > The new Ghostscript should be available for trying/testing in Rawhide
> in
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> If the content of "ghostscript-core" is now part of "ghostscript", you
> can do the following:
>
> Obsoletes: ghostscript-core < 9.22-5
> Provides: ghostscript-core = %{version}-%{release}
>
> In addition, packages that currently require "ghost
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:30 PM, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
wrote:
> I hope I didn't forget to mention something important... :D If something
> is unclear, lay it on me! ;)
>
Yeah, I forgot one more small thing to mention... :D For now I'm waiting
for 'google-droid-f
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Is there a specific bug that forces us to require we have transitional
> packages like this? RPM's Conflicts+Obsoletes logic is powerful enough
> to allow us to avoid this.
>
I'm not aware of any BZ/Fedora wiki page that is requiring this. Th
e names. For that I will create a new tracking BZ
for all related packages, and I will create necessary pull-requests on
Pagure, or open corresponding BZs if pull-requests are disabled.
The new Ghostscript should be available for trying/testing in Rawhide in a
few hours. I will follow up with addit
2 Richard: I think we've hit the cause of misunderstanding here. Many
people around me (including) me use the word "own", because it's shorter
(faster to say/write), even though we mean maintain (in a contributor
sense). It's a slang for us. I don't know anyone around ne who would take
the word "ow
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Reindl Harald
wrote:
>
>
> Am 04.12.2017 um 16:22 schrieb David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Richard Hughes > <mailto:hughsi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 4 December 2017 at 1
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 4 December 2017 at 14:17, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
> wrote:
> > 4) He found a fix for it, created a new patch and added it into the
> package
> > I maintain/own.
>
> Did you say thanks?
For what? Crea
Hello Christian,
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Christian Dersch
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> sorry but I think this mail goes into the completely wrong direction… You
> claim that you don't want to point any fingers, but instead you blame *all*
> proven packagers, including me.
>
my intention was
So, to clarify - I'm OK with proven packagers to make changes to package I
(actively) maintain in case I'm unavailable for some longer period of time
(weekend, vacation, etc.), and the changes needed to be done fall into one
of these categories:
* my package received some high/critical CVE that ne
la, irc or email prior to making changes. They should be careful not
to change other people's packages needlessly and try to do the minimal
changes required to fix problems, ..."
Last note to proven packagers: You're not BDFLs - so start acting according
to it. Thank you!
David Ka
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
> Based on this thread, I will retire now this package.
That's should be save to do IMHO:
*
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/hylafax+/c/4886f02ec6327a54488750acf4b9e05559a48460?branch=master
* https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDO
Thanks for the info. In that case there's nothing holding me from doing the
rebase (I'm already in contact with gawk extensions developer). My guess is
that the new gawk version will land in Rawhide tomorrow then.
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Enginee
-------
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted | Red Hat <http://www.redhat.com/en/about/trusted>.
Sorry for the delay in reply, vacation... Anyway, back to work! :)
On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 6:25 PM, wrote:
>
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]"
>
> > * Regarding the font family names and subpackages -- it's another mess.
>
So, I have tried to rebuild 'hylafax+' with 'urw-base35-fonts' and it
passed:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=22352204
I suggest we rebase it newer version (5.5 -> 6.0.6 -- the latest stable
release is already 5 years old -- http://www.hylafax.org/content/Download),
rebuild it
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 10:51 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> I don't see a urw-base35-fonts SRPM in my RawHide ... has it
> been packaged?
>
Yes, it's in the Rawhide already:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/urw-base35-fonts
My mirror only fires weekly, but it seens ... hasty to retire
> a package
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez
wrote:
> Zdenek Dohnal wrote:
>
> > I am going to retire ghostscript-fonts package in F27 because its fonts
> > are deprecated and replaced by urw-base35-fonts package.
>
> NACK. They are _extra_ fonts:
> http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.gi
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Christopher
wrote:
> You don't need to create pull requests at all. git handles multiple remote
> repositories (the "origin" and your fork) just as easily as it handles one.
> Saving your work in a separate branch is the same whether that branch is in
> the main r
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Pavel Valena wrote:
> You can do all you want in your fork[1], which Pagure does support. IMHO
> there's no need to use private branches now.
> Pagure also supports PRs[2].
>
Okay, that's oney way to deal with his. However, making a fork of a
repository where onl
n
to changes which Modularity brings.
I welcome any feedback! Thanks for it in advance! ;)
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies o
OK, I will proceed with Domininik's or Zbigniew's idea. Thanks all to your
suggestions. :)
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted
d with option 2) - IOW - to bypass
the versioning from URW++ completely, and have Version field based on
snapshot string, in a way:
X.Y.Z == .MM.DD
Or do you some problem with this approach?
Thanks! :)
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Br
pstream is not shipping license files in the archive. (I have already
contacted to correct this.)
What are you thoughts, guys? Anyone has a better idea how to solve this
mess? Or which option would you recommend?
Thank you in advance for all your ideas.
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*
Thank you guys for the reply, I'm just glad it's not something critical...
:)
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted | Red Hat <htt
,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted | Red Hat <http://www.redhat.com/en/about/trusted>.
__
roject.org/message/WZYPIRENDRAT3XZLTOVUVNOCJDZQIW3M/
- we have discussed a little on Thursday, so you should know what's going
on. :)
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 5
Hello folks,
ghostscript package has been rebased to version 9.20 across all current Fedora
releases. I am very well aware that we shouldn't do rebases for current
releases, to avoid stability problems. However, I have decided for this step in
order to fix 4 CVEs that arrived yesterday for ghos
ow. :(
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
*Associate Software Engineer*
*Brno, Czech Republic*
RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
Every airline in the Fortune 500 relies on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted | Red Hat <http://www.redhat.com/en/about/trusted>.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at
Hello guys,
I backported the upstream patch for CVE-2016-0634 [1] into bash for Rawhide,
F25, F24, and F23. If you have some spare time, feel free to help verifying the
issue / testing the stability of bash [2][3][4].
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1377614
[2] https://bodhi.fed
> On Monday, 12 September 2016, David Kaspar If anyone who occasionally may need these documentation in these
> formats always can download original texi files and generate doc in any
> format. Such needs now are so rare that distributing copies of such doc
> (just in case) as pac
- F24
* https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-e767636296 - F25
Last NOTE: I will be doing a rebase to gawk-4.1.4 for Fedora 26.
Best regards,
David Kaspar [Dee'Kej]
-
[1] List of gawk dependants:
akmods
am-utils
autoconf213
autofs
belooted
calamares
ceph-selinux
cloud-utils
cloud
43 matches
Mail list logo
