f28: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-e6538e58ce
and
f29: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-175284c10b
Is there a reason they haven't moved to testing state?
Thanks
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@list
On 12/6/18 7:04 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>
>> And the other active maintainer (branto) and I don't have cycles to
>> devote to keeping (any part of) it building on 32-bit archs.
>
> But people can always send patches. ;-)
If someone else would like to take over a
On 12/5/18 9:50 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Kaleb,
>
> Firstly the title is misleading as there was no heads up, a heads up
> is notice before you actually push the change, not when you do the
> change.
I suggest you take this up with branto. He's the one who built it
without 32-bit archs without
On 12/5/18 8:34 AM, Dan Horák wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 14:23:49 +0100
> Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
>
>> W dniu 05.12.2018 o 14:14, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY pisze:
>>
>>> Ceph 14.x.x (Nautilus) will no longer be built on i686 and armv7hl
>>> archs starting in
Ceph 14.x.x (Nautilus) will no longer be built on i686 and armv7hl archs
starting in fedora-30/rawhide.
The upstream project doesn't support it. The armv7hl builders don't have
enough memory (or address space) to build some components.
And the other active maintainer (branto) and I don't have cy
Hi,
How would one go about requesting this be enabled by default?
Upstream NFS-Ganesha devs have been playing with it a bit and got a
modest performance boost.
It's conceivable that GlusterFS could utilize it too.
Thanks,
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing
Is this a spurious failure or ???
...
Task info: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=28564187
...
buildArch (glusterfs-4.1.2-1.fc29.1.src.rpm, s390x): free -> FAILED:
Fault:
thanks,
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedo
according to https://release-monitoring.org/project/267/
But the Homepage: in the above and the Source: in the .spec would seem
to be saying that http://download.ceph.com/tarballs/ is where
the-new-hotness is looking.
And there is no ceph-13.x.y tar at that location (yet).
It's a maze of twisty
On 03/21/2018 04:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 03/20/2018 11:02 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>>
>> I've rec'd about 30 of these in the last hour or so, fedora-28,
>> fedora-27, fedora-26, and fedora-28-modular.
>>
>> Would someone please make
I've rec'd about 30 of these in the last hour or so, fedora-28,
fedora-27, fedora-26, and fedora-28-modular.
Would someone please make them stop
Thanks
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to d
On 03/15/2018 01:23 PM, Tomasz Torcz 👁️ wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 01:13:09PM -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>>
>> Did I miss something?
>>
>> Both machines were dnf system-upgraded from f27. Static IP settings were
>> set at f27 install time and work
Did I miss something?
Both machines were dnf system-upgraded from f27. Static IP settings were
set at f27 install time and worked before the respective upgrades.
f28 was working correctly until a couple of days ago to the best of my
knowledge.
E.g.——
%cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-e
E.g.:
...
On x86_64:
nfs-ganesha-2.6.0-0.4rc5.fc28.x86_64 requires
libntirpc.so.1.6(NTIRPC_1.6.0)(64bit)
...
I have long since built the GA packages: nfs-ganesha-2.6.0-1 in f28 and
even nfs-ganesha-2.6.0-2 because I didn't notice that this was whining
about -0.4rc5.
Is something stuck s
On 01/18/2018 01:16 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> On 01/18/2018 03:23 AM, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
>> (This is meant for the Fedora devel mailing list, but I've cc'd the
>> nfs-ganesha mailing list in the hopes that they might see something I'm
>> missing)
>
On 01/18/2018 03:23 AM, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> (This is meant for the Fedora devel mailing list, but I've cc'd the
> nfs-ganesha mailing list in the hopes that they might see something I'm
> missing)
>
> The latest release of the LizardFS distributed filesystem includes a
> FSAL for NFS Ganesha,
On 01/18/2018 03:23 AM, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> (This is meant for the Fedora devel mailing list, but I've cc'd the
> nfs-ganesha mailing list in the hopes that they might see something I'm
> missing)
>
> The latest release of the LizardFS distributed filesystem includes a
> FSAL for NFS Ganesha,
I've been contacted by Fedora QE about this, and have bz
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1518150
I haven't followed (can't follow) Fedora closely enough to know what's
needed here. Apparently none of my co-maintainers have either. ;-)
glusterfs packages are built for f27.
Reading th
perusing the glibc source and headers it seems to come down to the
#undef __IOV_MAX
line in bits/uio_lim.h.
The Changelog (2017-06-14) speaks rather obliquely to the issue, but I
can't quite figure out if
sysconf(_SC_IOV_MAX);
now returning -1 (errno = 0) is an unintentional side effect
017 at 11:36 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
I've built glusterfs previously on F27 with these same Build-Requires. Same
package & same .spec build on F28 and F26.
While trying to build a new version for the last 24 hours I keep hitting
this:
...
DEBUG util.py:439: No matching package to in
I've built glusterfs previously on F27 with these same Build-Requires.
Same package & same .spec build on F28 and F26.
While trying to build a new version for the last 24 hours I keep hitting
this:
...
DEBUG util.py:439: No matching package to install: 'libibverbs-devel'
DEBUG util.py:439:
After a successful scratch build[1] on fc27/i686 of ceph-2.1.2-2 to test
a fix for a 32-bit issue I immediately fired off a full fedpkg build,
which failed thusly [2]:
...
DEBUG util.py:439: Error: nothing provides librpm.so.7()(64bit) needed
by deltarpm-3.6-22.fc27.x86_64
DEBUG util.py:439
More ceph-12.1.1
This has built successfully previously, including the recent mass
rebuild. Today the other associated builds have either finished or
passed this point, but on the ppc64le build today I got this:
...
Executing command: ['bash', '--login', '-c', '/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb
--target ppc
On 07/26/2017 06:25 PM, Al Stone wrote:
I've been experimenting in a slightly different environment (RHEL vs Fedora) but have been seeing oddly
similar results. The use or not of the "-pipe" in GCC didn't seem to help. If I forced the make
in the %build step to be just "make" (aka, "make -j1"
On 07/26/2017 08:22 AM, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
It looks like the whole parallelized make-process is hitting the 4
Gbytes limit per process / task on 32 Bit arches…
Have you tried this?
%build
export CFLAGS="echo %{optflags} | sed -e 's!-pipe!!g'"
export CXXFLAGS="$CFLAGS"
…
Sometimes
trying to build ceph-12 on f27 armv7hl.
It builds on everything x86_64, aarch64, s390x, and i686 (w/o java), but
on armv7hl the build fails, reporting out of memory.
...
[100%] Built target ceph-osd
cc1plus: out of memory allocating 11284160 bytes after a total of
58859520 bytes
make[2]: *** [src
The current version is quite old (10.2.7) and I believe that may have
been built before f27/rawhide was updated to gcc-7.
10.2.8, 10.2.9, and 11.x.y do not build due to internal compiler errors.
12.1.1 does build at this time [1].
I am the package owner.
Thanks,
[1] https://kojipkgs.fedora
You keep using that word — where for [sic] — I do not think it means
what you think it means. (As inconceivable as it may seem.)
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedor
TL;DNR
https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/PyG9sLWVgPpVKqAXPYp6K15M1UNdIGYhyRLivL9gydE=/
Reader's Digest version: Could not execute update: Could not generate
update request: Command 'bodhi --bodhi-url
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/ --new --release f26 --file
bodhi.template libntirpc-1.
I've done two builds for rawhide this morning.
On the first the armv7hl and ppc64le builds failed because the source
tar file could not be unpacked.
On the second the aarch64 build failed because the source tar file could
not be unpacked.
All the other arches built successfully.
--
Kaleb
Hi,
I have two packages up for review that could use some attention please:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1411875
and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1411947
Thanks,
--
Kaleb
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorapr
On 10/12/2016 08:58 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 10/12/2016 02:47 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
Hi,
I have a glusterfs-3.7.16 scratch build that's failing in koji f26 builds
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=16059122&name=build.log&offset=-4000
Yesterday (
On 10/12/2016 08:49 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
Hi,
I have a glusterfs-3.7.16 scratch build that's failing in koji f26 builds
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=16059122&name=build.log&offset=-4000
Can
Hi,
I have a glusterfs-3.7.16 scratch build that's failing in koji f26 builds
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=16059122&name=build.log&offset=-4000
Yesterday (11 October) I downloaded and installed the current rawhide
and built — successfully — from the same src.rpm that's f
Hi,
My search engine fu is failing atm.
I get ABRT reports from notificati...@fedoraproject.org for another
package (nfs-ganesha) that I'm the maintainer for.
I'd like to enable ABRT reports for glusterfs. But I can't seem to find
where to do that. Or maybe glusterfs never crashes!
Thanks,
-
On 02/24/2016 10:46 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 02/24/2016 07:17 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 1) usually after the branch I build new packages for rawhide (i.e.
>> $branch+1). But atm in the master branch, a `fedpkg build` gives me
>>
>&g
On 02/24/2016 09:45 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 02/24/2016 09:30 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>> 1) usually after the branch I build new packages for rawhide (i.e.
>>> $branch+1). But atm in the master branch, a `fedpkg build` gives me
>>>
>>> Could not execute build: Package glusterfs-3.7
Hi,
1) usually after the branch I build new packages for rawhide (i.e.
$branch+1). But atm in the master branch, a `fedpkg build` gives me
Could not execute build: Package glusterfs-3.7.8-1.fc24 has already
been built
Am I just too early? Or is there something missing that's preventing
build
On 09/16/2015 01:19 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "AT" == Alexander Todorov writes:
>
> AT> offending packages. You can find links to the script and execution
> AT> log here:
> AT> http://atodorov.org/blog/2015/09/16/4000-bugs-in-fedora-checksec-failures/
>
> BTW to see if any packages
I previously did a fedpkg build of nfs-ganesha-2.2.0-1 for f22 on
2015-04-21. [1]
I've added a %license, bumped the Release, and added a changelog.
fedpkg builds for rawhide are okay, as are the x86_64 builds for f22,
but i686 builds are failing,
Apparently with (from [2] root.log and simi
Posting to -devel because I can't post to vdsm-owner or virt-maintenance.
On 09/15/2014 10:09 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
gluster server. AFAIK it's a mistake for vdsm to have these as
dependencies.
Correcting myself. glusterfs-cli is okay, and should, AFAIK, be in
RHEL6, althou
Posting to -devel because I can't post to vdsm-owner or virt-maintenance.
On 09/15/2014 09:57 AM, Balamurugan Arumugam wrote:
[Adding Dan]
- Original Message -
From: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY"
To: "Lalatendu Mohanty" , build...@fedoraproject.org,
vdsm-ow...@fedora
On 05/05/2014 10:43 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
/usr/sbin is an invention of Linux.
Strange that you would claim this.
Here's a list of what's in /usr/sbin on NetBSD 1.0 (and there's no
overlap between what's in /usr/sbin and any other subdir.)
drwxr-xr-x root/wheel 0 1994-10-19
On 05/05/2014 10:28 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 2014-05-04 at 18:59 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
however, the semantics of /usr/sbin is to contain superuser
binaries which should not be overriden because a binary
with the same name exists in /usr/bin
My memory is that the "s" was more for
nfs-ganesha is a user-mode NFS v4 server. GlusterFS will use nfs-ganesha
for it's NFSv4 implementation.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026337
--
Kaleb
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Condu
On 10/18/2013 10:54 AM, Steve Gordon wrote:
Would it be against the guidelines to move to packaging it (the software
itself, not a repo file) in Fedora/EPEL as glusterfs-community?
I'm sure it is against the guidelines. Under any name it'd still be
shipping a set of RPMs that conflict with
On 10/18/2013 10:09 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:03:28 -0400
"Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" wrote:
Okay, I'm okay with that. How about instead of a /etc/yum.repos.d/
file if it's a /usr/share/doc/glusterfs.README containing
instructions for how to use the communit
On 10/18/2013 09:55 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 18/10/13 13:38, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
Before too much longer I will need to withdraw the glusterfs.
(glusterfs-3.2.7 fwiw, very out of date, this version is a Requires for
another package, HekaFS.)
Withdrawal becomes necessary when RHEL starts
Before too much longer I will need to withdraw the glusterfs.
(glusterfs-3.2.7 fwiw, very out of date, this version is a Requires for
another package, HekaFS.)
Withdrawal becomes necessary when RHEL starts to ship a subset of the
glusterfs packages.
But instead of withdrawing it, what if I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1003089
This is a/the stand-alone replacement RPM for the glusterfs-ufo
subpackage and the fix for the broken deps in glusterfs in f20 and rawhide.
I personally would like to get this wrapped up so that glusterfs doesn't
have broken deps in f20 fin
FYI,
I have just tried to do a `yum --releasever=20 distro-sync` (of an f19
box) and it aborts with the error that the systemd rpm isn't signed.
(Yes, I know I can use --nogpgcheck to get around the problem.)
--
Kaleb
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedorapr
Flock is over. How about some action on my ticket?
Or reject the ticket and tell me why!
Original Message
Subject: promoting to package co-maintainers?
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 08:31:13 -0400
From: Kaleb S. KEITHLEY
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Hi
On 7
On 08/12/2013 09:46 AM, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
Hi,
On Monday, August 12, 2013 08:31 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
On 7 Aug I opened a trac ticket to request that two colleagues be
promoted to the packager group so that I can grant them the commit ACL
for the glusterfs package. They both work
Hi
On 7 Aug I opened a trac ticket to request that two colleagues be
promoted to the packager group so that I can grant them the commit ACL
for the glusterfs package. They both work full time on GlusterFS.
I have not heard anything in response to the trac ticket and I'm curious
about what th
On 07/17/2013 07:47 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
But a user who tried that says the "local" nfs mount(s) in his
/etc/fstab still failed. I tried it as well with an f19 guest vm and got
the same results, namely that the nfs mount(s) failed to mount at boot.
Answering my own quest
On 07/16/2013 11:24 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 16.07.13 11:12, Kaleb KEITHLEY (kkeit...@redhat.com) wrote:
I need glusterd to start before any _netdev mounts (NFS or
glusterfs) take place.
reading the system.special man page it talks about ...pulling in
network-online.target and or
When adding a new sub-package, what's the convention or rule regarding
the associated -devel?
E.g. for glusterfs, with its associated glusterfs-devel; when adding
glusterfs-api containing a new library, should the .so link and header
be in glusterfs-api-devel, or can they be in the glusterfs
On 03/20/2013 07:23 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 09:27 +0100, Christof Damian wrote:
Fixing them now will benefit all future releases and all the people
living in non pure ASCII countries.
∄ pure ASCII countries.
It is incredibly naĩve to believe otherwise.
That should b
On 01/18/2013 09:10 AM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY mailto:kkeit...@redhat.com>> wrote:
Matthias Saou has released ownership so that I can take over.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/__Package_SCM_admin_requests
<http://fedoraproject
Matthias Saou has released ownership so that I can take over.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests indicates that
I can use the https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb to request ownership
changes, but I don't see any way to do this. Am I not looking in the
right place?
It
SELinux Alert Browser tells me to:
grep plugin-containe /var/log/audit/audit.log | audit2allow -M mypol
I have policycoreutils-python installed, but there's no
/usr/bin/audit2allow in it (as there was in F17).
--
Kaleb
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedo
On 05/31/2012 02:00 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
Kaleb Keithley wrote:
About a week ago I did a scratch build of one of my packages that
includes and it built successfully.
Today I did another scratch build and it broke with:
...
Making all in src
CC fuse-helpers.lo
CC fuse-resolve.l
On 05/30/2012 02:23 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
Yes, for the Fedora side of things I think gluster 3.2 is the best
strategy with a fedorapeople repo of 3.3 if it's considered worthwhile
for those that wish to play. For gluster 3.3 I suggest a feature page
for F-18 / rawhide. Is it feasible for the
On 05/30/2012 01:34 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
On 05/30/2012 01:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
And FWIW, doing nothing doesn't resolve the glusterfs in EPEL versus
glusterfs in the RHS Channel issue.
That's a different story entirely, and why would you want gluster in
EPEL
On 05/30/2012 01:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
And FWIW, doing nothing doesn't resolve the glusterfs in EPEL versus
glusterfs in the RHS Channel issue.
That's a different story entirely, and why would you want gluster in
EPEL when it's already in RHEL? What's the difference?
This has been
On 05/30/2012 01:08 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
On 05/30/2012 12:44 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
To be honest it's a pain in the neck to deal with such packages, and
unless there's an overwhelming need, I can't recommend it. Does any
user really need to parallel install b
On 05/30/2012 12:44 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
To be honest it's a pain in the neck to deal with such packages, and
unless there's an overwhelming need, I can't recommend it. Does any
user really need to parallel install both versions of glusterfs?
No, and in fact that would not work. (And
What hoops do I have to jump through, approvals, etc., do I need to
respin glusterfs rpms as glusterfs32 (for 3.2.6, and soon 3.2.7), and
the imminent glusterfs-3.3.0, which would be glusterfs33.
I.e. what is currently glusterfs-3.2.6-2.{fc16,fc17,el6} would become
glusterfs32-3.2.6-x.{fc16,
GlusterFS-3.3.0, which is to GA soon, has had (another) license change.
Much of it now under a dual license: GPLv2 or LGPLv3+, with a small
number of pieces still remain under GPLv3+.
What is the correct way to represent this in the spec file?
--
Kaleb
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedora
Red Hat (nee Gluster) is about to release glusterfs-3.2.6. It's a bugfix
release. No API/ABI changes (in theory, I haven't done an exhaustive check.)
In f16 we released 3.2.5. Am I allowed to update it in f16 to 3.2.6?
In f17alpha we also have 3.2.5. Am I allowed to update that at this
point
On 11/23/2011 10:08 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 11/23/2011 07:57 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>>
>> I can build glusterfs fine on real RHEL6.1 using rpmbuild, both x86_64
>> and i686 with `rpmbuild -bb ...` and `rpmbuild -bb --target=i686 ...`
>> respectively.
>&g
I can build glusterfs fine on real RHEL6.1 using rpmbuild, both x86_64
and i686 with `rpmbuild -bb ...` and `rpmbuild -bb --target=i686 ...`
respectively.
I can also build using mock, both x86_64 and i386, with `mock -r
epel-6-x86_64 --rebuild ...` and mock -r epel-6-i386 --rebuild ...`
respe
On 11/09/2011 11:15 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2011 04:07 PM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
>> IIRC in f16alpha and f16beta with openssh-server installed, sshd was
>> enabled and run.
>>
>> I installed f16ga in several vm guests yesterday
IIRC in f16alpha and f16beta with openssh-server installed, sshd was
enabled and run.
I installed f16ga in several vm guests yesterday and even though
openssh-server was installed, it was both not enabled and therefor not
run when the install finished and after a reboot.
It's possible that I
Tell us again where to find that "gnome shell for dummies" doc?
I tried to give it a fair trial, but I found it so
non-intuitive/counter-intuitive that I gave up after an hour and
switched to Forced Fallback Mode.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.o
HekaFS runs a daemon from init. It's a Bottle (python-based) http server.
In order to work on, e.g. RHEL6 in addition to Fedora, the old init
script has:
...
vercmd="from distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print
get_python_lib()"
py_dir=$(python -c "${vercmd}")
exe="${py_dir}/hekafsd.py"
I looked at other spec files with systemd .system files. The relevant
part of my spec file is:
...
%files server
...
%if 0%{?fedora} < 17
# Legacy init
%{_sysconfdir}/init.d/glusterd
%{_sysconfdir}/init.d/glusterfsd
%else
%{_unitdir}/glusterd.service
%{_unitdir}/glusterfsd.service
%endif
...
and
Up to now the glusterfs and hekafs versions and releases have been the
same for f16 and rawhide, i.e.: glusterfs-3.2.4-1.x86_64.fc16.rpm,
glusterfs-3.2.4-1.x86_64.fc17.rpm, hekafs-0.7-16.x86_64.fc16.rpm, and
hekafs-0.7-16.x86_64.fc17.rpm.
I did that because the source, thus far, is exactly the
On 10/04/2011 09:36 AM, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 04:01, Camilo Mesias wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>> The XP I occasionally can not avoid to use, in its system control menus
>>> has controls to switch between "normal", "big" "very big" f
I've got an F16alpha kvm guest installed from scratch a few days ago.
Today I tried a `yum update` (with --disablerepo=updates-testing) which
failed. By trial and error I determined that it is btrfs-progs, trying
to update from 0.19-13.fc15 to 0.19-16.fc15, that fails with:
warning: rpmts_Hd
On 08/23/2011 08:40 AM, Rawhide Report wrote:
> Compose started at Tue Aug 23 08:15:54 UTC 2011
>
> Broken deps for x86_64
> --
> ...
> cloudfs-0.7-6.fc17.x86_64 requires glusterfs = 0:3.2.1
> ...
How do I get cloudfs out of rawhide/f1
On 08/17/2011 05:51 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Due to the brown paperbag bug of rpm-4.9.1 causing unwanted trailing
> slashes on directories (with various nasty side-effects), the following
> packages in F16 require rebuilding. The sooner the better to stop
> spreading the damage but
glusterfs is a clustering file system consisting of a management
daemon and one or more instances of servers for each 'brick' in the
cluster. hekafs is an add-on for glusterfs that adds cloud attributes
such as multi-tenancy, encryption, and authentication.
I suppose the first question is do w
Already approved once. Just need a quick re-review of the rename and the
added Obsoletes:
Original Message
Subject: package re-review needed — CloudFS name change to HekaFS
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 10:40:20 -0400
From: Kaleb S. KEITHLEY
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re
Re-review needed after package name change and added Obsoletes:
Will swap a review.
bz: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675050
Spec URL: http://cloudfs.org/dist/0.7/hekafs.spec
SRPM URL: http://cloudfs.org/dist/0.7/hekafs-0.7-7.fc15.src.rpm
Thanks,
--
--
devel mailing list
devel@l
84 matches
Mail list logo
