07.06.2012 12:52, Tadej Janež написал:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 21:27 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
With regard to the packages that depend on ImageMagick that you already
updated: will you revert those commits in git
I'm unsure I known how doing that correctly.
Does it enough do just:
git revert 56
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 21:27 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> >
> > With regard to the packages that depend on ImageMagick that you already
> > updated: will you revert those commits in git
> I'm unsure I known how doing that correctly.
> Does it enough do just:
> git revert 56e05f..HEAD
>
> or I mu
06.06.2012 03:09, Tadej Janež написал:
On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 13:55 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
I'll plan unpush that update and work on patching ImageMagick to handle
these issues locally. But I'm not security expert and can't guarantee
something except mentioned patch apply (contrary leave it
On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 13:55 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> I'll plan unpush that update and work on patching ImageMagick to handle
> these issues locally. But I'm not security expert and can't guarantee
> something except mentioned patch apply (contrary leave it on upstream
> authors, as I was w
05.06.2012 16:09, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:05:13 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
04.06.2012 22:26, Michael Schwendt написал:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
provenpackager and such updates
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:05:13 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> 04.06.2012 22:26, Michael Schwendt написал:
> > On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> >
> >> Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
> >> provenpackager and such updates and have not found how deal
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 13:55:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> Only one other think before I do that. Is it will be needed then
> introduce epoch in Fedora 16 IM build to push less version in stable
> branch?
Could you explain _why_ you think you need to increase the Epoch?
Last package in F-16 u
04.06.2012 22:26, Michael Schwendt написал:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
provenpackager and such updates and have not found how deal with such
versions.
It's not provenpackager specific stuff, but found in
04.06.2012 21:11, Pete Walter написал:
Pavel Alexeev hubbitus.com.ru> writes:
May be in next time? What disadvantages you are seen proceed with that
update? Do you try test it?
No, I did not test this. And here's a few reasons why I think this
shouldn't be pushed:
- You are forcing others
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:36:29 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> Additionally have worth I try read carefully all docs about
> provenpackager and such updates and have not found how deal with such
> versions.
It's not provenpackager specific stuff, but found in the basic packaging
guidelines:
https:
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 20:57:01 +0200, Tadej Janež wrote:
> For techne (one of the dependent packages which I maintain) you bumped
> the release from 0.2.3-2 to 0.2.3-3, which breaks upgrades to F-17 and
> rawhide.
> Is there a way to revert the change and make a 0.2.3-2.fc16.1 build?
Revert the cha
Pete Walter wrote:
> Pavel Alexeev hubbitus.com.ru> writes:
>> May be in next time? What disadvantages you are seen proceed with that
>> update? Do you try test it?
>
> No, I did not test this. And here's a few reasons why I think this
> shouldn't be pushed:
>
> - You are forcing others to do
Pavel Alexeev hubbitus.com.ru> writes:
> May be in next time? What disadvantages you are seen proceed with that
> update? Do you try test it?
No, I did not test this. And here's a few reasons why I think this
shouldn't be pushed:
- You are forcing others to do work they otherwise wouldn't nee
04.06.2012 20:10, Pete Walter wrote:
Pavel Alexeev hubbitus.com.ru> writes:
If you or other will insist I may unpush that update and try patch
IM for all issues off course... But I really do not want doing it
now.
In my opinion, the right way to handle this is to backport the security fixes.
Pavel Alexeev hubbitus.com.ru> writes:
> If you or other will insist I may unpush that update and try patch
> IM for all issues off course... But I really do not want doing it
> now.
In my opinion, the right way to handle this is to backport the security fixes.
You even have patches linked to eac
03.06.2012 22:57, Tadej Janež wrote:
Pavel,
On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
It is main reason why I request provenpackager rights. In fedora 17 it
was so painful because I several times asks build dependencies and
then ask help to push updates too.
I think in that turn
Tadej Janež wrote:
> Pavel,
>
> On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
>
>> It is main reason why I request provenpackager rights. In fedora 17 it
>> was so painful because I several times asks build dependencies and
>> then ask help to push updates too.
>> I think in that turn n
28.05.2012 16:45, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2012 23:28:03 +0400
Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Hi.
Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
had been done it early off course). It seams address
Pavel,
On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:21 +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> It is main reason why I request provenpackager rights. In fedora 17 it
> was so painful because I several times asks build dependencies and
> then ask help to push updates too.
> I think in that turn now I can do all that myself, so
28.05.2012 16:23, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 05/27/2012 10:28 PM, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
Hi.
Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
had been done it early off course). It seams addressed in rawhide
On Sun, 27 May 2012 23:28:03 +0400
Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
> provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
> had been done it early off course). It seams addressed in rawhide.
On 05/27/2012 10:28 PM, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Due to the security issues ([1] for example) and act as newcomer
> provenpackager I'll plan update ImageMagick in Fedora 16 too (I should
> had been done it early off course). It seams addressed in rawhide.
Hi Pavel,
Hello.
I've plan update ImageMagick in rawhide.
No major changes or ABI breakage awaited.
Rebuild needed only for packages explicitly depends on IM version (at
least ruby-RMagick).
Scratch build - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3977251
--
devel mailing list
On 07/06/2011 01:01 AM, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
> On 07/04/2011 07:52 PM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:33 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 18:10 +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
>>> wrote:
Now ImageMagick built against new
On 07/04/2011 07:52 PM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:33 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 18:10 +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
>> wrote:
>>> Now ImageMagick built against new gcc.
>> Great, thanks!
> Now that I've rebuilt rss-glx against the new
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:33 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 18:10 +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
> wrote:
> > Now ImageMagick built against new gcc.
>
> Great, thanks!
Now that I've rebuilt rss-glx against the new ImageMagick version I see
that it has the same lib
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 18:10 +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
wrote:
> Now ImageMagick built against new gcc.
Great, thanks!
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase
Red Hat a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
n...@
Yes, I seen mistake.
Now ImageMagick built against new gcc.
On 07/04/2011 03:45 PM, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 03:25:41PM +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
> wrote:
>> Sorry, but it is postponed [1] probably due to the bug in gcc [2]
>>
>> [1] https://bugzilla.re
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 03:25:41PM +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
wrote:
> Sorry, but it is postponed [1] probably due to the bug in gcc [2]
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715834
> [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715336
The latter is assigned to gc
tus)
> wrote:
>> Today or in next few days I'll plan update ImageMagick in rawhide to
>> version 6.7.0-8.
> And we're still waiting... ;-)
>
> Nils
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 10:39 +0400, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)
wrote:
> Today or in next few days I'll plan update ImageMagick in rawhide to
> version 6.7.0-8.
And we're still waiting... ;-)
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen "Those who would give up Essential Liberty
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:39:07 +0400, PA(PH wrote:
> Today or in next few days I'll plan update ImageMagick in rawhide to
> version 6.7.0-8.
>
> Dependency should be rebuilt:
> $ repoquery --repoid=rawhide --whatrequires --alldeps ImageMagick\*
--alldeps is the default
&g
Today or in next few days I'll plan update ImageMagick in rawhide to
version 6.7.0-8.
Dependency should be rebuilt:
$ repoquery --repoid=rawhide --whatrequires --alldeps ImageMagick\*
a2ps-0:4.14-12.fc15.i686
ale-0:0.9.0.3-5.fc15.i686
autotrace-0:0.31.1-26.fc15.1.i686
autotrace-devel-0:0.31
33 matches
Mail list logo
