Re: [Bug 2203836] New: F39FailsToInstall: slim

On Tuesday, May 16, 2023 at 03:30:03 AM CDT, Mamoru TASAKA wrote: Globe Trotter via devel wrote on 2023/05/15 23:36: >> During unretirement of the package, I changed the dependency of slim from >> desktop-backgrounds to f??-backgrounds-base in order to have a uniform &

Re: Fw: [Bug 2203836] New: F39FailsToInstall: slim

Globe Trotter via devel wrote on 2023/05/15 23:36: During unretirement of the package, I changed the dependency of slim from desktop-backgrounds to f??-backgrounds-base in order to have a uniform F-specific background for the slim login manager. However, the rawhide installation can not find

Fw: [Bug 2203836] New: F39FailsToInstall: slim

During unretirement of the package, I changed the dependency of slim from desktop-backgrounds to f??-backgrounds-base in order to have a uniform F-specific background for the slim login manager. However, the rawhide installation can not find it. Any suggestions on what to do? Thanks

Review Request: unretire slim

Hi, I have filed a BZ request for unretiring slim. It is at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2173236 Can someone please review it? Best! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

On 4/1/20 4:53 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:12 PM Samuel Sieb > wrote: On 3/31/20 7:16 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > It doesn't look like the spec can even be parsed... Something must be > off. There are conditionals in the spec

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:12 PM Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 3/31/20 7:16 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > > It doesn't look like the spec can even be parsed... Something must be > > off. There are conditionals in the spec for Fedora 15 so that tells me > > the spec file is in major need of an overhaul.

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

On 3/31/20 7:16 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:05 PM Globe Trotter via devel mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>> wrote: I am the maintainer of slim. As per BZ and here: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41322154 slim was unable to

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

For some reason the cmake setup is not linking with libXft causing undefined references during linking. I did not explore this but just forced it with LDFLAGS. I got a good build with both rawhide and Fedora 31. I committed my updates to master so you can take it from there (do a fedpkg pull). Th

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

Apparently %systemd_postun requires an argument now but did not before. I'm dong a test build now and will commit my updates if successful but will not perform a formal build. Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To uns

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

The root of the problem seems to be this but I can't find the bad macro or the line number: slim.spec: E: specfile-error error: This macro requires some arguments Thanks, Richard ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe sen

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

Globe Trotter via devel wrote: Hi, I am the maintainer of slim. As per BZ and here: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41322154 slim was unable to build BuildError: error building package (arch armv7hl), mock exited with status 1; see root.log for more information However, I ca

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:05 PM Globe Trotter via devel < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I am the maintainer of slim. As per BZ and here: > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41322154 > > slim was unable to build > > BuildEr

Re: silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

On 3/31/20 7:04 PM, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: I am the maintainer of slim. As per BZ and here: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41322154 slim was unable to build BuildError: error building package (arch armv7hl), mock exited with status 1; see root.log for more

silly question: finding root.log/build.log of FTBS F32 package (slim)

Hi, I am the maintainer of slim. As per BZ and here: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41322154 slim was unable to build BuildError: error building package (arch armv7hl), mock exited with status 1; see root.log for more information However, I can not figure out where to see

Re: slim spec requires arguments

package. Thanks! On Monday, December 30, 2019, 11:08:55 AM CST, Tom Hughes wrote: On 30/12/2019 16:42, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: > I use slim and have realized that it is retired/no longer supoorted from > F31. > > So, I got the src.rpm from teh F30 stable and was tryin

Re: slim spec requires arguments

On 30/12/2019 16:42, Globe Trotter via devel wrote: I use slim and have realized that it is retired/no longer supoorted from F31. So, I got the src.rpm from teh F30 stable and was trying to rebuild it at least to see what the issues were. However, the rpmbuild $ rpmbuild -bb slim.spec

slim spec requires arguments

Hi, I use slim and have realized that it is retired/no longer supoorted from F31. So, I got the src.rpm from teh F30 stable and was trying to rebuild it at least to see what the issues were. However, the rpmbuild $ rpmbuild -bb slim.spec error: This macro requires some arguments I have

Re: slim

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 7:53 PM, solarflow99 wrote: > It looks as if SLIM has been abandoned, with no package in F-16 it makes me > wonder what the chance it could be included again slim has only been orphaned, and is still present in F16: $ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 16

slim

It looks as if SLIM has been abandoned, with no package in F-16 it makes me wonder what the chance it could be included again -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Orphaned slim

Hello all. I've orphaned slim. I don't use them anymore. -- Regards, Pavel Zhukov mailto:landg...@fedoraproject.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

SLIM + patch = CK works

So I applied this patch cut-- Index: slim-1.3.2/app.cpp --- slim-1.3.2-orig/app.cpp +++ slim-1.3.2/app.cpp @@ -236,7 +236,6 @@ pam.start("slim"); pam.set_item(PAM::Authenticator::TTY, D

Orphaning Slim, To Jan Kaluža for Fedora 16 Rawhide

I know that you was going to orphan Slim, but I would like to ask you for some additional help with it. I found that slim currently works with pam but it looks like not properly. In the March post in XFCE lists there is the message

Re: Orphaning Slim

On 06/10/2011 07:04 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 09.06.2011, 13:40 +0400 schrieb Lucas: >> What kind of relation between Xfce maintainers and SLIM. > > The Fedora Xfce SIG considered SLIM but we didn't use it because (at > least at that time) it

Re: Orphaning Slim

Am Donnerstag, den 09.06.2011, 13:40 +0400 schrieb Lucas: > What kind of relation between Xfce maintainers and SLIM. The Fedora Xfce SIG considered SLIM but we didn't use it because (at least at that time) it had some problems with ConsoleKit. We are still trying to get rid of GDM bu

Re: Orphaning Slim

>> > >> >Regards, >> >Jan Kaluza >> >> You will be surprised, but I use it with Fedora 14, 15, and now with >> Rawhide. It works and quite >> good actually. >> >> So, thanks for making rpm. > > > > Check with the Xfce main

Re: Orphaning Slim

ll be surprised, but I use it with Fedora 14, 15, and now with Rawhide. > It works and quite > good actually. > > So, thanks for making rpm. > > Check with the Xfce maintainers, > they believe it's dead upstream. What kind of relation between Xfce maintainers and SLIM.

Re: Orphaning Slim

On 09/06/11 10:19, Lucas wrote: > >Hi, > > > >I'm not using this package and I have not checked its state before > >taking the ownership (which was mistake). It doesn't work for users who > >upgraded from F14 to F15 and I wasn't able to find out why exactly it > >fails. There are also s

Re: Orphaning Slim

>Hi, > >I'm not using this package and I have not checked its state before >taking the ownership (which was mistake). It doesn't work for users who >upgraded from F14 to F15 and I wasn't able to find out why exactly it >fails. There are also some bugs untouched for long time. > >To sum it u

Orphaning Slim

Hi, I'm not using this package and I have not checked its state before taking the ownership (which was mistake). It doesn't work for users who upgraded from F14 to F15 and I wasn't able to find out why exactly it fails. There are also some bugs untouched for long time. To sum it up, it is prob

Re: Orphaning slim

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 07:09:30PM +0200, Lorenzo Villani wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 08/26/2010 03:29 PM, Petr Sabata wrote: > > > >> Looks like something I've been looking for ;) > >> Taken. (F14 & rawhide) > > I can release ownership on F-12 and F-13 too,

Re: Orphaning slim

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/26/2010 03:29 PM, Petr Sabata wrote: > >> Looks like something I've been looking for ;) >> Taken. (F14 & rawhide) I can release ownership on F-12 and F-13 too, if you want. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Com

Re: Orphaning slim

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:19:21PM +0800, Chen Lei wrote: > It seems upstream released a new version one months ago. > > See > http://developer.berlios.de/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2663 > It's already in Fedora (F12+, testing). > > Chen Lei > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedorap

Re: Orphaning slim

It seems upstream released a new version one months ago. See http://developer.berlios.de/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2663 Chen Lei -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Orphaning slim

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 02:21:31PM +0200, Lorenzo Villani wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > I'm orphaning the SLIM display manager because: > - - Upstream is (mostly) dead¹; > - - I find this software to be broken beyond relief; > - - Up unt

Orphaning slim

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I'm orphaning the SLIM display manager because: - - Upstream is (mostly) dead¹; - - I find this software to be broken beyond relief; - - Up until 1.3.2 I had to maintain a huge stack of more than ten patches; - - I'm not using