Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Kevin Kofler
Wes Shull wrote: > yum --enablerepo=rawhide update firefox NEVER do that!!! You probably have way more Rawhide packages than just Firefox now. At least xulrunner and all the stuff using its "unstable API", probably also sqlite and a lot more stuff. Each time your package depends on a newer libr

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Kevin Kofler
Mail Lists wrote: > I think we need to use sun java as green tea is not yet on new api > anyway is it? The IcedTea plugin is in Fedora (as java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin). Fedora does not and will not ship proprietary software such as the Sun Java plugin (from the non-open JDK or JRE). A new versi

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Kevin Kofler
Frank Murphy wrote: > You can update to 3.6 > from Rawhide, > then disable rawhide again. > > Which is what I have done, > no problems yet. NEVER do that!!! You probably have way more Rawhide packages than just Firefox now. At least xulrunner and all the stuff using its "unstable API", probably

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Kevin Kofler
Christopher Brown wrote: > This is because 3.5.7 doesn't affect us. Stability issue is for > Windows people and update notification is patched out for obvious > reasons. > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%3A.7-fixed What about the NTLM issue? That looks lik

Re: Fast-track Nonresponsive maintainer: Frank Büttner (frankb)

2010-01-31 Thread Kevin Kofler
Frank Büttner wrote: > I have done some like at my first package, and then to my was spoken, > that I use local mock and not the infrastructure. But after some updates > of mock, mock it now dead. The no response from them maintainer. Don't worry, even I get away with my intensive use of Koji. ;-)

Re: How to take ownership of a package in rawhide branch? - Was: [Taking ownership of the orphaned packages: bytelist, jcodings, jvyamlb]

2010-01-31 Thread Kevin Kofler
Victor Vasilyev wrote: > I'm trying to complete the step 3 of the "Claiming Ownership of an > Orphaned Package Procedure" [1] that says: > "3. Press the "Take Ownership" button for each active branch that you > want to maintain." > > However, I don't see such buttons associated with the rawhide fo

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Wes Shull
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Wes Shull wrote: > > yum --enablerepo=rawhide update firefox > > NEVER do that!!! > If you'd taken half a minute to check, you would have seen that it sucks in a grand total of sqlite and xulrunner. Yeehaw. If anything, you should be chasti

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Christopher Brown
On 31 January 2010 08:14, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Christopher Brown wrote: >> This is because 3.5.7 doesn't affect us. Stability issue is for >> Windows people and update notification is patched out for obvious >> reasons. >> >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%

Re: abrtd not running: applet complains

2010-01-31 Thread nodata
On 28/01/10 12:18, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: > On 01/27/2010 10:57 PM, nodata wrote: >> On 27/01/10 09:29, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: >>> On 01/26/2010 10:02 PM, nodata wrote: Hi, When I disable abrtd, I get a tray applet complaining about this. Is there any precedent for this? I ha

Re: abrtd not running: applet complains

2010-01-31 Thread Jiri Moskovcak
On 01/31/2010 12:46 PM, nodata wrote: On 28/01/10 12:18, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: On 01/27/2010 10:57 PM, nodata wrote: On 27/01/10 09:29, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: On 01/26/2010 10:02 PM, nodata wrote: Hi, When I disable abrtd, I get a tray applet complaining about this. Is there any precedent fo

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread M A Young
On Sun, 31 Jan 2010, Wes Shull wrote: On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Wes Shull wrote: > yum --enablerepo=rawhide update firefox NEVER do that!!! If you'd taken half a minute to check, you would have seen that it sucks in a grand total of sqlite and xulrunner

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Frank Murphy
On 31/01/10 12:59, M A Young wrote: --snipped-- >> >> >> If you'd taken half a minute to check, you would have seen that it >> sucks in >> a grand total of sqlite and xulrunner. Yeehaw. > > At the moment it does for you, though more updates may be required > depending on what you have installed,

Re: Draft privilege escalation policy for comments

2010-01-31 Thread Miloslav Trmač
Kevin Kofler píše v Ne 31. 01. 2010 v 08:55 +0100: > Adam Williamson wrote: > > I think it's sensible, yeah. It's not really much bureaucracy; I don't > > think it would ever be a good idea to introduce a new privilege > > escalation mechanism without FESco knowing about it... > > Right now we're

rawhide report: 20100131 changes

2010-01-31 Thread Rawhide Report
Compose started at Sun Jan 31 08:15:06 UTC 2010 Broken deps for i386 -- PySolFC-cardsets-1.1-5.2.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1 PySolFC-music-4.40-5.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1 doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.i686 requires li

Orphaning a few packages

2010-01-31 Thread Debarshi Ray
Is any one interested in the following packages: glade3 -- User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME ldtp -- Desktop testing framework pida -- A Python IDE written in Python and GTK Cheers, Debarshi -- One reason that life is complex is that it has a real part and an imaginary part. -- Andr

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Garrett Holmstrom
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Frank Murphy wrote: > True, but if necessary. > You can always yum downgrade x > Especially if you just need to check out package x. In such scenarios you might find the ``yum history'' command useful since it can easily undo upgrades that include dependencies. --

Re: Fedora 13 Milestone Reached: Feature and Spin Submission Deadlines

2010-01-31 Thread Gianluca Sforna
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:00 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > A friendly reminder that yesterday, January 26, 2010, we reached the > Feature and Spin submission deadline. Where is the list of accepted spins? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/13/Spins says it's a placeholder, still -- Gianluca

Re: Fedora 13 Milestone Reached: Feature and Spin Submission Deadlines

2010-01-31 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 22:32:57 +0100, Gianluca Sforna wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:00 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > > A friendly reminder that yesterday, January 26, 2010, we reached the > > Feature and Spin submission deadline. > > Where is the list of accepted spins? > https://fedorapro

Re: Fedora 13 Milestone Reached: Feature and Spin Submission Deadlines

2010-01-31 Thread Gianluca Sforna
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Spins_Fedora_13 > > Some of those are kickstart only and won't have prebuilt isos for download. > Great thanks. So I've updated the Spins page with the info gathered from your link. I think someo

Re: How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

2010-01-31 Thread Mike Chambers
On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 22:37 +, Mat Booth wrote: > Maybe but I agree with Braden: I don't think it's worth it. Seems like > a lot of extra work for not a lot of gain. Running a fully updated system, I upgraded to firefox-3.6 in rawhide today, and it only updated 3 (firefox, xulrunner, and some

Re: burning an iso with gnome defaults -> confusing

2010-01-31 Thread Jud Craft
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote: > the ui is fine the text is misleading. You are correct. And they like it like that way. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Orphaning a few packages

2010-01-31 Thread Adam Miller
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Debarshi Ray wrote: > Is any one interested in the following packages: > > glade3 -- User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME > ldtp -- Desktop testing framework > pida -- A Python IDE written in Python and GTK > > Cheers, > Debarshi > -- > One reason that life

Re: Orphaning a few packages

2010-01-31 Thread Vivek Shah
Hi Adam, I would be interested in comaintaining pida. Thanks and Regards, Vivek -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

even with gcc -g -O0

2010-01-31 Thread Chuck Anderson
I'm trying to debug an issue for the upstream author of ocp and am running into an issue where gdb is showing "" for variables even though I've compiled the program with gcc -g -O0. Are there any gcc/gdb gurus who can help? Compiler excerpts: gcc -g -O0 -fPIC -Wall -I.././ -I.././gnulib kic