2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>> components revision number .
>
> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me...
>
> I hope that RHEL 6 will be
On 7 March 2010 13:21, Ryan Rix wrote:
[..]
>
> take a look at http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-tour
>
Cool, did not knew about it, thanks for pointing out.
--
Rakesh Pandit
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rakesh
freedom, friends, features, first
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraprojec
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 3:13 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 03/07/2010 07:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>
>>> Then make it 3 months, 4 months... Leave it in testing forever if you
>>> get too many complaints. But make it available for those wh
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Debarshi Ray wrote:
Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gives them
plenty of time to adapt.
>>>
>>> If you have a large codebase two months is barely enou
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> On 7 March 2010 13:21, Ryan Rix wrote:
> [..]
>>
>> take a look at http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-tour
>>
>
> Cool, did not knew about it, thanks for pointing out.
By the way, thank you very much guys for taking the idea and making
something
I've been refraining from commenting on these update-threads but as it
seems folks have started actually counting the pro semi-rolling vs
conservative updates style replies... for the record:
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Kalev Lember wrote:
>
> I'd personally want to be able to _choose_ if and when I wa
> Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend
> the time to make a system update to F12.
All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository.
eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is used to built the entire
Fedora tree. Suddenly bumping a GCC version wi
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 6:27 PM, psmith wrote:
> hey guys i'm hoping to package gerix-wifi-cracker-ng(1) for fedora and i'm
> looking for someone who i can look to for help if i need it, is there a list
> of names i can look to? or what is the reccomended path?
> tia
> phil
Do you have Gerix RPM p
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 17:25:18 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >
> > +1, Michał! People who want the latest and greatest have already updated
> > to F12 months ago anyway, so there is not much use in pushing new
> > versions to F11.
+1
> Why? I don't
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >>
> >> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
> >> a couple months will warn the users what is coming up and gi
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
> 2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
>>> The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
>>> components revision number .
>>
>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>> in past 11 years, and this is something new to me
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
>> 2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
>>> 2010/3/6 Orcan Ogetbil :
The numbers 11, 12 should only indicate the core
components revision number .
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced to this philosophy. I have used a few Linux distros
>>> in past 11
From what I see, to educate our users to actually test and provide
feedback is more laborious than educating our package maintainers. For
maintainers, discussions such as those that have occurred serve to
clarify, but I think in the case of users, it wouldn't be very painful
to insert one more scre
2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
> Why are you trying to change the Face and Character of Fedora instead
> of using what fits your needs (your own mentioned RHEL/CentOS)?
RHEL5/CentOS5 is outdated for my needs.
I had two ways:
1 update many packages in old distro
2 use previous stable Fedora, that fits
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> > On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Again I say "updates-testing"! Leaving php-5.3 in testing on F-11 for
>>
2010/3/7 Michał Piotrowski :
> 2010/3/7 Thomas Janssen :
>> Why are you trying to change the Face and Character of Fedora instead
>> of using what fits your needs (your own mentioned RHEL/CentOS)?
>
> RHEL5/CentOS5 is outdated for my needs.
>
> I had two ways:
> 1 update many packages in old distro
2010/3/7 Henrique Junior :
> From what I see, to educate our users to actually test and provide
> feedback is more laborious than educating our package maintainers. For
> maintainers, discussions such as those that have occurred serve to
> clarify, but I think in the case of users, it wouldn't be v
Compose started at Sun Mar 7 08:15:15 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
ale-0.9.0.3-2.fc12.i686 requires libMagickCore.so.2
autotrace-0.31.1-23.fc12.i686 requires libMagickCore.so.2
blahtexml-0.6-5.fc12.i686 requires l
Updating : selinux-policy-targeted-3.6.32-92.fc12.noarch
64/215
libsepol.scope_copy_callback: audioentropy: Duplicate declaration in module:
type/attribute entropyd_var_ru\
n_t (No such file or directory).
libsemanage.semanage_link_sandbox: Link packages failed (No such file or
di
Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 12:18 +0200 schrieb Debarshi Ray:
> > Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend
> > the time to make a system update to F12.
>
> All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository.
> eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:32:42PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>
> I don't really care for desktop programs here. If you want to upgrade
> X.org or OpenOffice - I probably don't notice it. But if you plan to
> upgrade things like python, php - it can be a problem for me.
>
On the python side,
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> > On 03/07/2010 06:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >> >>
> >
On 06/03/10 20:14, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/07/2010 01:40 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
If that were the case, I'd have expected someone to bring it up in the
comments. No-one has.
I've never actually heard of anyone running FN-1 because they want a
'more stable' system; this thread was the
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
2010/3/7 Toshio Kuratomi :
> One alternative that I have heard of that you might want to look into is
> RHEL5 plus packages from iuscommunity.org. As I understand it, they are
> trying to produce packages that you can install in parallel to the existing
> versions of certain programs (like pyhton
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 12:03:57PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> My reason to comment on those threads on devel list is really just that I
> want to retain the freedom to decide when my updates are ready to be
> released. I'm responsible for giving them adequate testing. Users
> expect the packa
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 11:02:46AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 07:34:25AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> >> > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 20:47:40 -0500, Orcan wr
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 16:02 +, psmith wrote:
> what the fedora users i came across are after. tbh i think this whole
> identity crisis is blown of of all proportion, you'd think that
> something like this would have come with the fedora10 dbus probs or
> the 'stabilisation cannot be detected'
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 11:04 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> No, the voting numbers aren't huge, but it's still some kind of data. I
Just an update - we're now up over 100 votes, adventurous still solidly
in the lead, though it's now around 70/30 not 80/20.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community
Hello,
I have a small question regarding a "configuration file" for BackupPC.
BackupPC requires a file for apache users. This file is referenced in
/etc/httpd/conf.d/BackupPC.conf and points to
/usr/share/BackupPC/apache.users.
I think that is a mistake, and such a file should better be placed i
Compose started at Sun Mar 7 09:15:08 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
blahtexml-0.6-5.fc12.i686 requires libxerces-c.so.28
doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.i686 requires libextractor.so.1
easystroke-0.5.2-1.fc13.i686 requires lib
On 03/07/2010 09:32 PM, psmith wrote:
> then i seriously think we are following different lists :/
No but I have been on that list for five years and follow a lot more
mails than the average reader and there have been recurrent threads
about users recommending to stay on one version behind to get
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, psmith wrote:
> On 06/03/10 20:14, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
> On 03/07/2010 01:40 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>
> If that were the case, I'd have expected someone to bring it up in the
> comments. No-one has.
>
> I've never actually heard of anyone running FN-1 because they wan
On 03/07/2010 02:42 AM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> On 6 March 2010 17:00, Christoph Wickert
> wrote:
>> While we are at it, here is another great update:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-3326
>>
>> Â Â Â * New version introduced in F11.
>> Â Â Â * Doesn't fix any bu
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:06 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> It very well might. But this poll is poorly worded and only
That's the first time you've suggested it's poorly worded; in what way,
might I ask?
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedorapro
On 03/07/2010 12:43 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> No but I have been on that list for five years and follow a lot more
I've been with it since early redhat days ...
First, may I suggest we not confuse version N-1 and assumtion of
stability. That is way too simplistic. Sometimes the best path t
On Sunday 07 March 2010, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> I've been refraining from commenting on these update-threads but as it
> seems folks have started actually counting the pro semi-rolling vs
> conservative updates style replies... for the record:
>
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > I'd
On 03/08/2010 12:40 AM, Mail Lists wrote:
>
> First, may I suggest we not confuse version N-1 and assumtion of
> stability. That is way too simplistic. Sometimes the best path to
> stability is to update.
>
You are arguing against something that was never suggested and I am not
even saying I
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:06 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> > It very well might. But this poll is poorly worded and only
>
> That's the first time you've suggested it's poorly worded; in what way,
> might I ask?
>
Adventurous and Conservative are both
On Sunday 07 March 2010 11:55:11 am Johan Cwiklinski wrote:
> If I change the path in conf.d/BackupPC.conf ; users who have modified
> the .conf file will get a conf.rpmnew file ; that's fine.
> The ones who did not change the .conf file will have it replaced by RPM,
> breaking the apache authentic
On 03/08/2010 12:22 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:06 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
>
>> It very well might. But this poll is poorly worded and only
>>
> That's the first time you've suggested it's poorly worded; in what way,
> might I ask?
>
I thought you were do
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 11:02:46 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> You can ask for
> removal from the buildroot override as soon as you are done building
> your package. In fact, Releng explicitly asks us to tell them when we
> are done so they can remove the override.
That's inconvenient and limiting. You can on
On Sunday 07 March 2010, Johan Cwiklinski wrote:
Not that I know anything about BackupPC, but:
> If I change the path in conf.d/BackupPC.conf ; users who have modified
> the .conf file will get a conf.rpmnew file ; that's fine.
If apache.users moves from /usr/share/BackupPC to /etc/BackupPC, it'
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 00:59 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 03/08/2010 12:22 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:06 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> >
> >> It very well might. But this poll is poorly worded and only
> >>
> > That's the first time you've suggested it's
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 00:59 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 03/08/2010 12:22 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:06 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> It very well might. But this poll is poorly worded and only
> >
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 01:04:03PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 11:06 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> > > It very well might. But this poll is poorly worded and only
> >
> > That's the first time you've suggested it's poorly
On 03/07/2010 03:39 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Very well, I retract badly worded and insert "not useful". But hey, it's
> generated more email right?
>
> -Mike
"Newer and less stable" - using your words - is way more leading (and
totally false) than what Adam did ...
polls can certai
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Mail Lists wrote:
> On 03/07/2010 03:39 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> > Very well, I retract badly worded and insert "not useful". But hey, it's
> > generated more email right?
> >
> > -Mike
>
> "Newer and less stable" - using your words - is way more leading (and
> totall
On 03/07/2010 04:41 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> This is my last email on this topic. Please hold me to that.
>
> -Mike
Sorry - missed that - what did you say ? :-)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Dear readers.
The last two weeks have had a few big, very hot discussed threads. I
personally was a few times way too much involved with my feelings and
i suspect a few others here as well.
As the subject says it clearly, i love Fedora. I love it as it is. It
is leading edge, i can have latest ve
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 17:55 +0100, Johan Cwiklinski wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a small question regarding a "configuration file" for BackupPC.
>
> BackupPC requires a file for apache users. This file is referenced in
> /etc/httpd/conf.d/BackupPC.conf and points to
> /usr/share/BackupPC/apache.use
51 matches
Mail list logo
