Hi,
I use it on a couple of servers, and I wouldn't mind co-maintaining it with
you.
Regards,
Maxim Burgerhout (wz...@fedoraproject.org)
On 2010-07-02 7:55 PM, "Stewart Adam" wrote:
Hi,
I packaged monit a while ago but never really got around to using it as I
found Nagios to be more suitab
If there are any discrepancy with the proventesters critpath policy then
please feel free to file a ticket with FESCo and allow our elected officials
decide the fate of this.
-AdamM (From Android)
On Jul 2, 2010 8:16 PM, "Kevin Kofler" wrote:
Will Woods wrote:
> The main reasons we want to perf
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:40:57 +0200, Kevin wrote:
> Thomas Janssen wrote:
> > You have to accept the maintainers decision to not update it yet? What
> > do you think will happen if everyone builds the wishes he has and
> > breaks a lot of stuff with it? Anarchy? We have processes for that in
> > Fe
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 06:31:35AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 07/02/2010 08:12 PM, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > Btw. on a related issue:How do provenpackagers properly test for broken
> > deps manually?
> Like ordinary packagers should do ;)
>
> The only difference between provenpackagers and "o
2010/7/3 Michael Schwendt :
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:40:57 +0200, Kevin wrote:
>
>>
>> It is part of the Fedora Objectives:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives
>> to "be on the leading edge of free and open source technology". Given that,
>> it is completely unacceptable to not upgrade sof
Luya Tshimbalanga wrote, at 07/03/2010 07:10 PM +9:00:
> Hello,
>
> I attempted to build a new version of Gimp 2.7.1 using Koji scratch method but
> ended up with that result[1]. Here is attached spec file borrowed from Nils
> as I
> wanted to experiment that version along with Design. Can anyone
Author: iarnell
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Statistics-Descriptive/EL-6
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv7483
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Statistics-Descriptive.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Jul 03 2010 Iain Arnell 3.0200-1
- update to latest upstream versi
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 20:12:26 +0200, Till wrote:
> Btw. on a related issue:How do provenpackagers properly test for broken
> deps manually?
Every packager can [configure and] run repoclosure from yum-utils.
Enable updates-testing, and optionally add a local repo for your own
candidate builds. It s
Author: iarnell
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Statistics-Descriptive/F-13
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv7976
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Statistics-Descriptive.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Jul 03 2010 Iain Arnell 3.0200-1
- update to latest upstream versi
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 07:43:26PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 07/02/2010 07:37 PM, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > Ok, this policy was for the other case, a case when the maintainer
> > does not respond. I am not saying that it happens a lot, but it
> > happened in the past, and the syslog-ng case
On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 18:08:03 +0800, Chen wrote:
> I'm fully agree with you, but there are some maintainers who don't
> respond on bugzilla at all or for a very long time. They may be still
> active on koji, but they don't respond even when you attach a
> patch/spec to solve known issues or request
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:27:50PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 20:12:26 +0200, Till wrote:
>
> > Btw. on a related issue:How do provenpackagers properly test for broken
> > deps manually?
>
> Every packager can [configure and] run repoclosure from yum-utils.
> Enable upda
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:50:15 +0200, Till wrote:
> This is not true, because there can be runtime dependencies on another
> update in -testing that is not build dependency, e.g. if an python app
> requires a newer version of a python module.
1) To make such run-time deps BuildRequires would be hel
> error: File not found:
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/gimp-2.7.1-1.fc13.x86_64/usr/li
b64/libgimp-2.0.so.0.600.1
is version hard-coded in spec %files
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 01:03:41PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:50:15 +0200, Till wrote:
>
> > This is not true, because there can be runtime dependencies on another
> > update in -testing that is not build dependency, e.g. if an python app
> > requires a newer version o
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 01:03:41PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:50:15 +0200, Till wrote:
> > Also Bodhi does not allow to [...]
>
> Bodhi ought to meet the package maintainers' requirements, not vice versa.
> If you determine a problem with the typical work-flow, how ab
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Class-MOP:
96b44730ae040c30d5e8e85b48e8cbe7 Class-MOP-1.03.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
Author: iarnell
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Class-MOP/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv14734
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Class-MOP.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Jul 03 2010 Iain Arnell 1.03-1
- update to latest upstream
- re-enable tests
- BR Test::Le
perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
On i386:
perl-Data-Alias-1.07-6.fc13.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extra
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
On i386:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-4.fc13.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.1)
Please resolve this as soon as
perl-DBI-Dumper has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-DBI-Dumper-2.01-8.fc12.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
On i386:
perl-DBI-Dumper-2.01-8.fc12.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extra
On 07/03/2010 04:05 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> Most of the packages listed here are not up to date:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&query_format=advanced&bug_status=ASSIGNED&email1=upstream-release-monitoring%40fedoraproject.org&product=Fedora
Yeah but this
Compose started at Sat Jul 3 08:15:05 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
BackupPC-3.1.0-14.fc14.noarch requires perl-suidperl
1:anjuta-2.30.0.0-2.fc14.i686 requires libgladeui-1.so.9
1:anjuta-2.30.0.0-2.fc14.i686 requir
Matthias Clasen wrote:
> uzbl-core
Rebuilt.
--Ben
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi,
I'm trying to build under mock currently but am getting the following
throwback (both as su and as me)
ERROR: Exception(rpmbuild/SRPMS/VirtualBox-OSE-3.2.6-1.src.rpm)
Config(fedora-rawhide-x86_64) 0 minutes 36 seconds
INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result
ER
Thomas Janssen wrote:
> I'm sorry, i can't agree with you here. Being more aggressive, putting
> pressure on whatever just to have the latest versions of all the
> software around in rawhide, sounds to me like we would go and break
> rawhide a lot.
> I thought rawhide should be more useful and less
On 07/03/2010 10:16 AM, Iain Arnell wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Remi Collet wrote:
>> Le 03/07/2010 10:02, Iain Arnell a écrit :
>>
How this should be handled nicely ?
>>>
>>> Exactly as it is at the minute - continue allow perl modules to share
>>> directory ownership.
>>>
>>>
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Ridiculous. :( The way you've phrased it doesn't meet the "be excellent"
> guidelines IMO. There is nothing "completely unacceptable" or "against
> Fedora's objectives" with skipping certain upstream releases. And I hope
> that nobody will become "more aggressive" or try t
Adam Miller wrote:
> If there are any discrepancy with the proventesters critpath policy then
> please feel free to file a ticket with FESCo and allow our elected
> officials decide the fate of this.
There isn't any such discrepancy, it's the policy which is broken and FESCo
which refuses to unde
Great! Just apply for access in PackageDB and I'll grant you access.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/monit
Cheers,
Stewart
On 2010/07/03 3:32 AM, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use it on a couple of servers, and I wouldn't mind co-maintaining it with
> you.
>
> Regards,
>
>
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 15:33 +0200, Kevin wrote:
> Rawhide should always have the latest upstream release unless there's a
> strong reason why a particular release needs to be skipped (i.e. it's
> broken, it contains illegal stuff or something like that).
How would you find out whether that's the
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Thomas Janssen wrote:
>> I'm sorry, i can't agree with you here. Being more aggressive, putting
>> pressure on whatever just to have the latest versions of all the
>> software around in rawhide, sounds to me like we would go and break
>> rawhid
On Saturday, July 03, 2010 08:14:57 am Paul wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to build under mock currently but am getting the following
> throwback (both as su and as me)
>
> ERROR: Exception(rpmbuild/SRPMS/VirtualBox-OSE-3.2.6-1.src.rpm)
> Config(fedora-rawhide-x86_64) 0 minutes 36 seconds
> INFO: Re
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 18:24 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 07/02/2010 06:20 PM, Will Woods wrote:
>
>
> > The main reasons we want to perform testing are things like: to avoid
> > pushing updates with broken dependencies, or updates that cause serious
> > regressions requiring manual intervent
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 10:33:04PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:48:43PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> > I have updated the page.
> >
> > Does it look clear now? Re-wording or tweaks very welcome.
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_acceptance_criteria
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> How would you find out whether that's the case? - You would need to talk
> to the package maintainer(s). Having arbitrary provenpackagers perform
> random upgrades won't do it.
We need to get packagers to document the reason why they're not upgrading
some package in a st
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:50:53PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 15:37 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> > A suggestion: when critical path updates hit updates-testing, a
> > notification should go to both devel@lists.fedoraproject.org and
> > q...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Colin Walters wrote, at 07/04/2010 03:23 AM +9:00:
> Author: walters
>
> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/shared-mime-info/devel
> In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv21405
>
> Modified Files:
> shared-mime-info.spec
> Log Message:
> * Sat Jul 3 2010 Colin Walters - 0.71-3
> - Re
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 10:05:07 -0700, Adam wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 18:24 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On 07/02/2010 06:20 PM, Will Woods wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The main reasons we want to perform testing are things like: to avoid
> > > pushing updates with broken dependencies, or updates
I was looking at qgis for doing roleplaying maps (I am not sure if that
will work out) and noticed it was way behind upstream and then when filing
a bug, noticed that it was orphaned.
I am going to try to get it updated to 1.4 and see how things go. If it
works out for roleplaying, I'll be a long t
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 20:40 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > That only handles a subset of the 'broken dependencies' problem. We've
> > already had an example this year of a dependency issue the proposed
> > autoqa depcheck test wouldn't catch, and Michael's script didn't - the
> > nss-softokn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/07/10 04:13 AM, Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
>> error: File not found:
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/gimp-2.7.1-1.fc13.x86_64/usr/li
> b64/libgimp-2.0.so.0.600.1
>
> is version hard-coded in spec %files
You can view at the spec file I attached on the origi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/07/10 03:25 AM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> Luya Tshimbalanga wrote, at 07/03/2010 07:10 PM +9:00:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I attempted to build a new version of Gimp 2.7.1 using Koji scratch
method but
>> ended up with that result[1]. Here is attached spec fi
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/07/10 03:25 AM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>> Luya Tshimbalanga wrote, at 07/03/2010 07:10 PM +9:00:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I attempted to build a new version of Gimp 2.7.1 using Koji scratc
Hi all,
Some key audio packages appear to be missing from RHEL-6, even though
they are in RHEL 5 (not in EPEL):
e.g. attempting to build libfishsound, I get the following error in EL-6:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=22931
DEBUG util.py:256: No Package Found for flac-devel
D
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Luke Macken wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just pushed a version 0.7.5 of bodhi into production. This release
> contains the following notable changes:
>
> proventesters & strict critical path update handling
>
>
> Critica
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> I was looking at qgis for doing roleplaying maps (I am not sure if that
> will work out) and noticed it was way behind upstream and then when filing
> a bug, noticed that it was orphaned.
> I am going to try to get it updated to 1.4 and see how things go. If it
> works out
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> I was looking at qgis for doing roleplaying maps (I am not sure if that
>> will work out) and noticed it was way behind upstream and then when filing
>> a bug, noticed that it was orphaned.
>> I am going to try to get
I've started using monit recently, so I volunteer to co-maintain it as
well (salimma on pkgdb)
Cheers,
--
Michel
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use it on a couple of servers, and I wouldn't mind co-maintaining it with
> you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Maxim Burgerho
Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Would be nice if our package database supports freezing up packages
> that should not be claimed -- and automatically do that once a package
> is orphaned for long enough?
The added complication is that the criterion is when the package was last
touched before bein
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 01:40:52 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Sorry, but qgis has been orphaned and not updated for more than 3 months, so
> it needs a rereview as per:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package_Proce
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 02:21:22 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> The added complication is that the criterion is when the package was last
> touched before being orphaned (and some people say it should be when it was
> last touched by the maintainer, which is even longer ago in qgis's case),
On 2010/07/03 8:09 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> I've started using monit recently, so I volunteer to co-maintain it as
> well (salimma on pkgdb)
>
> Cheers,
>
Thanks! I've approved your and Maxim's request.
Stewart
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedorapr
53 matches
Mail list logo
