> I don't currently maintain any Java packages within Fedora but I did
> (somewhat) build the maven2 stack for EPEL[0] and I would be
> interested in seeing a Java SIG happen as well as would definitely
> join up.
>
Please everyone that is interested add yourself to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
Greetings,
Preupgrade test day is coming up tomorrow:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:Current
Several problems have been reported when preupgrading to F-14 Alpha,
this day we will focus on preupgrade[1] to summarize the issues. The
tests were designed to cover general circumstances, incl
Top three FAS account holders who have completed reviewing "Package
review" components on bugzilla for last week ending 27th August were
Emmanuel Seyman, Mamoru Tasaka and Jakub Hrozek.
Emmanuel Seyman : 6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624465 perl-Lingua-Stem
ht
2010/8/31 pbrobin...@gmail.com :
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:57 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
(maste
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 14:52 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
> (master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell and quadrapassel, feel free
> to CC me for other fallout.
Hey,
Does this mean pyclutter and other bindings will see an update as
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:32 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:57 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> 2010/8/31 pbrobin...@gmail.com :
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:57 PM, pbrobin...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> Heads up to Clutt
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 14:52 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>> Heads up to Clutter consumers - I'm updating it in f15 to the 1.3
>> (master) branch. I've tested GNOME Shell and quadrapassel, feel free
>> to CC me for other fallout.
>
> Hey,
>
> Doe
Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
compile kernels for arches other than the x86_64 boxes I normally use, and I
keep borrowing prebuilt compilers off others (usually Al Viro - thanks
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/01/2010 06:41 AM, David Howells wrote:
>
> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
> compile kernels for arches other than the x86_64
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: new version available and shipped version has disappeared
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=629229
Summary: new version available and shipped version
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 07:21:51AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On 09/01/2010 06:41 AM, David Howells wrote:
>>
>> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
>> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I k
On 09/01/2010 12:41 PM, David Howells wrote:
>
> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
> compile kernels for arches other than the x86_64 boxes I normally use, and I
> keep borrowing pr
On 09/01/2010 12:48 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/01/2010 12:41 PM, David Howells wrote:
>>
>> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
>> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
>> compile kernels for arches other than the x8
Hi,
> - A cross compiler alone is not worth it, you need a whole zoo of
> further cross-target packages to make it usable.
> Without massive changes to the infrastructure, this would add a
> significant amount of packages to the distro.
Depends on what you wanna do with it. For linux kernel c
On 09/01/2010 01:53 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 09/01/2010 12:48 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 09/01/2010 12:41 PM, David Howells wrote:
>>> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
>>> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
Excerpts from Stanislav Ochotnicky's message of Mon Aug 30 16:17:40 +0200 2010:
> I'll be starting Java SIG wiki page soon, plus I guess we can peruse
> java-devel mailing list for SIG discussions.
In case you missed Alexander's mail the wiki is created [1]
I am planning first IRC meeting. Propos
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 20:47 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:36 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Perhaps local and so forth could be given a --dist=foo switch, and these
> > sorts of errors could say "can't figure out your dist from git, use --dist
> > or fix your repo".
>
>
Compose started at Wed Sep 1 08:15:32 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
PragmARC-20060427-6.fc13.i686 requires libgnarl-4.4.so
PragmARC-20060427-6.fc13.i686 requires libgnat-4.4.so
PragmARC-20060427-6.fc13.x86_64 req
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 02:06:37PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >> - Fedora's rpm and some components the build-infrastructure have serious
> >> issues related to cross-building.
> >>
> >> - A cross compiler alone is not worth it, you need a whole zoo of
> >> further cross-target packages to make
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 17:20:23 -0400,
> Al Dunsmuir wrote:
>>
>> Please do not ignore that the browser is there for the user to use,
>> not for Fedora to stream information in spite of the user's wishes.
>
> Nor for Mozilla to track
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> I hope cross Fortran and especially cross Java (or cross Ada/ObjC/ObjC++)
> aren't needed, especially libjava builds for eons and has myriads of target
> dependencies.
For my purposes, C is sufficient. No one's persuaded Linus to take C++ into
the kernel yet, except as na
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 12:20 +, Rawhide Report wrote:
> entangle-0.1.0-7.fc14.x86_64 requires libmozjs.so()(64bit)
> ethos-0.2.2-7.fc15.i686 requires libmozjs.so
> ethos-0.2.2-7.fc15.x86_64 requires libmozjs.so()(64bit)
> gjs-0.7.1-3.fc14.i686 requires libmozjs.so
>
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Martin Sourada wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 12:20 +, Rawhide Report wrote:
>
>> entangle-0.1.0-7.fc14.x86_64 requires libmozjs.so()(64bit)
>> ethos-0.2.2-7.fc15.i686 requires libmozjs.so
>> ethos-0.2.2-7.fc15.x86_64 requires libmozjs.so()(64
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 13:31 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > I hope cross Fortran and especially cross Java (or cross Ada/ObjC/ObjC++)
> > aren't needed, especially libjava builds for eons and has myriads of target
> > dependencies.
>
> For my purposes, C is sufficient.
On 09/01/2010 01:06 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/01/2010 01:53 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 09/01/2010 12:48 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>> On 09/01/2010 12:41 PM, David Howells wrote:
Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and
binutils rpms
for cross compile
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:46 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> There's a reason the 'crosstool' and similar scripts are so bloody sick.
>
>
Speaking of which, it looks like there's a stalled review of crosstool-ng in
the works [1]. Perhaps it'd be worthwhile in lieu of a complete set of
cross RPMs?
commit 86f3b34d4612ca3bed1841cba35229909525c283
Author: Tom "spot" Callaway
Date: Wed Sep 1 09:02:40 2010 -0400
update to 0.19
.gitignore |1 +
perl-OLE-Storage_Lite.spec |9 ++---
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deleti
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 11:41:34 +0100,
David Howells wrote:
>
> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
> compile kernels for arches other than the x86_64 boxes I normally use, and I
David Woodhouse writes:
> The problematic part is GCC, with its horrid incestuous dependencies --
> in particular, the way you have to build everything twice because it
> insists on building libgcc in the *same* pass as the one it uses to
> build gcc itself, and it wants to link libgcc_s against
On Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 6:41:34 AM, David Howells wrote:
> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
> compile kernels for arches other than the x86_64 boxes I normally use, and I
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 14:20 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 20:47 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:36 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > Perhaps local and so forth could be given a --dist=foo switch, and these
> > > sorts of errors could say "can't fig
Matt McCutchen writes:
> I propose that fedpkg should consider a --dist option, a "branch"
> file, and the name of the current git branch in that order.
Or make it a branch config (eg. git config branch.$branch.dist f14).
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E
On 08/28/2010 05:37 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> With the FPCA, the board could relicense everything. But RedHat appoints
> the board chair, who has veto power. If this is right, then this could
> be changed by making the chair seat another normal seat, that is voted
> for by the community and make the b
Matt McCutchen writes:
> I personally don't like fedpkg doing magic based on the name of the VCS
> branch I am on and would use a "branch" file. I don't see what the big
> deal is about having the branches identical; I think seeing the
> difference in the "dist" value could actually be a helpful
>> b) To equippe the rpm/yum/mock etc. infrastructure with a mechanism to
>> pull-in "foreign binaries" into a sys-root (E.g. to install Fedora
>> *.ppc.rpm rpms into /usr/ppc-redhat/sys-root). So far, such mechanism
>> doesn't exist.
>
> No need for that eithr. They can figure out
>
> rpm2cpio pa
On Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 9:35:16 AM, I wrote:
> On July 7th, 2009, Mark Salter made a post "crossbuilding rpms with
> koji" on the fedora-buildsys-list".
> http://www.mail-archive.com/fedora-buildsys-l...@redhat.com/msg02148.html
And for folks who prefer the official archive,
http://www
On 09/01/2010 03:37 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>> b) To equippe the rpm/yum/mock etc. infrastructure with a mechanism to
>>> pull-in "foreign binaries" into a sys-root (E.g. to install Fedora
>>> *.ppc.rpm rpms into /usr/ppc-redhat/sys-root). So far, such mechanism
>>> doesn't exist.
>>
>> No need f
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 20:58 -0700, Carl Byington wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I have a package (ghemical) which requires a courier 12 font for use in
> its xwindow gui. I clearly need some dependency that will drag in
>
> xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-1-100dpi
> or
> xorg
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 04:03:17PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> > Where, keep in mind, "slow" is defined as twice a year, right?
> Yes.
I think this is a remarkable definition of slow. Especially if we can
provide options for people who want a faster path to do so.
> > I don't think that's fa
On 09/01/2010 02:21 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 02:06:37PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
- Fedora's rpm and some components the build-infrastructure have serious
issues related to cross-building.
- A cross compiler alone is not worth it, you need a whole zo
On 09/01/2010 03:02 PM, Rich Mattes wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:46 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
>>
>> There's a reason the 'crosstool' and similar scripts are so bloody sick.
>>
>>
> Speaking of which, it looks like there's a stalled review of crosstool-ng in
> the works [1]. Perhaps it'd b
On 09/01/10 16:46, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> rpm2cpio package | cpio -i -
>>
>> Isn't that easy, you'll have to do a bunch of fixups after doing so to
>> have things actually work.
>
> Usually not. Nine times out of ten, (probably 99 out of 100) all you
> need for cross-devel is the headers and the
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 05:43:26PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> Exactly, the key idea is "The niche described is a kind of mix of
> attributes that appeal to entirely different types of
> users/contributors".
It's not a crazy point. :) But I disagree that the niche is as niche-like as
you're m
On 09/01/2010 04:37 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>> b) To equippe the rpm/yum/mock etc. infrastructure with a mechanism to
>>> pull-in "foreign binaries" into a sys-root (E.g. to install Fedora
>>> *.ppc.rpm rpms into /usr/ppc-redhat/sys-root). So far, such mechanism
>>> doesn't exist.
>>
>> No need f
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the F-14 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 po
commit 175b442591c86daed9cb0f605335e3bd57495363
Author: Mark Chappell
Date: Wed Sep 1 16:07:17 2010 +0100
Sync with perl-Class-Trigger-0.13-2.1.el6.src.rpm from the latest RHEL 6
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Class-Trigger.spec | 21 -
sources
commit 26e92c452be1d789b53a477f2187cf43769214c3
Author: Mark Chappell
Date: Wed Sep 1 16:07:37 2010 +0100
Sync with perl-Class-Data-Inheritable-0.08-3.1.el6.src.rpm from the latest
RHEL 6
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Class-Data-Inheritable.spec | 10 --
2 fil
commit 66adfd475d87cbd96beb23723a2530c30cce3c24
Author: Mark Chappell
Date: Wed Sep 1 16:07:55 2010 +0100
Sync with perl-Class-Accessor-0.31-6.1.el6.src.rpm from the latest RHEL 6
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Class-Accessor.spec |6 +-
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+),
commit 82c630adf58162b622eb8ac6193c6820e74e4110
Author: Mark Chappell
Date: Wed Sep 1 16:06:53 2010 +0100
Sync with perl-File-Copy-Recursive-0.38-4.el6.src.rpm from the latest RHEL 6
.gitignore|1 +
perl-File-Copy-Recursive.spec |8 +---
2 files changed, 2
On 09/01/2010 04:00 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On 09/01/10 16:46, Andrew Haley wrote:
rpm2cpio package | cpio -i -
>>>
>>> Isn't that easy, you'll have to do a bunch of fixups after doing so to
>>> have things actually work.
>>
>> Usually not. Nine times out of ten, (probably 99 out of 100) a
Gerd Hoffmann writes:
> Last time I did I had to (a) move stuff from $sysroot/usr/... to
> $sysroot/ to have compiler and linker find it.
Then your compiler/linker was misconfigured.
> Also fixup paths in the linker scripts (try 'cat /usr/lib64/libc.so').
If you configure your linker with a s
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 17:00 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On 09/01/10 16:46, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >>> rpm2cpio package | cpio -i -
> >>
> >> Isn't that easy, you'll have to do a bunch of fixups after doing so to
> >> have things actually work.
> >
> > Usually not. Nine times out of ten, (probably
Chris Tyler wrote:
> What are the use cases for the cross-compilers?
>
> If these are to compliment the Fedora secondary archs, then compiling
> kernels is probably the main use of cross-compilers
I've talked to a number of kernel developers, all of whom would like this.
> Once you're up on th
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:09:55 +0200
Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> Excerpts from Stanislav Ochotnicky's message of Mon Aug 30 16:17:40
> +0200 2010:
> > I'll be starting Java SIG wiki page soon, plus I guess we can peruse
> > java-devel mailing list for SIG discussions.
>
> In case you missed Alex
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/31/10 5:36 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Perhaps local and so forth could be given a --dist=foo switch, and these
> sorts of errors could say "can't figure out your dist from git, use --dist
> or fix your repo".
Yeah, I've been working in my head a
Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Matt McCutchen writes:
>> I propose that fedpkg should consider a --dist option, a "branch"
>> file, and the name of the current git branch in that order.
>
> Or make it a branch config (eg. git config branch.$branch.dist f14).
This, please. Using magical branch names or
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 09:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt McCutchen writes:
> > I personally don't like fedpkg doing magic based on the name of the VCS
> > branch I am on and would use a "branch" file. I don't see what the big
> > deal is about having the branches identical; I think seeing the
>
Hi,
I would like to know if something like the following exists or is it
possible to display the following for each packager:
Package EL-6 EL-5 F-14 F-13
in a web-page (for example) that can be populated from Koji
(perhaps?). For example:
Package EL-6 EL-5 F-14 F-13
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 04:03:17PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> > Where, keep in mind, "slow" is defined as twice a year, right?
>> Yes.
>
> I think this is a remarkable definition of slow. Especially if we can
> provide options for peo
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 21:41 +0530, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if something like the following exists or is it
> possible to display the following for each packager:
>
> Package EL-6 EL-5 F-14 F-13
>
> in a web-page (for example) that can be populated from K
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:11, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if something like the following exists or is it
> possible to display the following for each packager:
>
> Package EL-6 EL-5 F-14 F-13
http://rpms.famillecollet.com/rpmphp/all.php?what=shakthimaan
--
d
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 21:41 +0530, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
> I would like to know if something like the following exists or is it
> possible to display the following for each packager:
>
> Package EL-6 EL-5 F-14 F-13
>
> in a web-page (for example) that can be populated from Koji
> (pe
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 12:20:34PM +, Rawhide Report wrote:
> python3-PyQt4-4.7.4-2.fc14.i686 requires python(abi) = 0:3.1
> python3-PyQt4-4.7.4-2.fc14.x86_64 requires python(abi) = 0:3.1
> python3-PyQt4-devel-4.7.4-2.fc14.i686 requires python(abi) = 0:3.1
> python3-PyQt
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 12:13:04PM -0400, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> >> > I don't think that's fair at all. Fedora is unique in a lot of ways,
> >> > and a waterfall of updates isn't essential to that uniqueness.
> >> List those ways please, aside from the relationship with Red Hat/CentOS.
> > Why b
Hi,
--- On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Christof Damian wrote:
| http://rpms.famillecollet.com/rpmphp/all.php?what=shakthimaan
\--
That is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks!
SK
--
Shakthi Kannan
http://www.shakthimaan.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/1/10 9:01 AM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Matt McCutchen writes:
>>> I propose that fedpkg should consider a --dist option, a "branch"
>>> file, and the name of the current git branch in that order.
>>
>> Or make it a bran
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 10:06 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 9/1/10 9:01 AM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> > Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >> Matt McCutchen writes:
> >>> I propose that fedpkg should consider a --dist option, a "branch"
> >>> file, and the name of the current git branch in that order.
> >>
Matt McCutchen writes:
> Does it work if the current branch tracks another local branch which
> tracks an upstream branch? It looks to me that the code does not handle
> that, but I haven't found a good way to test it. And if I want to set
> up a local branch for the purpose of rebuilding a pack
> For cross gcc I guess the important question is, do we want
> gcc-4*.src.rpm to build all the cross compilers (and, is C enough, or
> do we need C++ too?), or do we have one cross-gcc-4*.src.rpm that
> semi-loosely tracks gcc-4*.src.rpm and builds all the cross compilers
> (BuildRequires all the
On 09/01/2010 06:09 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> Excerpts from Stanislav Ochotnicky's message of Mon Aug 30 16:17:40 +0200
> 2010:
>> I'll be starting Java SIG wiki page soon, plus I guess we can peruse
>> java-devel mailing list for SIG discussions.
>
> In case you missed Alexander's mail th
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> b) To equippe the rpm/yum/mock etc. infrastructure with a mechanism to
> pull-in "foreign binaries" into a sys-root (E.g. to install Fedora
> *.ppc.rpm rpms into /usr/ppc-redhat/sys-root). So far, such mechanism
> doesn't exist.
You should be able to f
If you define a desired target, then you know who to survey that you
haven't even gotten as a user yet and understand better how to win them
over and expand your userbase...
But I don't think we even have agreement amongst contributors that we
want to expand the userbase (w
On 01/09/10 19:53, Brendan Jones wrote:
> What is the end game here? Is Fedora lacking contributors?
Like all areas of life, you win some you lose some.
--
Regards,
Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded
Friend of Fedora
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/
On Sunday, August 29, 2010 08:15 pm, seth vidal wrote
> On Sun, 2010-08-29 at 15:26 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On 29 August 2010 15:07, seth vidal wrote:
> > > I realized after this that I don't even need it the pkgTags db that we
> > > already generate has the information needed b/c all th
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 21:50 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >
> > b) To equippe the rpm/yum/mock etc. infrastructure with a mechanism to
> > pull-in "foreign binaries" into a sys-root (E.g. to install Fedora
> > *.ppc.rpm rpms into /usr/ppc-redhat/sys-roo
The Fedora Packaging Committee has an open seat. Are you interested in
helping to decide the packaging standards and guidelines for Fedora? Are
you familiar with the inner workings of RPM and its spec file magic? Do
you make the wiki cry? Does trac tremble in your wake? Are you
clinically insane? (
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 2:15 PM, seth vidal wrote:
>
> Florian has already been working that out. He's got a pure-python script
> that grabs up the icons and we'll work on implementing them at the pkgdb
> layer.
Hmm, you're saying the client code would talk to pkgdb?
--
devel mailing list
devel@
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 16:47 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 2:15 PM, seth vidal wrote:
> >
> > Florian has already been working that out. He's got a pure-python script
> > that grabs up the icons and we'll work on implementing them at the pkgdb
> > layer.
>
> Hmm, you're say
On Thursday, August 19, 2010 05:46 pm, seth vidal wrote
> I mentioned this on:
> http://skvidal.wordpress.com/2010/08/19/fedora-app-market-proof-of-concept/
>
> last night but I thought I'd bring it up here:
>
> Yesterday someone was talking about installing apps in fedora and how it
> was hard
The lightweight tag 'perl-Term-Shell-0.02-2.fc15' was created pointing to:
85529da... Import, rhbz#624699
--
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/listinfo/perl-d
The lightweight tag 'perl-Term-Shell-0.02-2.fc14' was created pointing to:
85529da... Import, rhbz#624699
--
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/listinfo/perl-d
The lightweight tag 'perl-Term-Shell-0.02-2.fc13' was created pointing to:
85529da... Import, rhbz#624699
--
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/listinfo/perl-d
The lightweight tag 'perl-Term-Shell-0.02-2.el6' was created pointing to:
85529da... Import, rhbz#624699
--
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/listinfo/perl-de
The lightweight tag 'perl-Term-Shell-0.02-2.el5' was created pointing to:
85529da... Import, rhbz#624699
--
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/listinfo/perl-de
The lightweight tag 'perl-Term-Shell-0.02-2.el4' was created pointing to:
85529da... Import, rhbz#624699
--
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/listinfo/perl-de
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 09:53:15AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
> On 08/28/2010 05:37 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> > With the FPCA, the board could relicense everything. But RedHat appoints
> > the board chair, who has veto power. If this is right, then this could
> > be changed by making the chair se
On 09/01/2010 05:55 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> Sorry, I was too imprecise. I meant that the "unlicensed" contributions
> can only be relicensed to another default license by the board. And if
> Red Hat is lost to some evil company, as far as I understand, the Fedora
> project might not have this power
Hi,
Is there any possibility to use Youtube in Fedora 14? First I tried to
install Adobe Flash 10.1. I tried to copy flashlib to various dirs
/usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins, /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins,
~/.mozilla/plugins, but about:plugins in Firefox doesn't show me any
informationa about flash support.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/01/2010 07:59 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any possibility to use Youtube in Fedora 14? First I tried to
> install Adobe Flash 10.1. I tried to copy flashlib to various dirs
> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins, /usr/lib/mozilla/plugi
2010/9/2 Stephen Gallagher :
[..]
> Well, the version of Mozilla Firefox in Fedora 14 should support WebM,
> so try this: http://www.youtube.com/html5
Unfortunately does not work here
http://i54.tinypic.com/11ayg6d.png
Any ideas why Adobe Flash does not work on F14? Once everything worked
without
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 13:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matt McCutchen writes:
> > Does it work if the current branch tracks another local branch which
> > tracks an upstream branch? It looks to me that the code does not handle
> > that, but I haven't found a good way to test it. And if I want to
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 11:01 -0500, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > Matt McCutchen writes:
> >> I propose that fedpkg should consider a --dist option, a "branch"
> >> file, and the name of the current git branch in that order.
> >
> > Or make it a branch config (eg. git config
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 02:28 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/9/2 Stephen Gallagher :
> [..]
> > Well, the version of Mozilla Firefox in Fedora 14 should support WebM,
> > so try this: http://www.youtube.com/html5
>
> Unfortunately does not work here
> http://i54.tinypic.com/11ayg6d.png
>
>
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 09:00 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 8/31/10 5:36 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Perhaps local and so forth could be given a --dist=foo switch, and these
> > sorts of errors could say "can't figure out your dist from git, use --dist
> > or fix your repo".
>
> Yeah, I've been
On 01-Sep-10 20:43, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> Taking the dist value from the branch name is "magical" in the sense
> that it imposes a new interpretation on an existing datum. Taking it
> from a file in the working tree designated for that specific purpose
> (which I suppose should really be named "
On 09/02/2010 03:07 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On 09/01/2010 07:59 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>
>> So? Is there any way to use youtube on Fedora?
>
> Well, the version of Mozilla Firefox in Fedora 14 should support WebM,
> so try this: http://www.youtube.com/html5
This is incorrect, F14 i
Hi folks,
FESCo has heard a few complaints of cases where packages were newer (in
some cases several versions newer) in F-14 than in rawhide. So this is
just a friendly reminder that you should be updating rawhide
(dist-f15) in addition to branched (dist-f14.) Inheritence from F-14
into rawhide is
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Nicu Buculei wrote:
> On 09/02/2010 03:07 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > On 09/01/2010 07:59 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> >>
> >> So? Is there any way to use youtube on Fedora?
> >
> > Well, the version of Mozilla Firefox in Fedora 14 should support WebM,
>
On
09/02/2010 04:39 PM, Eelko Berkenpies wrote:
Tom "Spot" Callaway also has a very nice dedicated repository for
Firefox 4; http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/spot/
I personally prefer this one because it doesn't pull in oth
100 matches
Mail list logo
