On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:08:50 -0400, SS (Simo) wrote:
> If rpmbuild does not add an implicit requires with libraryX >= we built against> then it is certainly broken.
One could also argue that an activity like "yum install ..." ought to
search for and apply the latest available updates of needed p
Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:45:15 +0200, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> If a package fails to build in a mass rebuild because -Werror was enabled
>> then that's additional work for several people to fix something that may not
>> have ever actually been broken.
>
> 99% of warnings will
On 08/13/2011 10:51 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Whether to invest in enabling -Werror for all packages in a mass rebuild
> however is another question.
Pardon, but this is not a question, this is beyond reason and foolish.
> There will be many build failures, and
> some will be unwarranted.
Exact
Hi there,
Is there any plan to have the EKOPath compiler, from PathScale,
shipped as part of the future Fedora releases?
It doesn't necessarily mean having Fedora's packages built with it,
but merely packaging it as a first step.
Any thoughts?
-Ilyes
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorapro
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Is there any plan to have the EKOPath compiler, from PathScale,
> shipped as part of the future Fedora releases?
>
> It doesn't necessarily mean having Fedora's packages built with it,
> but merely packaging it as a first step.
>
> Well assuming no legal issues anyone can package it and submit it for review
> ...
I do know that SLES and RH releases are being worked on. It should
also become available for Scientific Linux too at some point.
-Ilyes
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 1:23 PM, drago01 wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at
Compose started at Sat Aug 13 08:15:29 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
acheck-0.5.1-4.fc15.noarch requires perl(Text::Aspell)
almanah-0.7.3-12.fc16.x86_64 requires libedataserverui-3.0.so.0()(64bit)
almanah-0.7.3-12
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>> Well assuming no legal issues anyone can package it and submit it for review
>> ...
>
> I do know that SLES and RH releases are being worked on. It should
> also become available for Scientific Linux too at some point.
So?
You (or anyone el
> You (or anyone else) is still free to just package it.
Sure. I'm trying to put together an initial spec file for Fedora.
-Ilyes
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 1:36 PM, drago01 wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>>> Well assuming no legal issues anyone can package it and su
does tags: f17 in <
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=257227
it's not pushed to 15, not even to 16
> $ repoquery --whatrequires netxen-firmware
> netxen-firmware-0:4.0.534-4.fc15.noarch
what packages requires this netxen-firmware ?
just itslef ?
can't get it
--
devel mailing
Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> I'm trying to put together an initial spec file for Fedora.
According to PathScale's license document their products are partly free and
partly unfree. You can of course only package the free parts. How useful are
they without the unfree parts?
Björn Persson
signature.asc
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 17:14:38 +0300, MA (Muayyad) wrote:
> does tags: f17 in <
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=257227
> it's not pushed to 15, not even to 16
No, it isn't. Is it a major problem to you?
Do you need that firmware? Did you try to install it? Or was it installed
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 16:42:13 +0200
Björn Persson wrote:
> Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> > I'm trying to put together an initial spec file for Fedora.
>
> According to PathScale's license document their products are partly
> free and partly unfree. You can of course only package the free
> parts. How usef
Compose started at Sat Aug 13 13:15:22 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
389-ds-base-1.2.9.0-1.fc16.2.x86_64 requires
libnetsnmpagent.so.25()(64bit)
389-ds-base-1.2.9.0-1.fc16.2.x86_64 requires
libnetsnmpmibs.so.25()(64bit)
We should also target and package a clearly stated and defined
(features) version of the compiler, that has been tested and
validated.
-Ilyes
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Jussi Lehtola
wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 16:42:13 +0200
> Björn Persson wrote:
>
>> Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>> > I'm trying
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
is it just me or is wicd unuseable due to several SELinux erors until
NetworkManager gets remove completely from the system?
- --
Regards,
Heiko Adams
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mo
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 08/13/2011 10:51 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Whether to invest in enabling -Werror for all packages in a mass rebuild
>> however is another question.
>
> Pardon, but this is not a question, this is beyond reason and foolish.
>
>> There will be many build failures, and
>> s
On 08/13/2011 09:30 PM, Heiko Adams wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi,
> is it just me or is wicd unuseable due to several SELinux erors until
> NetworkManager gets remove completely from the system?
What SELinux errors? Do you have a bug report?
Rahul
--
devel
Am 13.08.2011 20:25, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> On 08/13/2011 09:30 PM, Heiko Adams wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> Hi,
>> is it just me or is wicd unuseable due to several SELinux erors until
>> NetworkManager gets remove completely from the system?
>
> What SELi
Hey, folks. We're down to a single confirmed blocker without a fix
preventing us composing Fedora 16 Alpha RC4, but it's in rpm and we
haven't really had much feed-in from the rpm maintainers. Can anyone who
thinks they could play an rpm developer on TV please take a look at
https://bugzilla.redhat
Hi,
I am looking for a sponsor for uwsgi server in this ticket
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=682704 however I am trying
to fix the rpath issues I commented there because otherwise i think it
simply won't pass. I am faced with some... weird behavior.
The software does not use the sta
Jorge Gallegos wrote, at 08/14/2011 09:22 AM +9:00:
> Hi,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for uwsgi server in this ticket
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=682704 however I am trying
> to fix the rpath issues I commented there because otherwise i think it
> simply won't pass. I am faced
22 matches
Mail list logo
