Hi,
On 09/02/2011 05:37 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> If we wanted to do things properly, we'd use the specs so that the
> transition between HID and HCI was invisible to the user. Except that we
> don't have the specs (or it would be fixed already, it's one of my major
> gripes for a number of year
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:28:19PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 01:20:19PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Is there a specific reason glibc does this?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Can it not have a set of patches, one per change, as is usual practice?
>
> Fedora glibc sources are fr
Dne 2.9.2011 22:54, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> Hum, I didn't realize our resolutions were so customized, I thought they
> were the upstream ones; this is what I've been told when discussing
> custom resolutions in the past. It's certainly something you could
> propose as an enhancement by filing
Dne 3.9.2011 00:33, Matt McCutchen napsal(a):
> bugs would harmonize with the current RHEL policy. None of my 131 bugs
> have been marked CANTFIX [2]; maintainers seem to find that the
> better-known WONTFIX and NOTABUG cover the range of cases.
I use it routinely as a polite version of WONTFIX f
Dne 3.9.2011 10:38, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
> https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/nice-rpm-git-patch-management-trick/
>
> This method is quite probably simpler than the one you're using now.
I am in the process of pushing our less interesting Xorg patches
upstream, and I had a great expe
On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 09:38:46AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Fedora glibc sources are from git, and the bit diff is just generated
> > diff between the upstream snapshot and corresponding Fedora snapshot,
> > sans a few Fedora-only directories (which are packaged as extra tarball).
>
>
Compose started at Sat Sep 3 08:15:02 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
FlightGear-2.0.0-6.fc16.x86_64 requires libosgViewer.so.74()(64bit)
FlightGear-2.0.0-6.fc16.x86_64 requires libosgUtil.so.74()(64bit)
FlightGear
Regarding bugzilla, you can close your bug report and mark it as a duplicate
of the earlier bug report (you provide the number). This will also add a
note to the the original bug report about the duplicate.
Hth.
On Sep 2, 2011 11:19 AM, "Barry Fishman" wrote:
> Recently while running Fedora 16, m
I have submitted a review request for floppy-support:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735554
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 2011-09-03 09:35:21 EDT, Jorge Gallegos wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2011 11:19 AM, "Barry Fishman" wrote:
>> I found no way in bugzilla to close my bug report by merging it into
>> the earlier bug report. I think such an ability by the original
>> submitter would help the people working on fixing bug,
Compose started at Sat Sep 3 13:15:17 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)
the alpha was release and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd
is at 0% - why will F16 released WITHOUT making the system clean which
should have been done for F15
How many releases will this dirty mix of systemd/sysvinit(lsb in the
distribution exist until the OS can be called as
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 07:46, Reindl Harald wrote:
> the alpha was release and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd
> is at 0% - why will F16 released WITHOUT making the system clean which
> should have been done for F15
>
> How many releases will this dirty mix of systemd/sysvinit
On Sat, 2011-09-03 at 13:43 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 09:38:46AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > Fedora glibc sources are from git, and the bit diff is just generated
> > > diff between the upstream snapshot and corresponding Fedora snapshot,
> > > sans a few Fedo
Hello.
I'm review jreen library and there found [1] very interesting issue -
psi and kdenetwork bundle iris, jdns [2] and simplesasl.
For example:
$ find kdenetwork-4.6.5 psi-0.14 -iname simplesasl\*
kdenetwork-4.6.5/kopete/protocols/jabber/libiris/iris/xmpp/xmpp-core/simplesasl.h
kdenetwork-4
On 09/03/2011 07:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> To look at things at a higher level: it's clearly the goal of the
> guidelines that any interested party (with sufficient basic knowledge)
> who comes along and checks a Fedora package out of git should be able to
> _understand it_, and this include
Nils Philippsen wrote:
> Legal question: is it better to put this in its own subpackage to be
> able to specify this individual license, or would GIMP better have
> "GPLv3+ and LGPLv3+ and (GPLv2 or GPLv3)" as its license?
Not an actual answer to your question, but wouldn't the license of the PDF
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 07:46, Reindl Harald
> wrote:
>> the alpha was release and
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd is at 0% - why will
>> F16 released WITHOUT making the system clean which should have been done
>> for F15
>>
>> How many releases
Kevin Kofler writes:
> Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 07:46, Reindl Harald
>> wrote:
>>> How many releases will this dirty mix of systemd/sysvinit(lsb in the
>>> distribution exist until the OS can be called as "clean" like before
>>> F15?
>> As many as it takes to get it
19 matches
Mail list logo
