Hi,
On 12/06/2011 06:17 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
After yesterday's rebuilds, there remain 271 binary packages from 232
source packages that still require libpng-compat.
No FTBFS bugs have been filed at this time.
There's a pretty wide variety of failures represented here. In addition
to the li
Compose started at Wed Dec 14 08:16:13 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
OpenGTL-0.9.15.1-3.fc17.x86_64 requires libLLVM-2.9.so()(64bit)
OpenGTL-devel-0.9.15.1-3.fc17.i686 requires libLLVM-2.9.so
OpenGTL-devel-0.9.15.
Hi,
From the systemd.mount(5) man page:
"Mount units may either be configured via unit files, or via /etc/fstab"
This makes me wonder - to what extent will systemd replace fstab in
future Fedoras? Will fstab disappear in favour of systemd mount units?
Andy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.f
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767571
Petr Šabata changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
On 12/14/2011 07:25 AM, Andrew Price wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From the systemd.mount(5) man page:
>
> "Mount units may either be configured via unit files, or via /etc/fstab"
>
> This makes me wonder - to what extent will systemd replace fstab in
> future Fedoras? Will fstab disappear in favour of syste
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767571
Petr Šabata changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
On Wed, 14.12.11 12:25, Andrew Price (anpr...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From the systemd.mount(5) man page:
>
> "Mount units may either be configured via unit files, or via /etc/fstab"
>
> This makes me wonder - to what extent will systemd replace fstab in
> future Fedoras? Will fstab disapp
I note from this posting:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-July/153665.html
And this one:
http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=2666d441c2d8107b1987b869714189af64b954c6
that the nss_db package has been deprecated, and that the new nss_db support in
glibc no longer
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 14:01, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 14.12.11 12:25, Andrew Price (anpr...@redhat.com) wrote:
>> From the systemd.mount(5) man page:
>>
>> "Mount units may either be configured via unit files, or via /etc/fstab"
>>
>> This makes me wonder - to what extent will system
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Mark R Bannister
wrote:
> I note from this posting:
>
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-July/153665.html
>
> And this one:
>
> http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=2666d441c2d8107b1987b869714189af64b954c6
>
> that the nss_db package
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:21:10PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:29:54AM -0500, Ian Weller wrote:
> > I am orphaning the techtalk-pse package because the Gtk2::MozEmbed perl
> > module will no longer be maintained in Fedora because gtkmozembed
> > support has been re
On 12/14/2011 08:44 AM, Jared K. Smith wrote:
I appreciate your concerns, but unfortunately most of the glibc
development decisions happen in the upstream glibc community, and we
in Fedora don't always have a lot of pull when it comes to those sorts
of decisions.
That reminds me that you were
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Przemek Klosowski
wrote:
> That reminds me that you were talking to the glibc upstream about their
> sometimes cavalier attitude to significant changes. How did that go? Did you
> get a sense that they understood where we're coming from?
My discussion with the gli
On Wed 14/12/11 13:44 , "Jared K. Smith" jsm...@fedoraproject.org sent:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Mark R Bannister
wrote:
> I note from this posting:
> >
> > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-July/153665.html>
> >
> > And this one:
> >
> >
http://sourceware.org/git/?p=gl
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Mark R Bannister
>> > that the nss_db package has been deprecated, and that the new nss_db
>> > support in
>> > glibc no longer uses Berkeley DB format.
>>
>> I appreciate your concerns, but unfortunately most of the glibc
>> development decisions happen in the u
In consultation with Red Hat Legal and the Fedora Board, I have
implemented a chance to Fedora's policy regarding software marked as
being in the Public Domain. The new policy is as follows:
*
Works which are clearly marked as being in the Public Domain, and for
which no evidence is known to
On 12/11/2011 09:43 AM, Simon Lewis wrote:
Nice one Brendan,
can you push these on fc15 (fc15 still has 5 months of support from fedora)?
Regards, Simon
The following are in updates testing, the zita-convolver dependency I
mentioned, related to another update entirely.
zita-at1-0.2.3
On 12/15/2011 12:44 AM, Brendan Jones wrote:
zita-at1-0.2.3-4.fc15
zita-rev1-0.2.1-4.fc15
Brendan
Apologies, wrong list.
Brendan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Here's an native tsm client service for your fedora running
workstation/server since it's probably going to be awhile before IBM
catches up to systemd...
### tsm-client.service ###
[Unit]
Description=Tivoly Storage Manager Client
After=network.target
[Service]
Type=oneshot
Environment=DSM_LOG
19 matches
Mail list logo