Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > > Again, citing FHS: > "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or delete > software installed by the local system administrator without the assent of > the local system administrator." > > How can this be interpret

[Bug 787888] CVE-2012-0839 ocaml: hash table collisions CPU usage DoS (oCERT-2011-003)

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=787888 Richard W.M. Jones changed: What|Removed |Added

Re: [ACTION NO LONGER REQUIRED] Retired packages for F-17

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 02/06/2012 08:44 PM, Andy Grimm wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Bill Nottingham >>  wrote: >>> >>> As stated eariler, the following packages have been retired in F-17 (and >>> therefore rawhide), due to either failing to buil

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

- Original Message - > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda < bkab...@redhat.com > > wrote: > > Again, citing FHS: > > > "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or > > delete software installed by the local system administrator without > > the assent

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > -- > > > "Distributions may install software in /opt" > > What do you find vague about this sentence? > > Refer to what Ralf quoted and compare and contrast. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraprojec

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

- Original Message - > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda < bkab...@redhat.com > > wrote: > > "Distributions may install software in /opt" > > > What do you find vague about this sentence? > > Refer to what Ralf quoted and compare and contrast. > Rahul Yes, Ralf says ho

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 03:25 -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > "Distributions may install software in /opt" > > What do you find vague about this sentence? Is it a Linux distribution (i.e Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian,...) or a software distribution (i.e a tarball release from upstream) ? -- Mathieu -

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > Yes, Ralf says how a sentence from FHS "is meant to be interpreted". I'm > giving you a clear statement, that distributions may install software into > /opt. Is the interpretation that Ralf is mentioning an official > interpretation of FHS

libcgroup rebase

libcgroup-0.38.rc1 is heading to rawhide/F17. It should be binary compatible with 0.37, no rebuild of your packages is needed. Please check functionality of your applications, just to be sure. Dependent packages: condor condor-procd libvirt policycoreutils-sandbox policycoreutils-python In additi

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 09:21 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda > wrote: > > > Again, citing FHS: > "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or > delete software installed by the local system ad

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > And more importantly: > "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or > delete software installed by the local system administrator without > the assent of the local system administrator." Supposing that we allow Fedora packages to ship files in /opt,

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

- Original Message - > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda < bkab...@redhat.com > > wrote: > > Yes, Ralf says how a sentence from FHS "is meant to be > > interpreted". > > I'm giving you a clear statement, that distributions may install > > software into /opt. Is the interpret

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

- Original Message - > Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > > And more importantly: > > "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or > > delete software installed by the local system administrator without > > the assent of the local system administrator." > > Supposing that we a

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

2012/2/7 Marcela Mašláňová d > > > FHS is "vague" about this one, so the installation into /opt was > forbidden. UsrMove was against FHS and it passed. I guess it need better > explanation, then you gave us. > Good luck finding one other than consensus among distributions . If you want to talk ab

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 08:08 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: - Original Message - On 02/07/2012 07:38 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: Hi Tom, - Original Message - --- The section of the Packaging Guidelines covering /srv was amended to include /opt and /usr/local. Specifically, the following

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > Again, citing FHS: > "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or delete > software installed by the local system administrator without the assent of > the local system administrator." The only way the "but" part can be enforced in RPM is by not usin

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

- Original Message - > On 02/07/2012 08:08 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > > > > > > - Original Message - > >> On 02/07/2012 07:38 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > >>> Hi Tom, > >>> > >>> - Original Message - > --- > > The section of the Packaging Guidelines covering

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 11:24 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: Again, citing FHS: "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or delete software installed by the local system administrator without the assent of the local system administrator." The only way the "but" pa

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > I see your point and I agree that it does make sense from this > perspective. Still, I'd like to know what is behind this decision - > why do we want to forbid this behaviour? Have any Fedora users run > into problems with any software installing under /opt? Please give > m

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 10:04 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote: > Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: >> And more importantly: >> "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or >> delete software installed by the local system administrator without >> the assent of the local system administrator." > > Suppos

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 12:56 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: > Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: >> I see your point and I agree that it does make sense from this >> perspective. Still, I'd like to know what is behind this decision - >> why do we want to forbid this behaviour? Have any Fedora users run >> into problems with

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Marcela Mašláňová wrote: > We are against forbidden installation path into /opt, because we are > using it in our project - Dynamic Software Collections. Thank you for mentioning this. At least now I have understanding of the reasons behind the objections to the guideline. Michal -- devel mailin

Re: new comps group proposal: Virtualization Host

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Alan Pevec wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: >>> Renaming current "Virtualization" to "Virtualization Client" makes sense. Oops, just found there's already "Virtualization Client" in comps-el6.xml - but it's empty: Group: Virtualizat

rubgyem-session license change

Due to recent license change in Ruby (from 1.8.7 GPLv2 or Ruby to 1.9.3 BSD or Ruby), there were some clarifications with various upstreams whose licenses were "same as ruby's", therefore unclear. Then after clarification with upstream, rubygem-session now has BSD or Ruby as it's License. https:/

CGAL license change to (L)GPLv3+

From release 4.0, the CGAL libraries will be released under LGPLv3+ for the foundations, and GPLv3+ for the high level packages (instead of LGPLv2 and QPL respectively). I have built a prerelease of CGAL-4.0 in Rawhide. -- Laurent Rineau http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LaurentRineau -- devel m

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 12:17:07 +0100, HH (Honza) wrote: > On 02/07/2012 11:24 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > >> Again, citing FHS: > >> "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or delete > >> software installed by the local system administrator without t

Heads up: new mount(8) and umount(8)

I have upgraded util-linux package to version 2.21-rc2, changes: - new pure libmount based mount(8) and umounts(8), this change should be backwardly compatible and (I hope) invisible for users - new losetup(8) implementation (uses new /dev/loop-control API) - new prlimit(1) command - n

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 01:38:11AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > Can I ask you where specifically you found the statement, that distributions > cannot place their data under /opt? > > Citing FHS [1]: > "Programs to be invoked by users must be located in the directory > /opt//bin or under the

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:55:03AM +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote: > FHS is "vague" about this one, so the installation into /opt was > forbidden. UsrMove was against FHS and it passed. I guess it need better > explanation, then you gave us. I know that this is a rehash of previous discussions, b

Orphaning insight

I'm afraid I've just orphaned the insight debugger. It now miss dependency iwidgets, that was a working up-to-date package orphaned after the forced password change of last year, unperformed by the iwidgets package owner. I don't want to start I new troll on this subject: this has already been w

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Once upon a time, Bohuslav Kabrda said: > "Distributions may install software in /opt" > > What do you find vague about this sentence? That's not the sentence (if you're going to quote something, make sure you quote the whole thing); you left out the rest: "but must not modify or delete softwa

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 02:51 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: From a practical perspective, I do tend to agree that putting software under /opt/fedora would be in line with the FHS and also unlikely to break anything. I am inclined to agree, but why would the Fedora project want to do this and not to instal

rubgyem-systemu license change

Due to recent license change in Ruby from GPLv2 or Ruby of to BSD or Ruby for Ruby 1.9.3, there were some clarifications with various upstreams whose licenses were "same as ruby's", therefore unclear. After clarification with upstream, rubygem-systemu now has BSD or Ruby as it's License. htt

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

- Original Message - > Once upon a time, Bohuslav Kabrda said: > > "Distributions may install software in /opt" > > > > What do you find vague about this sentence? > > That's not the sentence (if you're going to quote something, make > sure > you quote the whole thing); you left out the

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

- Original Message - > On 02/07/2012 02:51 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > From a practical perspective, I do tend to agree that putting > > software > > under /opt/fedora would be in line with the FHS and also unlikely > > to > > break anything. > > I am inclined to agree, but why would

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > That's precisely what the new "stack" or "scl" concept that Marcela wrote > about needs. We don't have a complete documentation out yet, but we will, > soon (hopefully). Random idea after looking at http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/scl-utils

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 03:50 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: I am inclined to agree, but why would the Fedora project want to do this and not to install to /usr? That's precisely what the new "stack" or "scl" concept that Marcela wrote about needs. We don't have a complete documentatio

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Hi Alan, There are basically two main reasons: stacks contain platform specific files (so not good under share) and also, they should be separated from the core system, so it's probably best to place them under /opt. - Original Message - > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda

Review swap

Is anyone up for a review swap? I need a review for lrslib: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=723752. Thanks, -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

Yep, sorry about that. I was just trying to prove my point (which I think is correct), I didn't mean to start a flame. BTW, if you want to try, look at http://mmaslano.livejournal.com/6963.html and follow the instructions there, it describes in basic steps how to install and use a stack (older v

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > Hi all, > Ruby 1.9.3 has finally made it into Rawhide, there are still few more > packages that need to be built, but otherwise the transitions was successful. > > Please note again, that soname has been bumped to 1.9.1 and licens

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

Dne 7.2.2012 16:33, Darryl L. Pierce napsal(a): On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: Hi all, Ruby 1.9.3 has finally made it into Rawhide, there are still few more packages that need to be built, but otherwise the transitions was successful. Please note again, that s

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: >> Hi all, >> Ruby 1.9.3 has finally made it into Rawhide, there are still few more >> packages that need to be built, but otherwise the transitions was successful. >> >> Ple

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 10:13:16AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > Hi Alan, > There are basically two main reasons: stacks contain platform specific files > (so not good under share) > This means they could go under %{_libdir}/dsc/%{DSCNAME} > and also, they should be separated from the core syst

Heads-up: libgee06 fails a test case against the updated glib2 in Rawhide

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, It appears that a recent glib2 update breaks libgee06 -- which is currently being used by the following packages: caribou-0:0.4.1-4.fc17.src systemd-0:39-3.fc17.src tracker-0:0.12.9-1.fc17.src Could the maintainers of affected packages (esp.

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 7 February 2012 02:04, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: >> >> Yes, Ralf says how a sentence from FHS "is meant to be interpreted". I'm >> giving you a clear statement, that distributions may install softwar

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On 02/07/2012 12:56 PM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote: On 02/07/2012 10:04 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote: Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: And more importantly: "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or delete software installed by the local system administrator without the assent of the l

Re: Heads-up: libgee06 fails a test case against the updated glib2 in Rawhide

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/07/2012 04:51 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > Hi all, > > It appears that a recent glib2 update breaks libgee06 -- which is > currently being used by the following packages: > > caribou-0:0.4.1-4.fc17.src systemd-0:39-3.fc17.src > tracker

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

Dne 7.2.2012 16:37, Jon Ciesla napsal(a): On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: Hi all, Ruby 1.9.3 has finally made it into Rawhide, there are still few more packages that need to be built, but otherwise the tr

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 7.2.2012 16:37, Jon Ciesla napsal(a): >> >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Darryl L. Pierce >>  wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: Hi all, Ruby 1.9.3 has finally made it into Rawh

Re: why is gurb-menu hidden as default?

Am 06.02.2012 20:17, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > About a year ago Harald had a talk about a "smart initrd" / > "integrated rescue mode" along similar lines. Is this still under > development? >Mirek Not yet developed, but still on my agenda -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ht

KDE-SIG meeting report (06/2012)

This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply to this email or add it to the related meeting page. = Weekly KDE Summary = Week: 06/2012 Time: 2012-02-07 15:00 UTC Meeting page: https://fedoraproject.o

Re: new comps group proposal: Virtualization Host

Alan Pevec (ape...@gmail.com) said: > Bill, that was added by you in commit "Rearrange to match RHEL 6 groups." > > http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=comps.git;a=commit;h=25629d715dc2416b3a83195c6099828a0cfac0cf > what was the idea with those groups, I don't see them as sub-channels > in RHN, e

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

Dne 7.2.2012 17:27, Jon Ciesla napsal(a): On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 7.2.2012 16:37, Jon Ciesla napsal(a): On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote: Hi all, Ruby 1.9.3 has finally ma

btrfs "scrub" not included in F16?

I'm seeing all sorts of examples using the command "btrfs scrub" yet on all of my F16 installs (including current 3.2.3-1) the command: btrfs scrub start / ERROR: unknown command 'scrub' Usage: [ . . . ] Intentionally not included, or user error? Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel

Re: [389-devel] New Support Tool: dseconv.pl (dse.ldif file parser)

Hi Mark, nice tool. It seems you have hardcoded into the script some default values like config entries in cn=config suffix. Is there a way to do it in a more flexible way. For example, dseconv could take (some) default values from template-dse.ldif, template-*.ldif and if they are not found in th

Re: btrfs "scrub" not included in F16?

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > I'm seeing all sorts of examples using the command "btrfs scrub" yet on all > of my F16 installs (including current 3.2.3-1) the command: > btrfs scrub start / > ERROR: unknown command 'scrub' > Usage: >        [ . . . ] > > Intentionally not

Re: btrfs "scrub" not included in F16?

On 7 February 2012 17:40, Josh Boyer wrote: > The scrub commands weren't added in btrfs-progs until October of last year. > The version F16 and rawhide has is just too old to contain that support. That worries me a little, seeing how we're pressing on with btrfs by default for F17... Surely shipp

[389-devel] please review ticket #17 - Replication optimizations around adds and modifies

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/17 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/17/0001-Ticket-17-Replication-optimizations.patch Thanks, Mark -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel

Re: btrfs "scrub" not included in F16?

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: > On 7 February 2012 17:40, Josh Boyer wrote: >> The scrub commands weren't added in btrfs-progs until October of last year. >> The version F16 and rawhide has is just too old to contain that support. > > That worries me a little, seeing how

python-sqlite2 retirement/orphaning

In cleaning up some half-retired packages yesterday, we discovered that the python-sqlite2 maintainer wishes to retire the package. There are a few packages that depend on it but after reviewing the history and the code of the packages, I think that it is reasonably safe to let this go ahead. His

Re: [389-devel] New Support Tool: dseconv.pl (dse.ldif file parser)

Hi Andrey, This is definitely a good idea, and I will work on it when I get a chance. I think we might add this script to the product - maybe. If that's the case, there will probably more changes as well. So, this isn't the final version by any means. Thanks, Mark On 02/07/2012 12:35 PM,

Re: Heads up: Ruby 1.9.3 landed in Rawhide

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 7.2.2012 17:27, Jon Ciesla napsal(a): >> >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Vít Ondruch  wrote: >>> >>> Dne 7.2.2012 16:37, Jon Ciesla napsal(a): On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Darryl L. Pierce  wrote: > > On Mon, F

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 13:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda > wrote: > > > Again, citing FHS: > "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not > modify or delete software installed by the loc

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 13:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda >> wrote: >> >> >>         Again, citing FHS: >>         "Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not >>        

Re: python-sqlite2 retirement/orphaning

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/07/2012 07:08 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > In Fedora, there are several packages that have an explicit: > Requires: python-sqlite2 > > I've reviewed the code for all of them and discovered that most > will try to import sqlite3 from the stdlib

Re: python-sqlite2 retirement/orphaning

On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 08:03:01PM +0100, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > > * roundup > I've had an outstanding bug open on this for a while -- this is a > packaging bug as roundup now uses the built-in sqlite3 module by default. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690246 > Thanks, I'

[389-devel] please review ticket#17 - additional optimizations for replicated ops

https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/17 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/17/0001-Ticket-17-replication-optimizations.patch Found a few more minor optimizations. Thanks, Mark -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailm

This is not the power switch you are looking for

Fallout from usrmove, perhaps? I tried to shutdown a VM running Rawhide: Clicked on the power button symbol in the upper right hand corner of the GDM desktop and chose "Power Off". Nothing. Clicked it again, just in case. Nothing. Okay, so Ctrl-Alt-F3, login as root, and then this: [root@jer

[389-devel] please review ticket#17 - additional optimizations for replicated ops - updated link

Sorry had the wrong link to the patch https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/17/0001-Ticket-17-new-replication-optimizations.patch On 02/07/2012 03:05 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote: https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/17 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/17/0001-Ticke

Re: python-sqlite2 retirement/orphaning

On Tue, 7 Feb 2012 10:08:03 -0800, TK (Toshio) wrote: > There is one package that actually has a code dependency on pysqlite2. I've > submitted a patch and asked someone I know who uses the package to test it: > > * plague https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788189 Last time Plague has

Re: This is not the power switch you are looking for

On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 13:14 -0700, Jerry James wrote: > Fallout from usrmove, perhaps? I tried to shutdown a VM running Rawhide: > > Clicked on the power button symbol in the upper right hand corner of > the GDM desktop and chose "Power Off". Nothing. Clicked it again, > just in case. Nothing.

Re: KDE-SIG meeting report (06/2012)

Does this mean KDE4.8 will ship shortly ? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[389-devel] please review ticket #129 - Should only update modifyTimestamp/modifiersName on MODIFY ops

https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/129 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/129/0001-Ticket-129-Should-only-update-modifyTimestamp-modifi.patch This issue was previously fixed, I just expanded the fix a little. Thanks, Mark -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedorap

This is not the power switch you are looking for

Adam Williamson redhat.com> writes: > Shutting down can occasionally get a bit wiggy after a systemd version > update. Was this right after you did a big F16 -> F17 yum update or > anything? If so, you may find you have to just suck it up and hard power > off one time, then it'll be back to worki

Re: python-sqlite2 retirement/orphaning

On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:35:20PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 7 Feb 2012 10:08:03 -0800, TK (Toshio) wrote: > > > There is one package that actually has a code dependency on pysqlite2. I've > > submitted a patch and asked someone I know who uses the package to test it: > > > > * pl

Re: [389-devel] please review ticket #129 - Should only update modifyTimestamp/modifiersName on MODIFY ops

I had a typo in part of the fix, but... After looking at ticket #111, I think maybe we should add this flag to memberOf, referint, and maybe some other plugins. Any thoughts on this? Thanks, Mark PS - having email issues again, so this is a duplicate of a duplicate. Sorry I just don't know i

Re: This is not the power switch you are looking for

Jerry James wrote: > [root@jerry-rawhide32 ~]# poweroff > UNIT LOAD ACTIVE SUB JOB DESCRIPTION > proc-sys...misc.automount loaded active waiting Arbitrary > Executable File A bad systemd build due to a binutils bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=78810

Re: [389-devel] please review ticket #129 - Should only update modifyTimestamp/modifiersName on MODIFY ops

I had a typo in part of the fix, but... After looking at ticket #111, I think maybe we should add this flag to memberOf, referint, and maybe some other plugins. Any thoughts on this? Thanks, Mark PS - having email issues again, so this is a duplicate On 02/07/2012 04:28 PM, Mark Reynolds wr

Re: This is not the power switch you are looking for

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: > A bad systemd build due to a binutils bug: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788107 Thank you very much for the link. It'll be interesting to see if the man page problem is related. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ -- d

Re: This is not the power switch you are looking for

Jerry James wrote: > Thank you very much for the link. It'll be interesting to see if the > man page problem is related. You mean this error message?: man: can't open /usr/share/man/halt.8: No such file or directory No, that's not related to the binutils bug. The error seems harmless, because it

Re: This is not the power switch you are looking for

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: > You mean this error message?: > man: can't open /usr/share/man/halt.8: No such file or directory Yes. > > No, that's not related to the binutils bug. > The error seems harmless, because it does open the expected > man page afterwards. I'm

Re: [389-devel] please review ticket #129 - Should only update modifyTimestamp/modifiersName on MODIFY ops

Actually after looking at ticket #111, I think maybe we should add this flag to memberOf, referint, and maybe some other plugins. Any thoughts on this? Thanks, Mark On 02/07/2012 04:23 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote: https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/129 https://fedorahosted.org/389/at

Re: [389-devel] please review ticket #129 - Should only update modifyTimestamp/modifiersName on MODIFY ops

On 02/07/2012 02:42 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote: I had a typo in part of the fix, but... After looking at ticket #111, I think maybe we should add this flag to memberOf, referint, and maybe some other plugins. Any thoughts on this? If the concern is the audit trail, then when memberof, referint,

Re: This is not the power switch you are looking for

Jerry James wrote: > I'm not sure what you mean by that; "man poweroff" only shows the > error message. It worked for me. Perhaps because I had previously installed systemd from sources and had a leftover manpage file where the man command was able to find it. > [...] > I'll file a bug. Thanks.

Subversion 1.7.1? Not 1.7.2?

Is there a particular reason Rawhide etc. are stuck on 1.7.1? Is there a known problem with 1.7.2 or something? -- Bojan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

/usrmove?

1) Will /usrmove already be 'done' in the Fedora 17 test ISO's? 2) Will Rawhide have a simple 'do this step-by-step' for the already existing Rawhide /usr/move? 3) Will /usrmove be painless for those updating Fedora 16 or Fedora 15 or will we be biried for weeks with complaints of failed upgrades

Re: /usrmove?

On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:08:28 -0500 David wrote: > 1) Will /usrmove already be 'done' in the Fedora 17 test ISO's? Any of them moving forward, yes. > 2) Will Rawhide have a simple 'do this step-by-step' for the already > existing Rawhide /usr/move? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedor

[389-devel] Please review: [389 Project] #27: SASL/PLAIN binds do not work

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/27 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/27/0001-Trac-Ticket-27-SASL-PLAIN-binds-do-not-work.patch Bug description: ids_sasl_canon_user failed to set "dn: " in front of the dn string in the output argument out_user. The dn string is used in the next

Re: /usrmove?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2/7/2012 8:15 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:08:28 -0500 David > wrote: > >> 1) Will /usrmove already be 'done' in the Fedora 17 test ISO's? > > Any of them moving forward, yes. > >> 2) Will Rawhide have a simple 'do this step-

Re: /usrmove?

On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 18:15 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:08:28 -0500 > David wrote: > > > 1) Will /usrmove already be 'done' in the Fedora 17 test ISO's? > > Any of them moving forward, yes. It is not done in Alpha TC1. It will be there in Alpha TC2 and later. > > 2) Wil

Re: /usrmove?

On Feb 7, 2012, at 7:46 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Note that this has not actually been implemented in anaconda yet, so if > you do an anaconda upgrade at this time, it will explode horribly. So the instructions here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum#Fedora_16_-.3E_Fed

Re: /usrmove?

On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 20:57:05 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > On Feb 7, 2012, at 7:46 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Note that this has not actually been implemented in anaconda yet, so if > > you do an anaconda upgrade at this time, it will explode horribly. > > So the instructions here

Re: /usrmove?

Adam Williamson wrote: > Note that this has not actually been implemented in anaconda yet, so if > you do an anaconda upgrade at this time, it will explode horribly. The > bug requesting this support be added to anaconda is > http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787893 . It's totally unaccep

Re: /usrmove?

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:37:33 +0100 Kevin Kofler wrote: > Adam Williamson wrote: > > Note that this has not actually been implemented in anaconda yet, > > so if you do an anaconda upgrade at this time, it will explode > > horribly. The bug requesting this support be added to anaconda is > > http://