On 2012-07-16 22:50, Clive Hills wrote:
Coincidentally I was looking at gtm this weekend.
One of the interesting points in re packaging it is that one must
bootstrap gtm from an existing gtm using the providing source.
I'm wondering a bit how that might be affected by the Fedora packaging
guideli
On 07/17/2012 12:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Jan Kratochvil writes:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:42:00 +0200, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>> And I wouldn't be so presumptions as to state authoritatively what
>>> is or is not a bug, in something whose purpose is not known to me.
>>
>> Non-existing /
On 07/17/2012 12:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Jan Kratochvil writes:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:42:00 +0200, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>> And I wouldn't be so presumptions as to state authoritatively what
>>> is or is not a bug, in something whose purpose is not known to me.
>>
>> Non-existing /
On 07/17/2012 03:02 AM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, Mike Manilone wrote:
>
>> I think we can create a new repo called "security" like Debian. Push all
>> the security updates to it.
>
> Uhm, we have that. It is called RHEL
Not quite although RHEL errata are also categorised as
Clive,
It is great to hear that you are already interested in gtm.
The good news is that during the Debian packaging
we solved the bootstrapping problem. We worked
along with upstream and with Debian developers
to find a suitable solution.
The reason why gtm is needed in order to build gtm, is
t
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:17:59 +0800
Mike Manilone wrote:
> 於 一，2012-07-16 於 22:02 -0400，Paul Wouters 提到：
> > On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, Mike Manilone wrote:
> >
> > > I think we can create a new repo called "security" like Debian.
> > > Push all the security updates to it.
> >
> > Uhm, we have that. I
Andrew Haley writes:
On 07/17/2012 12:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Jan Kratochvil writes:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:42:00 +0200, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>> And I wouldn't be so presumptions as to state authoritatively what
>>> is or is not a bug, in something whose purpose is not known to m
On 17/07/12 02:40, Mike Manilone wrote:
> Hi, list
>
> I don't want too many updates so I disable the "updates" repo. But
> later I found that "fedora" repo has no updates so I couldn't get any
> security updates.
I'm not really sure, this would give you, what you really want;
especially, it may
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:01:23AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Andrew Haley writes:
>
> >On 07/17/2012 12:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> >> Jan Kratochvil writes:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:42:00 +0200, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> And I wouldn't be so presumptions as to state authori
Bryn M. Reeves writes:
On 07/17/2012 12:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Jan Kratochvil writes:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:42:00 +0200, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>> And I wouldn't be so presumptions as to state authoritatively what
>>> is or is not a bug, in something whose purpose is not known to
On 07/17/2012 12:01 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Andrew Haley writes:
>> Yes, it's the pathname that started this process. Yes, that pathname
>> may point to file that no longer exists. That's UNIX.
>
> No, that's Linux with prelink installed.
And a number of other common configurations for e.g
Bryn M. Reeves writes:
On 07/17/2012 12:01 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Andrew Haley writes:
>> Yes, it's the pathname that started this process. Yes, that pathname
>> may point to file that no longer exists. That's UNIX.
>
> No, that's Linux with prelink installed.
And a number of other comm
Tomasz Torcz writes:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:01:23AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Andrew Haley writes:
>
> >On 07/17/2012 12:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> >> Jan Kratochvil writes:
> >>
> >>> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:42:00 +0200, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> And I wouldn't be so presumpti
On 07/17/2012 12:42 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> … which can be used to reset the
> application, so that it knows that it's been updated.
Because that is a common need across many packages.
Apparently being notified of a prelink is not such a common need. Even
if such a thing did exist it coul
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Jan Kratochvil writes:
>> Non-existing /proc/self/exe file is a normal UNIX process state so a UNIX
>
>
> It is anything but "normal". The "normal" state of things is documented by
> proc(5).
Documentation tends to be written after-the fact
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Scott Schmit writes:
>> And what's the pathname of a deleted file?
>
> My point exactly. There is none. Thanks, prelink!
"Thanks, UNIX". What is the pathname of a file with several links?
The pathnames just doesn't mean much in UNIX, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
it was requested in https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5222 that
we do a mass rebuild for Fedora 18 for
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DwarfCompressor and
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/MiniDebugInfo due to a mix up
in dates it w
On 07/16/2012 07:38 PM, Till Maas wrote:
I was asked to send to send the status of the last run of the Upstream
Release Monitoring tool to this list. It would consist of all lines in
http://till.fedorapeople.org/tmp/cnucnu-last.log
that mention that a package is outdated. Would you welcome this
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> Well, SCM_RIGHTS/SCM_CREDENTIALS is how you get the peer's pid in the first
> place.
>
> This would be an additional check, on top of that.
Is there any value in this "additional check" (that nobody else
apparently does)? Do you not trust the kernel's
Am 17.07.2012 02:40, schrieb Mike Manilone:
> Hi, list
>
> I don't want too many updates so I disable the "updates" repo. But later
> I found that "fedora" repo has no updates so I couldn't get any security
> updates.
>
> I think we can create a new repo called "security" like Debian. Push all
Am 17.07.2012 04:17, schrieb Mike Manilone:
> 於 一，2012-07-16 於 22:02 -0400，Paul Wouters 提到：
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, Mike Manilone wrote:
>>
>>> I think we can create a new repo called "security" like Debian. Push all
>>> the security updates to it.
>>
>> Uhm, we have that. It is called RHEL
Hey list,
I've been a contributor to upstream systemtap since mid 2010 and have
been a Fedora user since Fedora 12. Prior to joining Red Hat full
time, I participated in their internship program while completing a
computer engineering degree at Queens University. I'd like to become a
packager fo
Hi!
This a friendly reminder that The Fedora 18 Feature Submission
Deadline is coming soon (maybe too soon for some of you;-) - see
the Fedora 18 Schedule [1] - and it's exactly in one week,
on Tuesday, July 24, 2012. After this date newly submitted
features will be targeted for Fedora 19 unless
Hi:
pdfmod is just one package of distance to get into F18 since the two
dependencies are now approved.
Someone want to review it?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Ismael Olea
Date: Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 1:16 PM
Subject: Package review requests related with pdfmod
To: Development dis
Before we branch for Fedora 18, as is custom, we will block currently
orphaned packages and packages that have failed to build since Fedora 16.
The following packages are currently orphaned, or fail to build. If
you have a need for one of these packages, please pick them up.
If no one claims any o
Hey, folks. It's that time again - time to start thinking about Test
Days for Fedora 18.
For anyone who isn't aware, a Test Day is an event usually focused
around IRC for interaction and a Wiki page for instructions and results,
with the aim being to get a bunch of interested users and developers
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:51:24 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Before we branch for Fedora 18, as is custom, we will block currently
> orphaned packages and packages that have failed to build since Fedora 16.
>
> The following packages are currently orphaned, or fail to build. If
> you have a need
* Till Maas [17/07/2012 07:09] :
>
> I was asked to send to send the status of the last run of the Upstream
> Release Monitoring tool to this list. It would consist of all lines in
> http://till.fedorapeople.org/tmp/cnucnu-last.log
> that mention that a package is outdated. Would you welcome this
Bryn M. Reeves writes:
On 07/17/2012 12:42 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> … which can be used to reset the
> application, so that it knows that it's been updated.
Because that is a common need across many packages.
Apparently being notified of a prelink is not such a common need. Even
if such a
Miloslav Trmač writes:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Sam Varshavchik
wrote:
> Jan Kratochvil writes:
>> Non-existing /proc/self/exe file is a normal UNIX process state so a UNIX
>
>
> It is anything but "normal". The "normal" state of things is documented by
> proc(5).
Documentation tends
Miloslav Trmač writes:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Sam Varshavchik
wrote:
> Scott Schmit writes:
>> And what's the pathname of a deleted file?
>
> My point exactly. There is none. Thanks, prelink!
"Thanks, UNIX". What is the pathname of a file with several links?
Doesn't matter, eith
Chris Adams writes:
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> Well, SCM_RIGHTS/SCM_CREDENTIALS is how you get the peer's pid in the first
> place.
>
> This would be an additional check, on top of that.
Is there any value in this "additional check" (that nobody else
apparently does)? Do you no
> Anyone interested in
>
> gnusim8085 -- A graphical simulator for Intel 8085 microprocessor
I would be interested in taking gnusim8085.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Miloslav Trmač writes:
>> > Can you explain, then, the "correctly" approach by which an executable can
>> > affirm whether another pid is either running the same executable, or the
>> > post-prelinked version of the same executable.
>>
>>
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> Chris Adams writes:
> >Is there any value in this "additional check" (that nobody else
> >apparently does)? Do you not trust the kernel's credential handling?
>
> I certainly trust it. But just because I trust it, it doesn't mean that any
> additional c
Miloslav Trmač writes:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Sam Varshavchik
wrote:
> Miloslav Trmač writes:
>> > Can you explain, then, the "correctly" approach by which an executable
can
>> > affirm whether another pid is either running the same executable, or the
>> > post-prelinked version
Chris Adams writes:
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> Chris Adams writes:
> >Is there any value in this "additional check" (that nobody else
> >apparently does)? Do you not trust the kernel's credential handling?
>
> I certainly trust it. But just because I trust it, it doesn't mean th
On 07/17/2012 10:19 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
gtick -- A graphical metronome software
I have added myself to this package.
regards
Brendan
(bsjones)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
38 matches
Mail list logo
