Quoting Denis Arnaud (2012-09-09 16:50:59)
> Hi,
>
> has anyone already attempted to package Hypertable (
> http://hypertable.com/community/source_code/) for Fedora/RedHat/CentOS?
> Does anyone know whether there are current initiatives around it? Would
> someone be interested in starting such a
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 12:39:46 +
Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
> [freeglut]
> freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.i686 requires libGLU-devel
> freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.x86_64 requires libGLU-devel
Hello,
freeglut is mine and I wonder whether the new mesa-libGLU package misses the
"Provid
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:21:04 +0200, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 12:39:46 +
> Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
>
> > [freeglut]
> > freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.i686 requires libGLU-devel
> > freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.x86_64 requires libGLU-devel
>
> Hello,
> freeglut is m
On 09/10/2012 11:36 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:21:04 +0200, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 12:39:46 +
Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
[freeglut]
freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.i686 requires libGLU-devel
freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.x86_64 requires
Compose started at Mon Sep 10 08:15:11 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[ClanLib]
ClanLib-devel-2.3.6-3.fc18.i686 requires libGLU-devel
ClanLib-devel-2.3.6-3.fc18.x86_64 requires libGLU-devel
[ClanLib06]
ClanLib06-de
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>
> mesa-libGLU is now an independent package (i.e. not a sub-package of
> mesa), with a sub-package of mesa-libGLU-devel. However, these new packages
> are missing the provides for libGLU and libGLU-devel that the original
> sub-packages of me
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 08:30:03 -0400
Rich Mattes wrote:
> Looks like it was also reported in its own bug (
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855536). There's a new build
> at (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=353410) which has
> the libGLU{,-devel} provides.
...whi
Same rules apply for any packages that want to get rolled into the
2.5.92 update: Please add the builds to the spreadsheet and they will
get rolled up into the mega-update.
The spreadsheet URL is:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtzJKpbiGX1zdGJzeU9waFJFZmgyQzBuN2VxU0lxbHc&pli=1#gid=0
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> Same rules apply for any packages that want to get rolled into the
> 2.5.92 update: Please add the builds to the spreadsheet and they will
> get rolled up into the mega-update.
>
> The spreadsheet URL is:
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreads
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=852503
--- Comment #2 from Olivier Bilodeau ---
Changes to package based on comments:
- whitespace cleanup
- global instead of define
- removed duplicated Provides:...
- Source URL now uses real_name global
Notes:
I do plan to propose this in EPEL5 s
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851721
--- Comment #2 from Olivier Bilodeau ---
Updates:
- whitespace cleanup
- global instead of define
- removed useless Provides:...
- Source URL now uses real_name global
I plan to propose this to EPEL5 also.
Successful koji build:
http://koji.fe
Summary of changes:
84fa1af... Update to 0.800 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mai
Bruno Wolff III writes:
>MichaÅ Piotrowski wrote:
>> Is there any chance that 9.2 will be available for F18?
> I think for 9.1 Tom pushed it just before beta when a few of us promised
> to do some testing pronmptly.
> So if 9.2 gets released before f18 beta there is probably a good change
Hi,
2012/9/10 Tom Lane :
> Bruno Wolff III writes:
>>Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>> Is there any chance that 9.2 will be available for F18?
>
>> I think for 9.1 Tom pushed it just before beta when a few of us promised
>> to do some testing pronmptly.
>
>> So if 9.2 gets released before f18 bet
Evolution crashed on takeoff this morning. I tried to report the bug
with ABRT, and was surprised when it automatically contacted the
retrace server without asking me what to do first. I've already got
huge piles of debuginfo packages installed, so it would probably have
been fine to generate the
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:24:40 -0400,
Tom Lane wrote:
PG 9.2 is now released, and F18 isn't beta yet. So I'd like to push it
into F18 --- will anyone help test?
Yeah!
I'll definitely do some testing. My personal web server is running on F18
with updates-testing enabled. Most of the test
2012/9/10 Michał Piotrowski :
> Hi,
>
> 2012/9/10 Tom Lane :
>> Bruno Wolff III writes:
>>>Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Is there any chance that 9.2 will be available for F18?
>>
>>> I think for 9.1 Tom pushed it just before beta when a few of us promised
>>> to do some testing pronmptly.
>>
On 9/10/12 4:21 AM, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 12:39:46 +
Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
[freeglut]
freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.i686 requires libGLU-devel
freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.x86_64 requires libGLU-devel
Hello,
freeglut is mine and I wonder whether th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855753
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from Fedora
On 10 September 2012 15:00, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
> Don't you mean 3.5.92? I didn't think we were reverting to a version of
> GNOME from 2004...
Gahh, Monday Yup, 3.5.* :)
Richard
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/deve
Bruno Wolff III writes:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:24:40 -0400,
>Tom Lane wrote:
>> PG 9.2 is now released, and F18 isn't beta yet. So I'd like to push it
>> into F18 --- will anyone help test?
> Yeah!
> I'll definitely do some testing. My personal web server is running on F18
> with up
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 17:58:32 +0200,
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
I updated my test rawhide VM and now it's broken - it boots to target
Basic System.
I think that depends on the version of systemd used in the initramfs. When
I saw that problem previously I was able to boot with an older ker
2012/9/10 Bruno Wolff III :
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 17:58:32 +0200,
> Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>
>>
>> I updated my test rawhide VM and now it's broken - it boots to target
>> Basic System.
>
>
> I think that depends on the version of systemd used in the initramfs. When I
> saw that problem p
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 11:54 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Fedora 18 is basically closed for new feature work, and instead the
> focus needs to be on integration of the existing feature set and
> bugfixes. But as you state there is a large amount of time before F18
> releases, which means new f
Matthias Clasen (mcla...@redhat.com) said:
> On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 11:54 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> > Fedora 18 is basically closed for new feature work, and instead the
> > focus needs to be on integration of the existing feature set and
> > bugfixes. But as you state there is a large am
On 09/10/2012 08:35 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 11:54 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
Fedora 18 is basically closed for new feature work, and instead the
focus needs to be on integration of the existing feature set and
bugfixes. But as you state there is a large amount of time
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:31:33 -0400,
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruno Wolff III writes:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:24:40 -0400,
Tom Lane wrote:
PG 9.2 is now released, and F18 isn't beta yet. So I'd like to push it
into F18 --- will anyone help test?
Yeah!
I'll definitely do some testing
On 2012-09-10 6:10, Richard Hughes wrote:
Same rules apply for any packages that want to get rolled into the
2.5.92 update: Please add the builds to the spreadsheet and they will
get rolled up into the mega-update.
The spreadsheet URL is:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtzJKpbiGX1
On Mon, 10.09.12 14:09, Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Matthias Clasen (mcla...@redhat.com) said:
> > On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 11:54 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >
> > > Fedora 18 is basically closed for new feature work, and instead the
> > > focus needs to be on integration of th
On 08/09/12 11:50, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Well, if you want to look, or anyone else wishes to take up the
> gauntlet:
>
> http://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/mash/tree/utils/spam-o-matic
Thanks for the link. Anyone see merit in these ideas ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https:/
On 09/10/2012 10:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Anway, I still believe that the default approach to doing package
> development should be to focus on F18 as long as it isn't released,
> and only open F19 for a packge if the packager decides he is ready
> to. Right now we have the opposite wh
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 23:27:43 +0200,
Kalev Lember wrote:
Can't we just change the branching to a later date?
Branching later results in rawhide being frozen during the alpha freeze
which breaks things for people doing development. (Note that by alpha
people really should be stablizing
On 09/10/2012 11:44 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 23:27:43 +0200,
> Kalev Lember wrote:
>>
>> Can't we just change the branching to a later date?
>
> Branching later results in rawhide being frozen during the alpha freeze
> which breaks things for people doing development
On 2012-09-10 15:03, Kalev Lember wrote:
The hard reality is that branched and rawhide are getting pretty much
the same set of packages currently. It's a very nice view to let
development go ahead in rawhide, and to stabilize branched. But we
only
have so many developers and everyone is focus
On Mon, 10.09.12 15:14, Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) wrote:
> On 2012-09-10 15:03, Kalev Lember wrote:
>
> >
> >The hard reality is that branched and rawhide are getting pretty much
> >the same set of packages currently. It's a very nice view to let
> >development go ahead in rawhide, an
On 2012-09-10 15:22, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Mon, 10.09.12 15:14, Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) wrote:
On 2012-09-10 15:03, Kalev Lember wrote:
>
>The hard reality is that branched and rawhide are getting pretty
much
>the same set of packages currently. It's a very nice view to
On Mon, 10.09.12 15:51, Jesse Keating (jkeat...@j2solutions.net) wrote:
> On 09/10/2012 02:27 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> >Can't we just change the branching to a later date?
>
> When we used to do that, we frequently had destabilizing changes
> happening late in the development process, because th
On 10 September 2012 17:16, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 10.09.12 15:51, Jesse Keating (jkeat...@j2solutions.net) wrote:
>
>> On 09/10/2012 02:27 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>> >Can't we just change the branching to a later date?
>>
>> When we used to do that, we frequently had destabilizing ch
FlightGear 2.8.0 has been released.
And it supports a lot more controllers.
Can we have FlightGear updated to 2.8.0 for F17?
Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Alpha Release Candidate 1
(RC1) is now available for testing. Content information, including
changes, can be found at
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5284#comment:16 . Please see the
following pages for download links (including delta ISOs) and t
On Mon, 10.09.12 17:43, Stephen John Smoogen (smo...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 10 September 2012 17:16, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Mon, 10.09.12 15:51, Jesse Keating (jkeat...@j2solutions.net) wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/10/2012 02:27 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> >> >Can't we just change the branching
On 2012-09-10 16:43, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 10 September 2012 17:16, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
On Mon, 10.09.12 15:51, Jesse Keating (jkeat...@j2solutions.net)
wrote:
On 09/10/2012 02:27 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>Can't we just change the branching to a later date?
When we used to do
On 2012-09-10 17:13, Andre Robatino wrote:
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Alpha Release Candidate
1
(RC1) is now available for testing. Content information, including
changes, can be found at
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5284#comment:16 . Please see
the
following pages
On 9/9/2012 2:03 AM, Gary Gatling wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I decided to ask if he would be willing to add an epoc tag as Ken
> suggested or be willing to become a maintainer or co-maintainer. I think
> he just continues to insist that rpm work in a way its not designed...
> (Have two versions of the
- Original Message -
> FlightGear 2.8.0 has been released.
>
> And it supports a lot more controllers.
>
> Can we have FlightGear updated to 2.8.0 for F17?
Hi,
You should open a new bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora&version=rawhide&component=FlightGear
Regard
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Alpha Release Candidate 2
(RC2) is now available for testing. Content information, including
changes, can be found at
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5284#comment:19 . Please see the
following pages for download links (including delta ISOs) and t
On 09/11/2012 12:03 AM, Tomas Dabašinskas wrote:
> FlightGear 2.8.0
Opened bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856053
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
47 matches
Mail list logo
