On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 01:19:54AM -0400, Anish Patil wrote:
> On fedora 17, system-config-language sets attributes LANG,SYSFONT in
> /etc/sysconfig/i18n file.
> Fedora 18, i checked the locale.conf file which has only one attribute i.e
> LANG.
> I would like to know where SYSFONT attribute is se
Le 01/11/2012 18:25, Jason L Tibbitts III a écrit :
> It would have been super nice to actually include a link in all of those
> bugs, or some reference. I mean, they must have been filed by program,
> so it's not as if you would have had to do a bunch of extra typing.
>
> We really need a "mass
Le 01/11/2012 18:25, Jason L Tibbitts III a écrit :
> It would have been super nice to actually include a link in all of those
> bugs, or some reference. I mean, they must have been filed by program,
> so it's not as if you would have had to do a bunch of extra typing.
No, nothing automatic here.
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Remi Collet wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Le 30/10/2012 15:14, Remi Collet a écrit :
>> So I open a tracker bug for this issues
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871373
>
> Finally : 60 open bugs.
>
Thanks for the bugs.
Hi Miroslav,
It sounds like you are missing f18 branch while creating new build
Thx for the new spacewalk release!
Nicolas (kwizart)
2012/11/2 Miroslav Suchý
> The unsigned tag 'rhn-client-tools-1.8.26-1.fc19' was created.
>
> Tagger: Miroslav Suchý
> Date: Fri Nov 2 11:29:04 2012 +0100
>
>
Quoting Michael Cronenworth (2012-11-01 18:33:24)
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I didn't want to throw this grenade into the debate, but now someone
> > else has, I'll just note that I was in favour of this before and I'm
> > still in favour of it now. :) Rolling release is a model that makes
> > cl
On 11/01/2012 05:25 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
It would have been super nice to actually include a link in all of those
bugs, or some reference. I mean, they must have been filed by program,
so it's not as if you would have had to do a bunch of extra typing.
Most of us do this actually ma
On 1 November 2012 17:33, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>> I didn't want to throw this grenade into the debate, but now someone
>> else has, I'll just note that I was in favour of this before and I'm
>> still in favour of it now. :) Rolling release is a model that makes
>> cl
On 11/02/2012 10:55 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
Quoting Michael Cronenworth (2012-11-01 18:33:24)
Adam Williamson wrote:
I didn't want to throw this grenade into the debate, but now someone
else has, I'll just note that I was in favour of this before and I'm
still in favour of it now. :) Ro
On 11/01/2012 06:25 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
It would have been super nice to actually include a link in all of those
bugs, or some reference. I mean, they must have been filed by program,
so it's not as if you would have had to do a bunch of extra typing.
We really need a "mass bug fili
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:03 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
>
> Trust me when I say this we have to fix other processes we have *before* we
> can properly fix the feature process.
Which?
> Until that is done there is no point in trying to fix the feature process.
I disagree. While we might
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 11:55:37AM +0100, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> I recently came up with similar 3-layer idea. My description was a bit
> different, something like this:
> 1. level - rawhide-like repository, more or less anything goes
> 2. level - package moves here after maintainer says "th
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Tree-DAG_Node:
1d12c1cb72a71edfdaab1b08a8f2e354 Tree-DAG_Node-1.07.tgz
--
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/mail
Ian Malone wrote:
> How does this work with things like Anaconda? In a rolling model
> (assuming you can do other major upgrades without reinstalling, if not
> there's less point anyway), people aren't going to be reinstalling so
> it could easily trickle through to stable before getting serious us
Stanislav Ochotnicky writes:
> Quoting Michael Cronenworth (2012-11-01 18:33:24)
>> I've wanted to write up a blog post about my plan for a rolling release,
>> but I'll post a snip-it here.
> I recently came up with similar 3-layer idea.
In my little corner of the system, the main thing that cau
> "RC" == Remi Collet writes:
RC> Have you notice than all this bugs depend on #871373 which provides
RC> some useful information ?
The useful information was not in the ticket. Which means it wasn't in
the email. Which means I had to get over to a web browser, wait for
bugzilla to load, a
commit aa8cdcff3aeb24f317ed1ba3dfecdf7d02f6a324
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Fri Nov 2 15:42:22 2012 +0100
Correct dependencies
perl-String-CRC32.spec | 10 +-
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-String-CRC32.spec b/perl-String-CRC32.spec
index 436
On 11/02/2012 01:20 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:03 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
Trust me when I say this we have to fix other processes we have *before* we
can properly fix the feature process.
Which?
As soon as an feature depends on other components or several other
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 02:52:46PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> As soon as an feature depends on other components or several other
> components and their maintainers involvement/participation, then for
> example the unresponsive maintainers policy conflicts with the
> feature process giv
On 11/02/2012 02:58 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 02:52:46PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
As soon as an feature depends on other components or several other
components and their maintainers involvement/participation, then for
example the unresponsive maintainers poli
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>As soon as an feature depends on other components or several other
> >>components and their maintainers involvement/participation, then for
> >>example the unresponsive maintainers policy conflicts with the
> >>feature pro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872158
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.52-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora
16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.52-1.fc16
--
You are receiving this mail because:
Yo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872158
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.52-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora
18.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.52-1.fc18
--
You are receiving this mail because:
Yo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872158
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.52-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora
17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.52-1.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
Yo
On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
As soon as an feature depends on other components or several other
components and their maintainers involvement/participation, then for
example the unresponsive maintainers poli
=?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?= writes:
> On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>> Dead/un-maintained packages need to be removed/reassigned at the
>>> very *beginning* of an new development cyc
On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?= writes:
On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Dead/un-maintained packages need to be removed/reassigned at the
very *begi
On Sex, 2012-11-02 at 02:53 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Qui, 2012-11-01 at 19:14 -0700, Benjamin De Kosnik wrote:
> > Using F18 TC6 in a KVM install, I was able to install texlive-2012 as
> > per the updates-testing packages, and look at the state of generating
> > documenation with DocBook t
=?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?= writes:
> On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> How exactly are you going to force maintainers who go missing to do so
>> at a prescheduled time? Real life is seldom that convenient.
> bash script + a cron job should suffice to achieve just t
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:44:06 +
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > =?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?=
> > writes:
> >> On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +, "Jóhann B.
> >>> Guðmu
Indeed. If someone owns 4 packages that are all stable and have no bug
reports, are they inactive?
-J
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?=
> writes:
> > On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> How exactly are you going to fo
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-App-Daemon:
0496db44622acb4478ef4bfc6be0d6e5 App-Daemon-0.18.tar.gz
--
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/mailman
On 11/02/2012 04:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:44:06 +
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
=?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?=
writes:
On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +00
commit 46ee9ac74ade858edbf0782a09ebceef424eb6ac
Author: Iain Arnell
Date: Fri Nov 2 12:04:45 2012 -0600
update to latest upstream version
.gitignore|1 +
perl-Catalyst-Manual.spec |7 +--
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3
commit 8ad2fd6c91fc8892254a13655da255971a4c812e
Author: Iain Arnell
Date: Fri Nov 2 12:04:55 2012 -0600
drop old test sub-package obsoletes/provides
perl-Catalyst-Manual.spec |5 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Catalyst-Manual.spec b/perl-C
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 17:57:57 +,
"\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\"" wrote:
Surely if an individual has not logged into for several months into
our infrastructure he must be inactive no?
Not necessarily. You can watch things without having to login to
infrastructure. Unless you need to mak
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:57 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/02/2012 04:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:44:06 +
>> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>
>> On 11/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
=?UTF-8?B?**IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc2**9uIg==?=
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Getopt-Long-Descriptive:
3610685889c885f13fe3f4ed1360e078 Getopt-Long-Descriptive-0.093.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admi
On 11/02/2012 04:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>How exactly are you going to force maintainers who go missing to do so
>>at a prescheduled time? Real life is seldom that convenient.
>bash script + a cron job should suffice to achieve just that.
Somehow, we are failing to communicate.
We would not
On 11/02/2012 06:05 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
No, they might simply have had nothing to do. Sometimes applications
are stable, have no releases, and have no bugs files against them.
Then those individuals would simply respond to the email that that was
the case and they are still alive and ac
- Original Message -
> From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2012 7:57:57 PM
> Subject: Re: Revamping the non responsive maintainer process
>
> On 11/02/2012 04:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:44:06 +
> > "Jó
* "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" [02/11/2012 18:59] :
>
> If at this point we dont have any process that can actively tell if
> a maintainer is present and active within the project then we have
> bigger fish to fry then the feature process...
This really does not matter. We've had maintainers that were
Several months ago I attempted to upgrade libffi 3.0.10 to 3.0.11. The change
was reverted because the soname change in this version of the library broke the
build environment. I would still like to get 3.0.11 in Fedora. I don't
anticipate any future ABI-breaking changes, and 3.0.12 will incl
The lightweight tag 'perl-Module-Signature-0.69-1.fc18' was created pointing to:
a5b4aff... Update to 0.69
--
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/mailman/listinfo/perl-
The lightweight tag 'perl-Module-Signature-0.69-1.fc19' was created pointing to:
a5b4aff... Update to 0.69
--
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/mailman/listinfo/perl-
On 11/02/2012 06:27 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
Wrong. Do you know how few of the problems we see in Eclipse land don't need
fixes upstreams? And some of these issues require man/months (years sometimes)
upstream before there is smth to show in Fedora. Don't make your assumptions
based on t
On 11/02/2012 06:56 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
If a package is unmaintained, send out a call to co-maintain to devel@ and open
up its ACLs.
That package would hardly be un-maintained if it has co-maintainers now
does it...
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 11:55 +0100, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> Quoting Michael Cronenworth (2012-11-01 18:33:24)
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > I didn't want to throw this grenade into the debate, but now someone
> > > else has, I'll just note that I was in favour of this before and I'm
> > > s
On 11/2/12 3:18 PM, Anthony Green wrote:
Several months ago I attempted to upgrade libffi 3.0.10 to 3.0.11.
The change was reverted because the soname change in this version of
the library broke the build environment. I would still like to get
3.0.11 in Fedora. I don't anticipate any future ABI
Well your point basically is "we can't/don't ship anything that is
stable so we should give up on that."
I disagree with that. Fedora releases had some small regression
introduced via updates from time but is is *very* usable as a stable
operating system.
Compare it to "always cutting edge" like
Hi,
Do current anaconda problems will have an impact on preupgrade?
--
Best regards,
Michal
http://eventhorizon.pl/
https://getactive.pl/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 21:07 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> Well your point basically is "we can't/don't ship anything that is
> stable so we should give up on that."
More or less, yes.
> I disagree with that. Fedora releases had some small regression
> introduced via updates from time but is is *very* u
Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said:
> Surely if an individual has not logged into for several months into our
> infrastructure he must be inactive no?
I maintain just a couple of low-overhead packages, and I haven't changed
either in a couple of years. The only time I've logged into
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build ->
> pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so during the transition we'll need to
> build both sonames of libffi. It might be worth keeping a compat-libffi
> around for a re
Michał Piotrowski (mkkp...@gmail.com) said:
> Do current anaconda problems will have an impact on preupgrade?
preupgrade is not the current supported upgrade tool to upgrade to Fedora 18.
So the simple answer to your question is 'yes', although not exactly for the
reasons you expect.
https://fed
Colin Walters (walt...@verbum.org) said:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
>
> > It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build ->
> > pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so during the transition we'll need to
> > build both sonames of libffi. It might
On 11/02/2012 07:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Anyway, we've rather torpedo'ed the feature process discussion now, and
I'm sorry about that :/. Hence the topic change. But while we're blue
sky thinking about massive release process changes, I think it's worth
keeping a firm grasp on what Fedora i
Adam Williamson writes:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 21:07 +0100, drago01 wrote:
>> I disagree with that. Fedora releases had some small regression
>> introduced via updates from time but is is *very* usable as a stable
>> operating system.
> I disagree. It's usable by the kind of people who use Fedor
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Adam Williamson writes:
>> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 21:07 +0100, drago01 wrote:
>>> I disagree with that. Fedora releases had some small regression
>>> introduced via updates from time but is is *very* usable as a stable
>>> operating system.
>
>> I
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 17:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Adam Williamson writes:
> > On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 21:07 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> >> I disagree with that. Fedora releases had some small regression
> >> introduced via updates from time but is is *very* usable as a stable
> >> operating system.
>
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:49:01PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Colin Walters (walt...@verbum.org) said:
> > On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> >
> > > It looks like libffi is emitted into the minimal buildroot (rpm-build ->
> > > pkg-config -> glib2 -> libffi), so durin
Am 02.11.2012 17:25, schrieb Tom Lane:
> =?UTF-8?B?IkrDs2hhbm4gQi4gR3XDsG11bmRzc29uIg==?= writes:
>> On 11/02/2012 03:32 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:12:56PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Dead/un-maintained packages need to be removed/reassigned at the
Am 02.11.2012 22:53, schrieb Tom Lane:
> Abandoning any pretense of having stable releases will eliminate a huge
> fraction of the user community. For sure it will eliminate *me*. I'm
> not in the business of fighting OS bugs every single day, and I will not
> be forced into that business. I h
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:17:02 -0700
Adam Williamson wrote:
..snip...
> If you're using a Fedora release today you're _already_ fighting OS
> bugs more often than most people do, I'd say. I disagree with drago's
> assertion that my description was of people who use Rawhide. It was
> not intended t
Adam Williamson writes:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 17:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I've seen a whole lot of user demand for *more* stable versions of
>> Fedora. I've seen none whatever for less stable versions.
> Perhaps I ought to be more clear. I think we can maintain the level of
> *actual* stab
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> If you're using a Fedora release today you're _already_ fighting OS bugs
> more often than most people do, I'd say. I disagree with drago's
> assertion that my description was of people who use Rawhide. It was not
> intended to be, and it wa
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 13:22 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 21:07 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> > Well your point basically is "we can't/don't ship anything that is
> > stable so we should give up on that."
>
> More or less, yes.
>
> > I disagree with that. Fedora releases had som
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:31 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:17:02 -0700
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> ..snip...
>
> > If you're using a Fedora release today you're _already_ fighting OS
> > bugs more often than most people do, I'd say. I disagree with drago's
> > assertion that
On 11/01/2012 04:21 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 09:08:36 -0600
Orion Poplawski wrote:
Some MPI updates:
- I built openmpi 1.6.3 in rawhide yesterday. This had an unexpected
bump in the libmpi_f90.so soname. I know this affects hdf5 and
netcdf-fortran, both my packages and I'
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> [...]
> * Upgrading every year, with an unreliable upgrade process, is not
> something you have to do with a proper stable OS
I am not sure why you call it unreliable ... I *never* reinstall
unless I really had to (moving one installation
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> My fundamental argument is there's a bit of a
> disconnect between our release process - which is sort of aping the way
> a stable general-purpose OS would be released, but on fast-forward and
> with far fewer resources - and our actual g
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:04 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:31 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:17:02 -0700
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > ..snip...
> >
> > > If you're using a Fedora release today you're _already_ fighting OS
> > > bugs more ofte
On Sat, 2012-11-03 at 00:18 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > [...]
> > * Upgrading every year, with an unreliable upgrade process, is not
> > something you have to do with a proper stable OS
>
> I am not sure why you call it unreliable ... I *nev
On Sat, 2012-11-03 at 00:18 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > [...]
> > * Upgrading every year, with an unreliable upgrade process, is not
> > something you have to do with a proper stable OS
>
> I am not sure why you call it unreliable ... I *nev
Hi,
2012/11/3 Adam Williamson :
> Note
> that neither Red Hat nor Microsoft actually support major version
> upgrades for their operating systems
Just take a look at this - MS rocks here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPnehDhGa14
--
Best regards,
Michal
http://eventhorizon.pl/
https://getactiv
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-11-03 at 00:18 +0100, drago01 wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > [...]
>> > * Upgrading every year, with an unreliable upgrade process, is not
>> > something you have to do with a proper sta
On Sat, 2012-11-03 at 00:44 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> > The number of variables involved in one is astronomical. Note
> > that neither Red Hat nor Microsoft actually support major version
> > upgrades for their operating systems,
>
> Microsoft does. They do even sell upgrade boxes ...
Well, it's a
On Sat, 2012-11-03 at 01:07 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 03.11.2012 00:58, schrieb Adam Williamson:
> > Microsoft don't really expect you to upgrade Windows. They expect you to
> > buy a computer with Windows X on it, use it for three years, then throw
> > it away and buy a new computer with Wi
Am 03.11.2012 00:58, schrieb Adam Williamson:
> Microsoft don't really expect you to upgrade Windows. They expect you to
> buy a computer with Windows X on it, use it for three years, then throw
> it away and buy a new computer with Windows Y on it. Red Hat expects
> something similar for RHEL - th
On 11/02/2012 04:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Adam Williamson writes:
>> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 21:07 +0100, drago01 wrote:
>>> I disagree with that. Fedora releases had some small regression
>>> introduced via updates from time but is is *very* usable as a stable
>>> operating system.
>
>> I disagree
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 03:23:48PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> And has been since August. Development starts when rawhide and F-next
> branch.
We need some way to put this in bigger letters.
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproj
On 2 November 2012 17:36, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2012/11/3 Adam Williamson :
>> Note
>> that neither Red Hat nor Microsoft actually support major version
>> upgrades for their operating systems
>
> Just take a look at this - MS rocks here
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPnehDhGa14
S
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Beta Test Compose 7 (TC7)
is now available for testing. Content information, including changes,
can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5349#comment:19
. Please see the following pages for download links (including delta
ISOs) and testing
Hello,
I am looking for a sponsor.
I am Canadian, I know French, English, and many programming languages. I use
Fedora 17 on
my Lenovo Thinkpad x230 and I have started using Linux in 2003 on a Red Hat 9
installation.
Over the years, I have used: Slackware, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Fedora, CentOS, Mint,
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> well, it would maybe a start to DROP packages which are still
> missing systemd-units
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/18/FeatureList
>
> 60%
> SysV to Systemd
>
Dropping 40% of packages isn't going to happen. Sorry
Rahul
--
deve
85 matches
Mail list logo
