On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 05:16:27PM -0500, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
> Then he finds out that Debian actually has a version of suexec[1] that lets
> you use a conf file to configure suexec. My question is, why the heck isn't
> this in Fedora? How is it that Debian can offer both versions[1][2], bu
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 05:16:27PM -0500, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
> I'm honestly surprised that Fedora doesn't offer this little piece of
> flexibility. I would think that this would be in Fedora and RHEL, because
> of how useful this would be. So what's going on here?
Actually a Debian devel
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 01:52:32PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 13.3.2014 13:17, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 05:43:16AM -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> >> - Original Message -
> >>> = Proposed System Wide Change: Ruby 2.1 =
> >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wi
Hi,
My package failed to build on rawhide. Upstream comments point
to Swig as guilty party. Was there any un-announced Swig change?
- Forwarded message from Tomasz Torcz -
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:32:31 +0100
From: Tomasz Torcz
To: owfs-develop...@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject
On 03/13/2014 08:10 PM, Álvaro Castillo wrote:
Dear devel mailing list,
I would like to know more information about SSD in Fedora. How I can
manage spaces, partition's disk and more?
I read about SSD with TRIM support improvements more lyfe cycle
durability between other things. I read too that
Would like to do a review swap on this package. I'm most useful when it
comes to python packages.
https://github.com/tbielawa/bitmath
Brief description to pique your interest:
> bitmath simplifies many facets of interacting with file sizes in
> various units. Examples include: converting betwe
> Original Message -
> From: "Tim Bielawa"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 5:54:09 PM
> Subject: Review swap: python-bitmath
>
>
> Would like to do a review swap on this package. I'm most useful when it
> comes to python packages.
>
> https://github
Gilles J. Seguin wrote:
> -1
> I vote against
> reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XPM_%28image_format%29
> your arguments about transparent pixels is wrong, and XPM is more
> flexible than the others one.
Me too.
> - i do not want to break with the unix tradition of supporting legacy
> appli
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> The primary problem is that we need to be able to address the
> potential for packages that *aren't* part of the default install to
> handle differing config based on the Product upon which it is being
> installed.
>
> For example, let's say that theoretically, Fedora Cl
Adam Williamson wrote:
> AIUI the installer team's opinion is more or less the precise opposite:
> the live installation case is problematic and if we're getting rid of
> anything, we should get rid of that.
But AFAIK, ALL the desktop teams (the Red Hat Desktop Team working on GNOME
and the SIGs
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> - From what I've seen of the planned "rich" dependencies, I don't think
> they would provide any mechanism better than this one anyway. Can you
> explain how you would see this working, with a specific example?
foo.spec:
Requires: foo-config-default or foo-config-server
Hi
I am Mohan Prakash from Ranchi, India.
I am in my final semester of masters in computer applications.
I also have a masters in mathematics.
I run an institute for high school and undergraduate students and am
actively involved in social activities for spreading education among
economically chall
12 matches
Mail list logo
