Dne 27.6.2014 18:37, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Juan Orti Alcaine
wrote:
El Sábado, 28 de junio de 2014 00:31:26 Christopher Meng escribió:
Thank you.
It's better to nofity him about his archaic email address IMO, as he
uses his working address in the %change
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Actually, bouncing his email address is one think, but it would be nice if
> Kanarip can take care about his packages. Looking at Koji [1], it is more
> then one year since he did his last build of any package. He has not touched
> any of his R
Dne 30.6.2014 10:23, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Actually, bouncing his email address is one think, but it would be nice if
Kanarip can take care about his packages. Looking at Koji [1], it is more
then one year since he did his last build of
Dne 28.6.2014 05:16, poma napsal(a):
On 27.06.2014 19:03, DJ Delorie wrote:
Welcome to the 21st century!
Do we have different eyes and brains than we did last century?
Because otherwise, excessively wide paragraphs are just as hard to
read now as they were then.
E.g. for me, 'bz.rh-cols90
From here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2012-12-11_Network_Manager_and_DNSSEC
it says to do:
sudo yum install dnssec-trigger
sudo systemctl enable dnssec-triggerd.service
sudo systemctl enable unbound.service
sudo reboot
Then to get DNS over SSL it says
https://fedoraproject.org/w
Broken deps for i386
--
[APLpy]
APLpy-0.9.8-5.fc21.noarch requires pywcs
[IQmol]
IQmol-2.2.0-9.fc21.i686 requires libQGLViewer.so.2.3.9
[PyKDE]
PyKDE-3.16.6-14.fc20.i686 requires sip-api(10) >= 0:10.0
[PyQuante]
Hey,
Apparently, people can still file bugs for dead packages:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114180
And I (and many others) get CC:ed on those bugs files, with
no possibility to remove ourselves from the CC: in pkgdb.
Any idea where I should be filing a bug for this bug?
Cheers
-
Am 30.06.2014 11:55, schrieb Bastien Nocera:
> Apparently, people can still file bugs for dead packages:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114180
xorg-x11-server is a dead package?
seriously?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.
On 06/30/2014 11:57 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 30.06.2014 11:55, schrieb Bastien Nocera:
Apparently, people can still file bugs for dead packages:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114180
xorg-x11-server is a dead package?
seriously?
Look here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:57:49AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 30.06.2014 11:55, schrieb Bastien Nocera:
> > Apparently, people can still file bugs for dead packages:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114180
>
> xorg-x11-server is a dead package?
> seriously?
If you chec
After going through the thread, a revelation, a deep understanding
occured. There is always a confusion regarding Linux, why does it not
get popular even when being the best (Am Beston;) OS in the whole
Universe. , it was not renamed even once since the nineties even
when the hole f^%(*g thing was
DJ Delorie wrote:
> > Welcome to the 21st century!
>
> Do we have different eyes and brains than we did last century?
> Because otherwise, excessively wide paragraphs are just as hard to
> read now as they were then.
But we do have wide logfile excerpts that are much easier to read if they
don'
On 06/27/2014 09:39 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> On 2014-06-27 07:09, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
>> On 06/26/2014 08:01 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>>> As a newcomer to Fedora development, is there something else I should
>>> doing to get these patches reviewed and committed?
>>
>> I offered you on I
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:21:43AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> > > Welcome to the 21st century!
> >
> > Do we have different eyes and brains than we did last century?
> > Because otherwise, excessively wide paragraphs are just as hard to
> > read now as they were then.
>
Executive summary: a bug in package generation of rpm 4.12, presumably
related to hardlinked files has been spotted. I've untagged 4.12 while
we're investigating, some packages might need a rebuild because of this.
If you haven't built packages for rawhide today, you can probably stop
reading.
Dne 27.6.2014 17:38, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
Hi all,
Rpm 4.12 alpha just got released:
http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2014-June/45.html
The plan is to update rawhide to this shiny new version first thing on
Monday morning and babysit as needed (ie the usual drill), but i
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Christopher Meng wrote:
> How many patches needed for the latest mule?
>
> Are these[1] merged already?
I'm not sure how many of those will be needed. Several of them were
for building the old version of mule against newer dependencies (like
spring 3.1), and newe
On 06/30/2014 02:04 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Executive summary: a bug in package generation of rpm 4.12, presumably
related to hardlinked files has been spotted. I've untagged 4.12 while
we're investigating, some packages might need a rebuild because of this.
If you haven't built packages for
On 06/30/2014 03:12 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 27.6.2014 17:38, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
Hi all,
Rpm 4.12 alpha just got released:
http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2014-June/45.html
The plan is to update rawhide to this shiny new version first thing on
Monday morning and baby
Dne 30.6.2014 14:48, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 06/30/2014 03:12 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 27.6.2014 17:38, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
Hi all,
Rpm 4.12 alpha just got released:
http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-announce/2014-June/45.html
The plan is to update rawhide to this shiny n
On 06/30/2014 03:48 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 06/30/2014 03:12 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Interesting, it breaks Ruby build it seems:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7090194
Not sure about the reason, though.
Seems the ruby macros are not expanding properly throughout the
Dne 30.6.2014 15:14, Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 06/30/2014 03:48 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 06/30/2014 03:12 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Interesting, it breaks Ruby build it seems:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7090194
Not sure about the reason, though.
Seems the ruby
Change in package status over the last 168 hours
14 packages were orphaned
-
SOAPpy [f19, master, f20, el5] was orphaned by pingou
Full-featured SOAP library for Python
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:16:41AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 13.06.2014 10:15, schrieb Richard Hughes:
> > On 12 June 2014 16:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >> DNF is a fork of YUM and pretends to be compatible
> >> and if it finally replaces YUM it's just a new
> >> generation of YUM
> >
>
On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 07:59 +0200, David Nichols wrote:
> Hello,
>
> My name is David Nichols, and I'm the author of the Qore programming language.
>
> I've recently made a package submission request to Fedora for Qore, which is
> under review here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=11
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 06:02:09PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> The intention of all this is to keep the amount of patches in Fedora low and
> to "pay it back to upstreams" iff possible.
>
> However, in many (most?) cases this is not possible or feasible.
It is always possible to add a comment
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 05:55:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> As in many cases before, I once more have to disagree with you, because this
Please refrain from personal attacks and note the Fedora code of
conduct:
https://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Thank you
Till
--
devel mailing lis
Am 30.06.2014 18:37, schrieb Till Maas:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 05:55:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
>> As in many cases before, I once more have to disagree with you, because this
>
> Please refrain from personal attacks and note the Fedora code of
> conduct:
> https://fedoraproject.org/
On Thu, 2014-06-26 at 17:50 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From time to time, I see trivial patches posted in bugzilla which end
> up sitting there because the maintainer is too busy / gets bombarded
> with tons of bugzilla mails and misses that particular one / whatever
> reason. As a pa
On odd weeks WG meeting will be at 15:00 UTC, 17:00 Central Europe,
11:00 (noon) Boston, 8:00 San Francisco, 0:00 Tokyo in #fedora-meeting
on Freenode.
= Topics =
* free seats in Env WG
* Taskotron and rpmgrill
* OpenFloor
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedora
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 05:55:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
>> As in many cases before, I once more have to disagree with you, because this
>
> Please refrain from personal attacks and note the Fedora code of
> conduct:
> https://fedorapro
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:54:42PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 05:55:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >
> >> As in many cases before, I once more have to disagree with you, because
> >> this
> >
> > Please refrain fr
Am 30.06.2014 19:06, schrieb Till Maas:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:54:42PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Till Maas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 05:55:41PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
As in many cases before, I once more have to disagree with you,
Since the discussion seems to have pretty much died down and the
reaction favourable, at least to the point that there is agreement that
such situations are problematic, I've submitted FESCo ticket with the
proposal [1]. Thanks for all inputs so far, and happy to hear further
suggestions.
San
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:12:06PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 30.06.2014 19:06, schrieb Till Maas:
> > If he just writes that he disagrees with me, I agree with you. But
> > highlighting that he disagreed with me many times in the past is
> > personal and has no relevance to whether or no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
We're getting down to the wire on Fedora 21 and we need to nail down a
few of the low-level release requirements.
First of all, I'd like to formally propose that each of the products
will have a fedora-release-$PRODUCT (and corresponding
generic-relea
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> We're getting down to the wire on Fedora 21 and we need to nail down a
> few of the low-level release requirements.
>
> First of all, I'd like to formally propose that each of the produc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/30/2014 03:08 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> We're getting down to the wire on Fedora 21 and we need to nail
>> down a few of the low-le
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06/30/2014 03:08 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Stephen Gallagher
>> wrote:
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> We're getting down to
On Mon, 30.06.14 14:59, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
> 2) The fedora-release-$PRODUCT package (and possibly %post or systemd
> snippets therein) will be responsible for the creation and maintenance
> of /etc/issue, /etc/os-release and /etc/fedora-release-product (note:
> there is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/30/2014 03:38 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 06/30/2014 03:08 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Stephen Gall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/30/2014 03:39 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 30.06.14 14:59, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com)
> wrote:
>
>> 2) The fedora-release-$PRODUCT package (and possibly %post or
>> systemd snippets therein) will be responsible for the cr
On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 14:59 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Additionally, I am working on a proposal[1] for per-product configs in
I think you can go with something very close to this design _if_ you
always have a product. This would mean that even a minimal Fedora
install would need a system-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/30/2014 03:54 PM, James Antill wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 14:59 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>> Additionally, I am working on a proposal[1] for per-product
>> configs in
>
> I think you can go with something very close to this design _
On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 15:42 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 06/30/2014 03:38 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On 06/30/2014 03:08 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jun 30, 20
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:44:26PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Any chance that systemd wants to build a hostnamectl-like interface
> for setting the os-release values? That would make life a lot easier
> on us, as we could reconfigure that file if-and-when a
> fedora-release-$PRODUCT package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/30/2014 04:10 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:44:26PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Any chance that systemd wants to build a hostnamectl-like
>> interface for setting the os-release values? That would make
On Mon, 30.06.14 16:16, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06/30/2014 04:10 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:44:26PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >> Any chance that systemd wants to buil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/30/2014 04:22 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 30.06.14 16:16, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com)
> wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 06/30/2014 04:10 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>>> On Mo
On Mon, 30.06.14 16:43, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >> Well, ideally we'd like the majority of the file to be owned by
> >> fedora-release and then just add the one or two additional
> >> fields specific to the products programmatically.
> >>
> >> I suppose though that we co
> On Jun 30, 2014, at 5:15 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> On Mon, 30.06.14 16:43, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
Well, ideally we'd like the majority of the file to be owned by
fedora-release and then just add the one or two additional
fields specific to th
On Mon, 30.06.14 17:31, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 30, 2014, at 5:15 PM, Lennart Poettering
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 30.06.14 16:43, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> Well, ideally we'd like the majority of the file to be owned by
Bastien Nocera (bnoc...@redhat.com) said:
> Apparently, people can still file bugs for dead packages:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114180
>
> And I (and many others) get CC:ed on those bugs files, with
> no possibility to remove ourselves from the CC: in pkgdb.
>
> Any idea whe
53 matches
Mail list logo
