Re: Django 1.4 and 1.5 retired in Fedora 21 [Was: F-21 Branched report: 20140923 changes]

Hi On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 2:28 AM, Matthias Runge wrote: > askbot upstream still requires django < 1.6, which pretty much limits to > Django14, which is supposed to be supported until March next year. > Django-1.5 is not supported any more. > I have retired askbot in Fedora master Rahul -- de

Re: Major wiki revisions: release process documentation, package maintenance instructions, repository documentation, Changes...

> Hi, folks. As I hinted a bit, and as some of you might know from IRC, > I've spent the last ~24 hours on something of an epic Wiki revision > spree. I made some fairly major and possibly significant changes, so > under the 'ask forgiveness' principle I thought I'd post a quick summary > here. We

[Base] Base Design WG agenda meeting 26 September 2014 15:00 UTC on #fedora-meeting

Agenda: - Introduction David Sommerseth, taking over buildrequires cleanup work from Benedikt - Discussion: Sharing alpha base image on Docker Hub - Open Floor Thanks & regards, Phil -- Philipp Knirsch | Tel.: +49-711-96437-470 Manager Core Services| Fax.: +49-711-964

File File-chdir-0.1009.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by psabata

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-File-chdir: 0804aa682c184d90315e9b27399d50b1 File-chdir-0.1009.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/mailm

F-21 Branched report: 20140926 changes

Compose started at Fri Sep 26 07:15:02 UTC 2014 Broken deps for armhfp -- [PyQuante] PyQuante-libint-1.6.4-11.fc21.1.armv7hl requires libint(armv7hl-32) = 0:1.1.6-2.fc21 [askbot] askbot-0.7.48-13.fc21.noarch requires python-d

Re: [Base] Base Design WG agenda meeting 26 September 2014 15:00 UTC on #fedora-meeting

On 26.9.2014 11:41, Phil Knirsch wrote: Agenda: - Introduction David Sommerseth, taking over buildrequires cleanup work from Benedikt - Discussion: Sharing alpha base image on Docker Hub I am not sure if I will make it to the meeting so I'll comment here. Matt asked if we are going to push

Re: Multiple directory ownership including filesystem package

On 24/09/14 21:36, Till Maas wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed that mulitple packages own /etc/bash_completion.d/ even though > it is nowadays part of the filesystem package. From what I read from the > Guidelines, it is not clear to me whether it is prohibited or not. > Should it be fixed? Here is a cur

Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

At the moment applications have to provide an icon >= 32x32px in size to be included in the AppStream metadata and shown in the software center. This is *tiny* on a HiDPI screen, so should I mandate that all applications ship a 64x64 (and ideally, 128x128/64x64@2 also) icon for the shell and gnome-

rawhide report: 20140926 changes

Broken deps for i386 -- [PyQuante] PyQuante-libint-1.6.4-11.fc22.1.i686 requires libint(x86-32) = 0:1.1.6-2.fc21 [Sprog] Sprog-0.14-27.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.0) [askbot] askbot-0.7.48-13.fc21.noa

Re: Multiple directory ownership including filesystem package

2014-09-24 22:50 GMT+02:00 Michael Schwendt : > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership > > | Packages must own all directories they put files in, except for: > | > | any directories owned by the filesystem, man, or other explicitly > | created -

Re: Major wiki revisions: release process documentation, package maintenance instructions, repository documentation, Changes...

- Original Message - > > Hi, folks. As I hinted a bit, and as some of you might know from IRC, > > I've spent the last ~24 hours on something of an epic Wiki revision > > spree. I made some fairly major and possibly significant changes, so > > under the 'ask forgiveness' principle I thought

Re: Major wiki revisions: release process documentation, package maintenance instructions, repository documentation, Changes...

- Original Message - > - Original Message - > > > Hi, folks. As I hinted a bit, and as some of you might know from IRC, > > > I've spent the last ~24 hours on something of an epic Wiki revision > > > spree. I made some fairly major and possibly significant changes, so > > > under th

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

Hello, - Original Message - > At the moment applications have to provide an icon >= 32x32px in size > to be included in the AppStream metadata and shown in the software > center. This is *tiny* on a HiDPI screen, so should I mandate that all > applications ship a 64x64 (and ideally, 128x128

Re: Django 1.4 and 1.5 retired in Fedora 21 [Was: F-21 Branched report: 20140923 changes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/26/2014 03:16 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 2:28 AM, Matthias Runge wrote: > > askbot upstream still requires django < 1.6, which pretty much > limits to Django14, which is supposed to be supported until March > nex

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > (And I always thought that HiDPI is trying to keep the screen size of > elements the same and only add detail, which is inconsistent with displaying > low-resolution icons in a smaller physical size, but what do I know…) No hidpi is about

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

- Original Message - > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > > (And I always thought that HiDPI is trying to keep the screen size of > > elements the same and only add detail, which is inconsistent with > > displaying low-resolution icons in a smaller physical size, but

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On 26 September 2014 12:36, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > This is $n-th gradual tightening of the rules Right, I think that's the only way to transition from having no rules of inclusion, to a large cohesive set of high quality applications. Dropping 95% of applications in the software center from F21

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

- Original Message - > On 26 September 2014 12:36, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > > This is $n-th gradual tightening of the rules > > Right, I think that's the only way to transition from having no rules > of inclusion, to a large cohesive set of high quality applications. > Dropping 95% of appl

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On 09/26/2014 12:19 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: > At the moment applications have to provide an icon >= 32x32px in size > to be included in the AppStream metadata and shown in the software > center. This is *tiny* on a HiDPI screen, so should I mandate that all > applications ship a 64x64 (and ideall

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On 26 September 2014 13:12, Kalev Lember wrote: > Yes, I'd say it's time to cut off apps with 32x32 icons. Padding 48x48 > icons to 64x64 might still be OK though, especially since the number of > affected apps is quite large. Right, this is probably the best course of action now. > In any case,

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On 09/26/2014 02:23 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: > When to warn them? In rpmbuild? In the koji logs no human ever reads? > You can get this kind of warning now, if you BR: libappstream-glib and > then do a: > > %check > DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT appstream-util check-root > > ...but this requires the p

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On 26 September 2014 13:36, Kalev Lember wrote: > An option would be to add libappstream-glib to the minimal koji > buildroot and run the check automatically for every package that's built > in koji. If you know how to do that, that'd be awesome. > And same thing with desktop-file-validate, inst

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > - Original Message - >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: >> > (And I always thought that HiDPI is trying to keep the screen size of >> > elements the same and only add detail, which is inconsistent with >> > di

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:56:47PM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: > > (And I always thought that HiDPI is trying to keep the screen size of > > elements > > You can either sacrifice quality or size; padding a 32px icon to 128px > with a giant white border would keep the icon crisp and sharp, but >

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On 26 September 2014 13:57, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > Actually scaling icon by integer factor should not have noticable > impact on quality. It really does, maybe not in an absolute way like you suggest, but in a subjective way. When you're used to everything being crisp and clear, suddenly a low r

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

On 09/26/2014 02:39 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: > On 26 September 2014 13:36, Kalev Lember wrote: >> An option would be to add libappstream-glib to the minimal koji >> buildroot and run the check automatically for every package that's built >> in koji. > > If you know how to do that, that'd be awes

Re: [Base] Base Design WG agenda meeting 26 September 2014 15:00 UTC on #fedora-meeting

On Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:13:35 +0200 Václav Pavlín wrote: > > On 26.9.2014 11:41, Phil Knirsch wrote: > > Agenda: > > - Introduction David Sommerseth, taking over buildrequires cleanup > > work from Benedikt > > - Discussion: Sharing alpha base image on Docker Hub > I am not sure if I will make

Re: [Base] Base Design WG agenda meeting 26 September 2014 15:00 UTC on #fedora-meeting

- Original Message - > On Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:13:35 +0200 > Václav Pavlín wrote: > > > > > On 26.9.2014 11:41, Phil Knirsch wrote: > > > Agenda: > > > - Introduction David Sommerseth, taking over buildrequires cleanup > > > work from Benedikt > > > - Discussion: Sharing alpha base imag

Re: Major wiki revisions: release process documentation, package maintenance instructions, repository documentation, Changes...

On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 05:32 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > > Hi, folks. As I hinted a bit, and as some of you might know from IRC, > > I've spent the last ~24 hours on something of an epic Wiki revision > > spree. I made some fairly major and possibly significant changes, so > > under the 'ask forgive

Re: Major wiki revisions: release process documentation, package maintenance instructions, repository documentation, Changes...

On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 06:47 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > - Original Message - > > - Original Message - > > > > Hi, folks. As I hinted a bit, and as some of you might know from IRC, > > > > I've spent the last ~24 hours on something of an epic Wiki revision > > > > spree. I made s

Re: Proposal: Increasing application icon sizes to 64px

drago01 wrote on 2014-09-26 13:46 (UCT+0200): > hidpi is about higher pixel destiny (i.e same as you get with > phones today). So my 3200x1600 (14 inch) laptop is effectively just a > 1600x900 screen with twice as high pixel destiny. So eveything gets > render at twice the size to not be ridiculou

5tFTW: F21 Alpha, Shellshock, Schedule Docs Update, Flock 2015 Locations, and a Fedora User Committee idea (2014-09-26)

Reposted from . Fedora is a big project, and it’s hard to follow it all. This series highlights interesting happenings in five different areas every week. It isn’t comprehensive news coverage — just quick summaries with links to each. Here are the five

Re: Major wiki revisions: release process documentation, package maintenance instructions, repository documentation, Changes...

- Original Message - > On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 05:32 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > Hi, folks. As I hinted a bit, and as some of you might know from IRC, > > > I've spent the last ~24 hours on something of an epic Wiki revision > > > spree. I made some fairly major and possibly significant c

Changing release time (was Re: Major wiki revisions:)

On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 12:37 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > And as we're already changing bits during release I'd like to change release > time to use UTC instead of ET. We talked a lot about it but actually - never > committed to it. To make the life easier for US folks, 15:00 UTC (we have > 14:0

Unable to mount partitions on boot with latests F 21 Alpha updates

F 21 Alpha itself works just fine for booting and rebooting, unfortunately after updating all packages certain partitions fail to mount (usually home) which in turn drops me into single user mode. I am able to do a vgchange -ay and home will be detected and mount, but doing a ctl-d or systemctl de

Re: Unable to mount partitions on boot with latests F 21 Alpha updates

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Erinn Looney-Triggs wrote: > F 21 Alpha itself works just fine for booting and rebooting, unfortunately > after updating all packages certain partitions fail to mount (usually home) > which in turn drops me into single user mode. > > I am able to do a vgchange -ay

Re: Changing release time (was Re: Major wiki revisions:)

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Adam Williamson < adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 12:37 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > > And as we're already changing bits during release I'd like to change > release > > time to use UTC instead of ET. We talked a lot about it but ac

Re: Unable to mount partitions on boot with latests F 21 Alpha updates

Well that did the trick, thanks. -Erinn On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Erinn Looney-Triggs > wrote: > > F 21 Alpha itself works just fine for booting and rebooting, > unfortunately > > after updating all packages certain partitions fail t

Re: Intent to update libinfinity to 0.6.1 (soname bump)

On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 04:00:36PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > > What are your opinions? > > gedit-collaboration should probably be retired in F21+. It's largely > unmaintained upstream and doesn't work with latest gedit anyway. > > Nacho, any opinions? If gedit-collaboration can be retired, w

Request for testers: glibc update to work around Intel TSX errata microcode_ctl problems.

Developers. Testers wanted immediately for: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.18-16.fc20 and https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.20-4.fc21 For Fedora 21 and Fedora 20 we will be disabling Intel TSX support in POSIX threads effective immediately. This disabling of TSX

Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

Hi All, Just spend some time debugging this and thought I should share this, see: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=762195 for details, I've filed a bug to track fixing this in Fedora: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147062 There are 2 ways this problem shows itsel

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

Hi, On 09/26/2014 08:37 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > Just spend some time debugging this and thought I should share this, see: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=762195 > > for details, I've filed a bug to track fixing this in Fedora: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.co

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > Just spend some time debugging this and thought I should share this, see: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=762195 > > for details, I've filed a bug to track fixing this in Fedora: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.

Re: Request for testers: glibc update to work around Intel TSX errata microcode_ctl problems.

Hi All, On 09/26/2014 08:34 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > Developers. > > Testers wanted immediately for: > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.18-16.fc20 > > and > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.20-4.fc21 > > For Fedora 21 and Fedora 20 we will be disabling In

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Just spend some time debugging this and thought I should share this, see: >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=762195 >> >> for details, I've file

Re: Request for testers: glibc update to work around Intel TSX errata microcode_ctl problems.

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > On 09/26/2014 08:34 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: >> Developers. >> >> Testers wanted immediately for: >> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.18-16.fc20 >> >> and >> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.2

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Just spend some time debugging this and thought I should share this, see: >>> >>> https://bugs.debian.org/

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Josh Boyer > wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi All, Just spend some time debugging this a

Re: Request for testers: glibc update to work around Intel TSX errata microcode_ctl problems.

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 08:53:59PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > I've just tested the F-21 update for this, and I'm afraid that the > problem is still present there. I've also regenerated my initrd to make > sure that that included the new glibc too, but that did not help. Do you still see crashes

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Josh Boyer >> wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Hans de Goede wr

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Josh Boyer > wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Josh Boyer >>> wrote: On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Andrew Lutomirski w

Re: Major wiki revisions: release process documentation, package maintenance instructions, repository documentation, Changes...

On Thu, 2014-09-25 at 19:58 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi, folks. As I hinted a bit, and as some of you might know from IRC, > I've spent the last ~24 hours on something of an epic Wiki revision > spree. I made some fairly major and possibly significant changes, so > under the 'ask forgiveness

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On 09/26/2014 09:16 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > The microcode_ctl package that added this update was karma'd out. So > it shouldn't be in updates-testing any longer, which will help > mitigate how wide spread it is. No, it's still available in the updates-testing repository. Being karma'd out doesn'

Re: Latest F-21 updates cause non-booting system on some Haswel systems + workaround

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 09/26/2014 09:16 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> The microcode_ctl package that added this update was karma'd out. So >> it shouldn't be in updates-testing any longer, which will help >> mitigate how wide spread it is. > > No, it's still availabl

Re: F-21 Branched report: 20140924 changes

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: > I have done first 8 broken package rebuilds in Fedora 21. You can do > rest of the 6 packages :) I did ocaml-bin-prot, ocaml-pxp, ocaml-sexplib, and ocaml-type-conv. I am probably not going to have time to do any more until Monday. Regards,

Re: Multiple directory ownership including filesystem package

Hi On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Till Maas < wrote: > sundaram cowsay > Fixed directory ownership and bash completion script location using pkg-config as suggested by Ville.FWIW, packaging guidelines has an example using the old location which should be fixed. Thanks Rahul -- devel mail

[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2014-09-29 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi folks! We've met every week for a while, and had blocker review meetings too. I don't see anything pressing for discussion, either, so I figure it might be a good week for us to take a break and everyone can sleep in / get to the pub early (delete as appropriate) :) Please, do yell if you wante