Philippe Makowski schrieb am So., 17. Apr. 2016
um 19:29 Uhr:
> Hi,
>
> just in case, I started to package ipython 4 and Jupyter in Mageia..
> my progress is there https://wiki.mageia.org/en/User:Philippem
>
> may be it could help for Fedora.
>
Thank you for your effort. It is of help to see whi
Hi Neal,
The link to the source rpm in rhbz seems broken.
If nobody else comes forward by tonight, I'll pick up the review.
Best Regards
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Rex Dieter wrote:
% yum includes arch/release subdirs under /var/cache/yum, the important part
% is the "release" part. So, it is theoretically easy to identify which parts
% are worth keeping and which ones are not (ie, does the release/ subdir match
% the current release or not). ie,
% $ ls
On Thursday, 14 April 2016 at 23:03, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 April 2016 at 14:50, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> [...]
> > > I'm going to update elpa to 2015.11 this week, which includes a soname
> > > bump and an API change. This change affects the following packages:
> >
On 18 April 2016 at 08:06, Thomas Spura wrote:
> Any help on reviewing new packages for ipython/jupyter and (co-)maintaining
> the ipython stack is welcome. Are there any volunteers? :)
Am happy to help review packages, and will have a window of time in
the coming two weeks where I'll have more
Jonathan Underwood schrieb am Mo., 18. Apr.
2016 um 12:04 Uhr:
> On 18 April 2016 at 08:06, Thomas Spura wrote:
> > Any help on reviewing new packages for ipython/jupyter and
> (co-)maintaining
> > the ipython stack is welcome. Are there any volunteers? :)
>
>
> Am happy to help review packages,
Alexander,
It should be fine now. I forgot to move it to the correct location. Silly me.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:15 AM, Alexander Ploumistos
wrote:
> Hi Neal,
>
> The link to the source rpm in rhbz seems broken.
> If nobody else comes forward by tonight, I'll pick up the review.
>
> Best Regar
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20160417.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20160418.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 2
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 30
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 117.65 KiB
Size of dropped packages
Missing expected images:
Kde live i386
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Kde raw-xz armhfp
Workstation live x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 9/54 (x86_64), 15/15 (i386)
ID: 13327 Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedora
Hi,
The current maintainer and major contributor to iptrag-ng, Nikola
Pajkovsky , no longer has the time to devote to
this project. I have been working with him to transition the work to me.
Phil Cameron
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/
Change in package status over the last 168 hours
60 packages were orphaned
-
bandwidthd [master, el6, epel7, el5] was orphaned by ondrejj
Tracks network usage and builds html and graphs
https://admin.fedoraproject.o
Why I am getting these messages?
Latest version in rawhide is 0.5-3, and there are no broken dependencies...
Regards, Irina.
- Forwarded Message -
From: build...@fedoraproject.org
To: qpid-dispatch-ow...@fedoraproject.org
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:11:59 AM
Subject: Broken dependencies:
From 4f122176b6c2370f0e23e6727e018aa3e82ae88c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Petr=20P=C3=ADsa=C5=99?=
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:26:04 +0200
Subject: Provide maybe_command independently
---
...Utils-MM-methods-as-standalone-ExtUtils-M.patch | 110 +
perl-ExtUtils-Mak
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Irina Boverman wrote:
> Why I am getting these messages?
> Latest version in rawhide is 0.5-3, and there are no broken dependencies...
> Regards, Irina.
> - Forwarded Message -
> From: build...@fedoraproject.org
> To: qpid-dispatch-ow...@fedoraproject.org
Planned Outage: koji database server - 2016-04-18 14:00 UTC
There will be an outage starting at 2016-04-18 14:00 UTC, which will
last approximately 1 hour.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2016-04-18 1
The F24 packages were updated as well, latest is qpid-dispatch-0.5-3.fc24 and
qpid-proton-0.12.1-1.fc24.
- Original Message -
From: "Jon Ciesla"
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:49:27 AM
Subject: Re: Broken dependencies: qpid-dispatch
On
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Irina Boverman
> wrote:
>
>>
>> qpid-dispatch has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
>> On x86_64:
>> qpid-dispatch-router-0.5-2.fc24.x86_64 requires
>> libqpid-proton.so.3()(64bit)
>> On i386:
I am very sorry.
Today Lubos K. accidentally submitted 10k packages to Copr. I wanted to run one
simple SQL query to set all those builds
as failed. Unfortunately I made big mistake - I forgot to add one column to
'where' condition. As result of this error
*all* builds were marked as failed. All
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1307195
--- Comment #18 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
ppisar's perl-IPC-Cmd-0.94-3.fc25 completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=755529
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedo
mån 2016-04-18 klockan 09:41 -0400 skrev Irina Boverman:
> Why I am getting these messages?
> Latest version in rawhide is 0.5-3, and there are no broken
> dependencies...
> Regards, Irina.
> - Forwarded Message -
> From: build...@fedoraproject.org
> To: qpid-dispatch-ow...@fedoraproject.or
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:20:15 +0100
Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hello, sometime ago I took libcdaudio , because though that was
> important to keep it, nowadays almost all packages that need cdaudio,
> use libcdio and libcdio-paranoia [1], so I think the correct is remove
> libcdaudio from critpath , ho
Tomorrow (Tuesday 2016-04-19) will be Fedora Media Writer Test Day[1]!
As part of this planned Change[2] for Fedora 24, the Fedora graphical
USB writing tool - formerly called "Live USB Creator", and still
technically called that in terms of source repos and filenames, but in
the process of being
FYI, tracking bug:
Tracking bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1310542
Maybe a good idea for any new bugs filed to set that bug number in the
blocks field.
Chris
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.
I'm trying to build a package in COPR, the source RPM is rather large
(500MB), but it always worked fine also with bigger source files. I
supposed I had a bad URL an uploaded the SRPM twice, but the result is the
same.
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/share/copr/dist_git/dist_git_im
Hi Jan,
Looking at the schedule[1] today I am confused by one thing, Fedora policy
states that any slip pushes out all other milestones. which would mean Beta
Freeze is next week not this week.
Dennis
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/24/Schedule
signature.asc
Description: This is
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 15:11 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> Looking at the schedule[1] today I am confused by one thing, Fedora policy
> states that any slip pushes out all other milestones. which would mean Beta
> Freeze is next week not this week.
>
> Dennis
>
>
> [1] https://fe
ausil unset the critpath flag on the perl-HTTP-Negotiate package ()
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 15:11 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>> Looking at the schedule[1] today I am confused by one thing, Fedora policy
>> states that any slip pushes out all other milestones. which would mean Beta
>> Freeze
On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 22:41 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 15:11 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Jan,
> > >
> > > Looking at the schedule[1] today I am confused by one thing,
> > > Fed
It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and it
seems I'm hitting these two bugs:
* dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538
* fedora-review queries too many times for same thing #1275275
I'll try to stay up until it finishes and if that takes too long, I'll let
it
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Ploumistos
wrote:
> It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and it seems
> I'm hitting these two bugs:
> * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538
> * fedora-review queries too many times for same thing #1275275
>
> I'll
Hi folks! Time for a first F24 Beta blocker bug status mail. Today is
the Beta freeze date, so we need to be really focusing on getting Beta
into shape now.
tl;dr work summary
--
QA folks:
* test fix for #1325085 (ARM-y):
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-9efb5
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:47:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Is it acceptable to have Beta & Final release dates for F24 as stated
> > on [1], or we really need to slip these dates ?
> From QA's side we can at least try to make the unamended date, as I
> said.
Awesome. I'd really, really n
Well, after almost three hours, fedora-review came through.
I am a little confused by the beginning of the %install section, could you
please explain the syntax of the first line?
(%make_install INSTALL="install -p")
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.or
On Monday, April 18, 2016 5:30:49 PM CDT Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:47:49PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > Is it acceptable to have Beta & Final release dates for F24 as stated
> > > on [1], or we really need to slip these dates ?
> >
> > From QA's side we can at least
ausil unset the critpath flag on the perl-HTTP-Negotiate package (master)
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Alexander Ploumistos
wrote:
> Well, after almost three hours, fedora-review came through.
>
> I am a little confused by the beginning of the %install section, could you
> please explain the syntax of the first line?
> (%make_install INSTALL="install -p")
>
It esse
ausil unset the critpath flag on the perl-Coro package (master)
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 06:36:02PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> I think we have all of the releng changes lined up for Beta, though
> another week would let us get layered image build service in
> production. I do not think that pushing 24 out an extra week needs to
> delay f25 in any way shape o
On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and
> it seems I'm hitting these two bugs:
> * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538
I already change priority and severity of #1279538 to urgent
> * fedor
ausil unset the critpath flag on the perl-AnyEvent-BDB package ()
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
I found out gimpfx-foundry was retired a while ago since Fedora 16 so I
brought it back. It will be nice someone doing a review in exchange of
doing the same as I plan to add gimpfx-foundry as part of Design Suite
collection.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327929
Thanks in advance.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 01:20:51AM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review and
> > it seems I'm hitting these two bugs:
> > * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538
>
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Alexander Ploumistos
wrote:
Well, after almost three hours, fedora-review came through.
I am a little confused by the beginning of the %install section, could you
please explain the syntax of the first line?
(%make_install INSTALL="install -p")
It essentially
44 matches
Mail list logo
