Re: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs

On 10/04/2010 03:34 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> On 10/04/2010 06:53 PM, Brandon Lozza wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: So according to you any free software with a trademark is non-free software? G

Re: Firewall settings unworkable

On 10/06/2010 08:31 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Seems quite complex. What's wrong with a directory: > >/etc/iptables.d/ > > where RPMs like libvirt just drop the required additional rules (in a > separate chain if you like) and restart the iptables service? It's > low-tech but simple and

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/12/2010 10:28 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > >> Striving for usability and pleasantness for the untechnical users certainly >> is >> a good thing. It gets problematic when you choose to make things technically >> inferior just to please those kind of users. > > We don't have to make th

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/12/2010 02:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 10/12/2010 02:16 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >> On 10/12/2010 10:28 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>>> Striving for usability and pleasantness for the untechnical users >>>>

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/12/2010 02:57 PM, Jean-Francois Saucier wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 8:16 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn > wrote: >> On 10/12/2010 10:28 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>>> Striving for usability and pleasantness for the untechnical user

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/12/2010 04:20 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:16:49PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >> The only way to accomplish this without actually removing the features is >> to have two anaconda modes one for easy desktop installation and one full >>

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/12/2010 05:13 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 08:06:59AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 10/12/10 7:20 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:16:49PM +0200, D

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/13/2010 05:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 10:16 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > >> And it probably shouldn't be labeled "Advanced ..." but say what kind of >> advanced stuff is hidden there, i.e. the "advanced storage" button >> should be labeled "Add SAN storage ..." bec

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/14/2010 06:32 PM, Lars Seipel wrote: > On Tuesday 12 October 2010 15:56:02 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >> Now we are really talking semantics. The point is that users should not be >> confronted with choices they don't really need to make or they don't >>

Re: Ubuntu 10.10's installer looks rather nice

On 10/14/2010 07:05 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 10/12/2010 03:56 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >> On 10/12/2010 02:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >>> On 10/12/2010 02:16 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >>>> On 10/12/2010 10:28 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >>&

Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

Interesting move: http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/551 Has anyone looked into bringing Wayland to Fedora? If not this might be the right time getting involved in the discussion. http://wayland.freedesktop.org/ Regards, Dennis -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/06/2010 12:21 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 03:16:11PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >> Richard W.M. Jones (rjo...@redhat.com) said: Has anyone looked into bringing Wayland to Fedora? If not this might be the right time getting involved in the discussion. >

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/06/2010 04:16 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote: Out of interest, do you use individual shells/terms or something that provides a more remote desktop like experience? >>> >>> I use ssh -Y. Anything that sits in a huge window showing an entire >>> desktop-in-a-desktop is so obviously the wron

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/06/2010 07:39 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 05:28:08PM +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >> First I think you should probably head over to the Wayland mailing list and >> get involved there. That's something I also recommend to Richard be

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

On 03/24/2011 04:36 AM, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:36:33 -0400 > Genes MailLists wrote: >> On 03/23/2011 07:58 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >>> Jochen Schmitt wrote: > If you want to get firefox4 on Fedora 14 now, the only way is to use the private firefox4 repository on > >

Re: Firefox 4 for f14?

On 03/24/2011 07:31 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > drago01 wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Kevin Kofler >> wrote: >>> Adam Williamson wrote: In the particular case of Firefox, this isn't a problem, as it just gives you one giant static executable...so it's very easy to 'unins

Re: GNOME3 and au revoir WAS: systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :)

On 06/17/2011 01:02 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 06:48:14PM +0800, Mathieu Bridon wrote: >> On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 12:20 +0200, Henrik Wejdmark wrote: > Since you recommend not using the application menu, in other words, > you agree that the application menu is use

Re: systemd: bugreports for missing service-files

On 06/21/2011 12:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 21.06.2011 07:23, schrieb Alexander Kurtakov: >> I wonder how could someone would put a deadline on volunteers? >> You can't :) > > oh in the thread "Packages that will be orphaned" you can? Yes, because if the deadline passes then the packages

Re: MATE desktop environment (GNOME 2 fork)

On 12/09/2011 12:50 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 12/09/2011 03:50 AM, Eric Smith wrote: >> I've submitted review requests for the first two packages for the MATE >> desktop environment, mate-doc-utils and mate-corba. MATE is a fork of >> GNOME 2. I expect that it will take me a few mon

Re: Starting mysql

On 12/12/2011 06:15 PM, Paul F. Johnson wrote: Hi, 111211 20:48:32 [ERROR] /usr/libexec/mysqld: Can't find file: './mysql/proxies_priv.frm' (errno: 13) 111211 20:48:32 [ERROR] Fatal error: Can't open and lock privilege tables: Can't find file: './mysql/proxies_priv.frm' (errno: 13) I think th

Re: Canonical Will Remove Java From Ubuntu

On 12/20/2011 05:48 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Peter Robinson wrote: Actually that's not entirely correct. They're removing the Sun Java closed source variant due to changes in licensing from Oracle preventing them from shipping security fixes. They also ship OpenJDK which is the open source releas

Re: Canonical Will Remove Java From Ubuntu

On 12/21/2011 06:52 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 12/21/2011 05:09 PM, Matej Cepl wrote: On 20.12.2011 19:30, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: Probably because OpenJDK and SunJDK aren't really that compatible. Well, hold on. Both the proprietary JDK and OpenJDK meet the specification, and w

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/09/2010 10:05 AM, Jon Masters wrote: > On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 08:43 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 01:36:43AM +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >>> On 11/06/2010 12:21 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 03:

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/09/2010 06:12 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: >> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 04:05 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: >> >>> +1 for bringing these points up. No offense to krh (because it's nice >>> technology) but you can pull my genuine networked applicat

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/09/2010 07:33 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn > wrote: >> Then why are people already calling for the rejection of Wayland even >> though Wayland is still far from being finished and hasn't even touched >> Fedor

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/09/2010 08:04 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn > wrote: >> On 11/09/2010 06:12 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: >>> I've mostly been watching here and I think people have been fairly >>> clearly about thei

Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

On 11/09/2010 10:33 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn > wrote: >> No. I'm sorry but it's fundamentaly unfair to hold me responsible for the >> behaviour of others. If you think this shouldn't have been brought up fin

Re: Fedora 15, new and exciting plans

On 11/14/2010 12:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 06:26:48PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> *DE could consider switching the default to use EXT4 directly without >> LVM. [1] >> 1. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NoDefaultLVM > > The "Detailed Description"

Re: Fedora 15, new and exciting plans

On 11/14/2010 05:44 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 11/14/2010 10:42 AM, drago01 wrote: >> Yes unless something changed recently the filesystem's discard command >> never reaches the drive. > > Looks like I'm reformatting and dumping the LVM. Thanks. You should also file a bug against the tool

Re: Fedora 15, new and exciting plans - BTRFS

On 11/14/2010 07:03 PM, Genes MailLists wrote: > > >> btfrs providing raid0 functionality. > > Does BTRFS have the equivalent of raid 5 ? Apparently that's being worked on: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Raid5.2F6 Regards, Dennis -- devel mailing list devel@lis

Re: Fedora 15, new and exciting plans (LVM issues)

On 11/15/2010 12:00 AM, John Reiser wrote: > On 11/14/2010 01:13 PM, Matt McCutchen wrote: >> On Sun, 2010-11-14 at 13:07 -0800, John Reiser wrote: >>> When I created 14 partitions using a DOS partition label >>> (3 primaries, plus extended containing 10 logical partitions) >>> and gave 6 of the pa

Re: Firewall

On 12/06/2010 08:53 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Phil Knirsch (pknir...@redhat.com) said: >> Basically it's a statefull firewall daemon now that allows us to support >> and implement a lot of those features which have been so critically >> missing in our old way of doing firewalls (aka static crap)

Re: Firewall

On 12/06/2010 08:43 PM, Phil Knirsch wrote: > On 12/06/2010 08:40 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 11:15:37AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: >>> On 12/06/2010 11:05 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: The other benefit would be if the user only intended the service to be ac

Re: firewalld - A firewall daemon with D-BUS interface providing a dynamic firewall (test version)

On 01/02/2011 04:57 PM, Genes MailLists wrote: > On 01/02/2011 06:16 AM, Thomas Woerner wrote: >> On 12/27/2010 08:42 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote: > Can I ask a stupid question? Does dbus have the kind of performance necessary to support this type of application? >>> >>> What kind of perf

Re: really strange ext4 behavior

On 02/12/2011 11:52 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 02/12/2011 05:31 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: >> Hi, >> >> W dniu 12 lutego 2011 23:19 użytkownik Ric Wheeler >>napisał: >>> On 02/12/2011 05:12 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: Hi, I added a disc to my box. I wanted to use ext4. I run

Re: Plans for BTRFS in Fedora

On 02/23/2011 03:27 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:18 AM, John Reiser wrote: >> On 02/23/2011 05:07 AM, drago01 wrote: >>> Defaults should be chooses on the metric what provides the best >>> experience for the users not based on "what we have been doing in the >>> past" (i.e st

Re: F15 Alpha impressions

On 02/27/2011 03:55 PM, Mike Chambers wrote: > Fonts or whatever don't seem to be as nice or full looking as other > releases (F14 or below). Yes the font rendering makes applications look significantly more ugly then under F14. That was the first thing I noticed after starting Firefox. > When i

Re: F15 Alpha impressions

On 02/27/2011 06:36 PM, drago01 wrote: I used to be able to hover my mouse over the time and at least it would tell me the date instead of having to click on it just to see it. >>> >>> I think the general problem here is that with the advent of tablet and >>> other touchscreen driven devi

Re: should we consider making CoDel the default to combat bufferbloat?

On 28.03.2015 04:42, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 12:34:35AM +, Pádraig Brady wrote: >> Following on from >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.kernel/5549 >> Has there been any more consideration for enabling this by default? > It's the default i

Re: libblockdev reaches the 1.0 milestone!

On 21.05.2015 20:08, Vratislav Podzimek wrote: > A year ago, I started working on a new storage library for low-level > operations with various types of block devices -- *libblockdev*. Today, > I'm happy to announce that the library reached the **1.0** milestone > which means that it covers all the

Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides

On 12.06.2015 15:25, Radek Holy wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> From: "Kalev Lember" >> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" >> >> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 3:09:50 PM >> Subject: Re: DNF vs YUM, $pkg, $pkg-mpi, $pkg-openmpi having same provides >> >> On 06/12/2015 10

Re: httpd 2.4 is coming, RFC on module packaging draft

On 03/26/2012 10:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > 2012/3/26 Nicolas Mailhot : >> The following is going to kill pretty much every packaged webapp unless they >> are changed now: >> >> https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/upgrading.html#access > > IMHO mod_access_compat should be enabled by default >

Re: httpd 2.4 is coming, RFC on module packaging draft

On 03/27/2012 03:54 AM, Ken Dreyer wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn > wrote: >> I disagree. Since this is a major update that gets introduced together with >> a new Fedora version this opportunity should be used to make switches like >> th

Re: SPDY in F18 (was Re: F17 httpd 2.4?)

On 03/27/2012 09:46 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > W dniu 21 marca 2012 15:13 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski > napisał: >> 2012/3/21 Peter Robinson : > [..] >>> There's nothing stopping you from packaging up mod_spdy or any other >>> modules that add support for the protocol. >> >> I will try tomorr

Re: SPDY in F18 (was Re: F17 httpd 2.4?)

On 03/28/2012 07:39 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > 2012/3/28 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn : >> On 03/27/2012 09:46 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: >>> W dniu 21 marca 2012 15:13 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski >>> napisał: >>>> 2012/3/21 Peter Robinson

Re: httpd 2.4 is coming, RFC on module packaging draft

On 04/02/2012 09:08 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > 2012/3/27 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" : >> On 03/27/2012 05:15 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >>> I assume that that mod_access_compat module only requires a few bytes, so> I >>> don't see why it should not be loaded by default forever (or at least as >>> long a

Re: Replacing grubby with grub2-mkconfig in kernel install process

On 06/19/2012 08:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:12:06PM -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: >>> F18 is already using grub2 for EFI. I think we can remove grub-legacy >>> now. >> >> What about the Fedora images for Amaz

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

On 21.03.2014 13:24, Christian Schaller wrote: - Original Message - From: "Matthew Miller" To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:59:01 PM Subject: Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:28:

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

On 23.03.2014 03:45, Kevin Kofler wrote: Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: One example is the policy that patches for packages should first be submitted and accepted upstream before they make it into Fedora. That "policy" is only a non-normative guideline (not part of any enfor

Re: DNF: why does it refresh metadata all the time

On 20.06.2014 14:11, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 20.06.2014 14:04, schrieb Tim Lauridsen: >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Dennis Gilmore > > wrote: >> >> In testing dnf on rawhide I nearly always do "dnf clean metadata && dnf >> update" purely because I found most

rpmbuilding golang applications

Hi, I'm currently looking into creating an RPM for influxdb 0.9 but have run into a problem when it comes to the %install step in the spec file. I created RPMs for all dependencies which are installed at /usr/share/gocode/src and these are found and influxdb builds fine however once the "go instal

nodejs/npm coupling

Hi, I'm currently looking into using npm v3 with nodejs v4. The problem I've run into is that npm is apparently part of the main nodejs package which effectively joins them at the hip for no apparent good reason. Upstream ships npm with nodejs because they need npm to bootstrap the environment and

Re: nodejs/npm coupling

On 21.12.2015 08:23, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 21/12/15 01:36, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: > >> I'm currently looking into using npm v3 with nodejs v4. The problem I've >> run into is that npm is apparently part of the main nodejs package which >> effectively joi

Re: [HEADS-UP] Rawhide: /tmp is now on tmpfs

On 07/13/2012 09:14 AM, Roberto Ragusa wrote: > On 07/12/2012 09:54 PM, Harald Hoyer wrote: > >> Again.. tmpfs is restricted to half the RAM size by default. You can't >> store 8-9GB of trash.. only 2GB, which might land on swap over time. > > As I have already pointed out some time ago, isn't a

Re: Network configuration future

On 08/30/2012 08:55 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) said: >> Olaf Kirch (o...@suse.de) said: >>> On Wednesday 29 August 2012 21:56:45 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 08/29/2012 11:58 AM, Olaf Kirch wrote: > Your feedback is very much welcome! T

Re: Update mongodb to 2.2.0 (latest release)

On 10/08/2012 09:48 PM, Troy Dawson wrote: > On 10/05/2012 04:43 PM, Troy Dawson wrote: >> Hello, >> I have updated mongodb from 2.0.7 to 2.2.0. >> It is currently going through the normal channels for rawhide and Fedora 18. >> >> 10gen has a very good track record for being backwards compatible. >

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On 11/12/2012 06:03 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Tomas Mraz wrote: > >> On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 11:37 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Matthew Miller wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:29:34AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: > I think ssh has to

Re: raising warning flag on firewalld-default feature

On 11/13/2012 05:28 PM, Thomas Woerner wrote: > On 11/13/2012 03:46 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 02:28:17PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: >> Here, I mostly don't see the reason for it to be running all the time. >> Couldn't it be dbus activated, and then go away when it

Re: Does your application depend on, or report, free disk space? Re: F20 Self Contained Change: OS Installer Support for LVM Thin Provisioning

On 27.07.2013 05:07, Chris Murphy wrote: On Jul 26, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote: On 07/26/2013 09:13 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: Hello all, with thin provisioning available, the total and free space values reported by a filesystem do not necessarily mean that that much space is _actu

Dell XPS 13 ("Sputnik") no longer working with fedora kernels >= 3.10

Hi, i seems something in Kernel 3.10 broke the intel display driver for the Dell XPS 13 (a.k.a. Sputnik). I filed a bug here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=995782 Sombody commented in the bug that since it's hard to find other reports of this elsewhere this might be related to f

Re: Dell XPS 13 ("Sputnik") no longer working with fedora kernels >= 3.10

On 05.09.2013 16:32, Łukasz Jagiełło wrote: 2013/9/5 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn mailto:denni...@conversis.de>> Hi, i seems something in Kernel 3.10 broke the intel display driver for the Dell XPS 13 (a.k.a. Sputnik). I filed a bug here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/__show_bug.

Re: Dell XPS 13 ("Sputnik") no longer working with fedora kernels >= 3.10

On 08.09.2013 01:42, Chuck Anderson wrote: On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 12:45:03PM +0200, Łukasz Jagiełło wrote: 2013/9/5 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn Working fine here. #v+ [root@p0x ~]# uname -a Linux p0x 3.10.10-200.fc19.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Aug 29 19:05:45 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Re: LVM thinp expectations in anaconda 20

On 27.09.2013 20:59, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:55:43AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: I still can't choose a Desired Capacity that's larger than free space in the VG. Ergo, I can't create a virtual size LV. Is this expected? At this stage, yes. It might change in future,

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Ryu - Network Operating System

On 01/23/2013 04:25 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = Features/Ryu = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Ryu > > Feature owner(s): Isaku Yamahata > > Ryu Network Operating System http://www.osrg.net/ryu/ > > == Detailed description == > Ryu is an Operating System for Software Defined Netwo

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

On 01/31/2013 05:30 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 01/31/2013 04:30 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> I don't see how a distribution default would make any sense. > > I guess that's as senseless to you as it is for me fesco decision of make > mariadb to be preferred "default" is to me... Fedora

Re: Should MariaDB touch my.cnf in %post?

On 02/15/2013 04:13 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> Well, unless Oracle as upstream wants to get involved as downstream >> maintainers in Fedora as well. They did offer to do that but don't seem >> to have stepped up yet. > > I really don't see what we have to gain from having

Re: F27 System Wide Change: Graphical Applications as Flatpaks

On 14.07.2017 19:36, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 1:27 PM Matthew Miller 05:05:23PM +, Debarshi Ray wrote: > >> >>> How about reliable online updates of running applications as a >>> benefit? >> >> AND the ability to roll back, to choose beta or stable streams, etc. >> > >

Re: Announce: fedostree/rpm-ostree v2014.3

On 20.01.2014 19:03, Colin Walters wrote: Hello devel@, I'm excited to announce the first public release (v2014.3) of the fedostree/rpm-ostree project. The web page is here: http://rpm-ostree.cloud.fedoraproject.org/#/ rpm-ostree is a quite new, raw, and also quite unofficial project (the ins

Re: Announce: fedostree/rpm-ostree v2014.3

On 21.01.2014 08:30, Colin Walters wrote: Hi Dennis, On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 07:40 +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: Interesting. I've downloaded the VM Image and tried to understand the setup. Some bits are documented here https://people.gnome.org/~walters/ostree/doc/layout

Re: Announce: fedostree/rpm-ostree v2014.3

On 21.01.2014 20:07, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 07:40:00AM +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: Interesting. I've downloaded the VM Image and tried to understand the setup. Apparently there exist sort of two root trees / and /sysroot in the system with some links targ