On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 07/13/2011 10:57 AM, Olivier Sallou wrote:
>> I create a new package.
>> At install, we need to ask for some quesitons to the user to
>> preconfigure the application.
> rpm-based installations are supposed to be non-interactive, i.e. this
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Fulko Hew wrote:
> %{_bindir}/chcon -t httpd_sys_script_exec_t
> /var/www/html/nia/scripts/* 2>/dev/null
> semanage fcontext -a -t httpd_sys_rw_content_t '/var/www/html/nia/tmp'
> 2>/dev/null
> restorecon -v '/var/www/html/nia/tmp' 2>/dev/null
As an aside, it is
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> cronolog
I'll take this.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Or we can open it to the entire project and
> just assume that the electorate will ensure that nobody inappropriate
> gets elected.
I don't see the harm in letting the electorate decide this. If you're
not a packager and you somehow manage
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> Hm. The list of (implicitly labeled) critpath packages seems to have
> proliferated recently
Why not impose a self-restriction on the number of critpath packages?
Make a rule like "The ratio of proventesters to critpath packages must
be x
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> * #715 Provenpackager education/status/brainstorming (sgallagh,
> 18:43:02)
There was some discussion a while back about preventing certain
extensions from being uploaded to the lookaside cache. Could ".patch"
be added to that list?
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 15:21:11 -0500,
> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> Of course, a whitelist might be a better idea. Maybe we only
>> allow .tar.gz, .tar.bz2 and .zip to be uploaded this way and make
>> additional exceptions as they ar
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> Shouldn't fedpkg be calling rpmbuild-md5 -bs when targeting an older
> dist like EL5?
fedpkg's --help text for "local" or "srpm" describes an --md5 option,
and that's what I use when building for EL5.
- Ken
--
devel mailing list
devel@lis
2012/2/23 Miroslav Suchý :
> But I find incredibly hard to find relation between bugzilla email and FAS
> account.
> How do you do this check?
I use zodbot's fasinfo command, because it's faster than searching the
FAS web interface.
> Therefore I suggest to enhance template of [2] to include line
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> If you have any questions feel free to contact any of the people in CC.
Thanks for this heads' up. I maintain a package that hardcodes a /tmp
path: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/796910 . (I'm not really following
how you've set up the Blo
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> We may have tracked this down to a new app server that only had 1 vcpu.
> (It was thus getting bogged down and not processing as normal).
> We have that app server all fixed up now.
>
> Can anyone who sees this problem again let us know?
> (Eith
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:15 AM, John Ellson wrote:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.9.3.995-0.6.git20120314.fc17
>
> The update contains fixes for three problems: 800690, 798102, 802540
>
> I contributed to the first bug, 800690, and duly tested and reported "works
>
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:22 PM, BJ Dierkes
wrote:
> I'm wondering how other people have resolved these issues for projects using
> GitHub as the upstream Source0 download provider.
I package a github-hosted package, and I ran across this when I was
testing with rpmlint. It is too bad that Git
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 08:45:30PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
>> EPEL-only packages should have their devel branch (and any other Fedora
>> branches if they were already created) properly retired including adding the
>> dead.package file. It c
Hi folks,
Cacti is a PHP monitoring program that has been showing its age for a while now.
There are numerous CVEs relating to XSS and SQL injection that
upstream has patched in SVN but are not available in any tagged
release, and this has been the case for several months.
More recently, another
Was wondering the same thing on my rubygem-thinking-sphinx build just now.
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7979/8047979/root.log
- Ken
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7943/8047943/mock_output.log
>
> So
It looks like the upstream is here:
https://github.com/msimacek/koschei . You could open a GitHub issue
there.
- Ken
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> I'm not sure where to post issues with koschei - the website itself does not
> specify. So here goes - whenever I try to
Hi folks,
The Ceph package ships some utilities that are not intended to be run by users.
1. There's one utility that prepares Ceph's object storage daemon and
that is at is in /usr/libexec/ceph/ceph-osd-prestart.sh . The systemd
unit file calls that with "ExecStartPre=".
2. There are some other
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> Hello,
>> I confess I've only seen /usr/libexec used for add-on utilities, but
>> now I'm curious.
>>
>> Does it make more sense for these sort of scripts to live in
>> /usr/libexec, or in /usr/share?
>
> /usr/libexec. From (info standards)
A day or two ago Ceph upstream was just discussing using this library
to support for HTTPS support in its embedded Civetweb server.
nss-compat-ossl is not in Debian/Ubuntu, but we could try to make that
happen... this announcement catches me by surprise. Is this library
essentially dead upstream? W
Thanks Florian and Kamil.
I've updated the wiki page
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Nss_compat_ossl ) to warn developers
that this library should not be used.
- Ken
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Thursday, April 30, 2015 10:27:50 Ken Dreyer wrote:
>> A
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> By the way, I am not a maintainer of rubygem-rugged, either, and
> I don't use rubygem-rugged (currently). Anyway I want to know
> how the current maintainer think of the current status.
> If the current maintainer has no interest on this pack
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Mamoru TASAKA
> wrote:
>> By the way, I am not a maintainer of rubygem-rugged, either, and
>> I don't use rubygem-rugged (currently). Anyway I want to know
>> how the current ma
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 10:31 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> Personally, I have long wanted burst-to-cloud or the ability for
> others to donate hosts to the Fedora build system without having to
> physically ship hardware. Koji is somewhat limited in that regard.
> Maybe developing a shim layer and some
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 1:27 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
> I don't think burst-to-cloud means we only burst to a single cloud.
> That seems like a great way to just lock into that cloud with no
> flexibility. Rather, I would look at it as a hybrid cloud opportunity
> and use AWS, or the IBM cloud that o
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:16 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> I love how people hold up "containers" as a solution to these problems
> without considering for a moment how exactly the container itself gets
> built. If you were to look into the flatpak build system in Fedora,
> you'd see that they ar
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
> these.
In principle I agree with what you're saying, but this is still going
t
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 1:50 AM, Remi Collet wrote:
> Le 29/03/2012 07:40, Remi Collet a écrit :
>> I'm still searching for a good solution I can submit to upstream for
>> packages I maintained (ok, this is mainly an issue on debian-like distro).
>
> What do you think of
>
>
>
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> For a while now I have been working on a proposal for some changes to
> both the way we elevate packagers to sponsors and what (to a small
> extent) sponsors actually do. Please note that this is not a proposal
> for any changes to ho
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> I'd be perfectly happy saying we will never ship glusterfs-3.3.x on f16 and
>> f17, but the reality is that there probably are people who want it.
>
> So you can always do a fedorapeople repository for those that want to
> experiment.
I s
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I replied elsewhere in the thread, but I believe KK is significantly
> underestimating things here. There are indeed only a few system firmware
> vendors, who write the firmwares for just about all PCs under contract
> from the manufacturers
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Gary Gatling wrote:
> My name is Gary Gatling and I work at North Carolina State University
> supporting Linux in the college of engineering. I mainly work with Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux.
Hi Gary,
I co-maintain one or two packages Jack Neely @ ncsu.edu in RPM
Fu
I was looking briefly into packaging some Puppet modules, and I was
curious if anyone else has gone down this road.
http://forge.puppetlabs.com/
I'm mainly interested in the Puppetlabs modules,
http://forge.puppetlabs.com/users/puppetlabs , since I imagine these
will have the widest user base, al
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 13:14 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've just upgraded my main workstation form F-20 to rawhide, and during
>> the distro-sync I noticed that several packages in rawhide are older then
>> in F-20.
>
> That
What version of libnl3 do you have installed? I was having bridge
problems too this week. I downgraded libnl3 from 3.2.24-1.fc20 to
3.2.21-2.fc20 and restarted the NetworkManager service, and then my
bridge worked. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1063290
- Ken
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Jo
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
>> = Proposed System Wide Change: Ruby193 in SCL =
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby193_in_SCL
>>
>> Change owner(s): Marcela Mašláňová
>>
>> Ruby 1.9.3 with Rails 3.2.8 is still comm
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> OK cool. What is the plan for when repositories change what they
>> are carrying and add stuff that may be legal for them but not for
>> others? Will there be periodic reviews to make sure that this
>> hasn't happened or some way that we
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:04:41 -0600
> Ken Dreyer wrote:
>
>> One practical difference is that there's no bug trackers for
>> individual COPRs. At least when a package is in Fedora, communication
>> can hap
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Susi Lehtola
wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 11:45:11 -0500
> Richard Shaw wrote:
>
>> First let me say that if anyone wants to be the primary maintainer of pvm
>> please step up! I only need it as a dependency.
>
> What package are you referring to?
I co-maintain
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> At least ceph appears to have systemd support upstream already,
Yep! We're waiting for Ceph upstream to release a stable version of
the 9.x series (codenamed "Infernalis"), and then we can ship this in
Rawhide.
I anticipate that Ceph upstrea
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
> So, in the general case of packages being retired from EPEL7 because
> they have moved to RHEL, how do we avoid missing packages in the future?
What is the issue with the CR CentOS repository?
- Ken
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorapro
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
> fedpkg pull
> Already up-to-date.
>
> git branch
> f12
> f13
> f14
> f15
> f16
> * f17
> master
"git pull -a" will grab the f18 branch. Not sure why fedpkg doesn't do it.
- Ken
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Gary Gatling wrote:
> But like everything else he is talking about, I feel its not my problem. And
> I don't really care. Maybe thats evil/wrong of me?
Well, there are occasions when upstream's priorities are somewhat
antithetical to what we're doing in Fedora. And
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> My proposal would be the following:
> * Move EPEL 6, Fedora >= 17 to use Puppet 3.0.
> * Move EPEL 5 to the latest 2.7.x branch. This is the last branch of
> Puppet that supports Ruby 1.8.5, and works with 3.0 masters.
The last big Puppet
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> I'm not opposed to putting puppet 3 in, but it'd really be helpful if it
> went in as "puppet3" or something, and left the stable version as is,
> happily getting security-only updates.
My biggest concern is that 2.6 will not get security u
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> We can make the new package available, and do something to publicize that
> there is going to be a change. When 2.6.x is no longer maintained for
> security updates, the new package gets the old name and obsoletes the
> temporary name.
The
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:47:21AM -0500, David Lehman wrote:
>> > It means F18 GUI installation will be completely unusable for people
>> > requiring enterprise features but unable to write own kickstart
>> > themselves.
>> Such people nee
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> It has been discussed in the past that we should have a repository of
> the rawhide kernels with debug turned off to encourage more users to run
> the latest upstream snapshots. That repository now exists. You can
> enable it by dropping
I'm going through the "co-maintain to sponsor" process this week with
blakegardner on the gearmand package. Gearmand was recently orphaned,
and I've picked it up in order to work with blakegardner on the EL5
branch. I sponsored Blake in FAS yesterday, and I was surprised to see
that he was able to
The gearmand package was recently orphaned for all branches. I've
taken over maintenance, and Blake and I intend to push the latest
upstream gearmand (1.1.8) to Fedora and EPEL 5 and 6.
This will involve an ABI break from the current EPEL libgearmand
package (0.14), although no packages in EPEL de
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> It's a vastly safer initial setup than leaving it wide open, by
> default. this applies to many tools such as Nagios and cacti, that may
> share information about your system that you really should review
> before exposing.
Right. Cacti'
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 01:16:30AM -0600, Ken Dreyer wrote:
>> I do agree that the .rpmnew thing is annoying, and I wish there was a
>> better way to handle that.
>
> I think in general, packaging webapps into RPM
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:23 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
wrote:
> Debian already uses /usr/share/javascript for this purpose, and it
> would be really nice if we both could coordinate on getting some
> upstream support for this in certain cases. I'm very strongly -1
> against pointless Fedoraisms here.
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 5:23 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth
wrote:
> I wasn't aware Debian already exported a directory for this. (But
> "/javascripts", really?) It would be nice if they wrote that into
> their policy.
I was slightly wrong: it's "/javascript" (singular). I couldn't find
any formal Debi
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:54 AM, James Hogarth wrote:
> When the switch was first proposed it was Oracle who was most vocal against
> it to the point of them stating they'd take over package ownership and
> filing #958131 to update to 5.6 and change the name from community-mysql to
> mysql-commu
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Norvald Ryeng wrote:
>
> If you want us to do more, please say so. We're happy to help out.
Thanks for extending the offer. Would you mind commenting on the
mysql-workbench issues too? As Remi's pointed out a couple times,
there's a long list of crasher bugs that
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> I would like to ask *you* what is your opinion?
Koji has another advantage over OBS in that it's already in the distro.
I've found that packaging Rails apps for the long term (especially for
EPEL) is an absolute nightmare. Looking at OBS's
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 2:05 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> On 08/30/2013 08:42 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
>>
>> I've found that packaging Rails apps for the long term (especially for
>> EPEL) is an absolute nightmare. Looking at OBS's webui requirements,
>> getting
I can sponsor you, assuming that you'll be following the "co-maintain
to get sponsored" process and Christopher will offer help with
aoetools if needed.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Become_a_co-maintainer
Christopher, are you ok with this?
- Ken
On
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Christopher Meng wrote:
> On Thursday, September 5, 2013, Ken Dreyer wrote:
>> I can sponsor you, assuming that you'll be following the "co-maintain
>> to get sponsored" process and Christopher will offer help with
>
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Miroslav Suchy wrote:
> On the other hand, I do not think we can close the gap between Copr/Koji and
> OBS now nor in future as OBS have more resources. So I will try to get (in
> spare time) OBS to Fedora anyway and build some community around it. And
> revisit the
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik said:
> I could certainly have been out of town, for a while, and missed
>> this. But, to the best of my knowledge, Fedora uses ext4 as the
>> default boot/root. Just sounds a bit strange to me, that this is
>
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Net-INET6Glue:
100a4b5550a05925bf7af5acf0597a6a Net-INET6Glue-0.5.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/ma
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/sourcecheck/sourcecheck-20130930/fedora-gnat-project-common-dl.txt
>
> Looks like we have a wildcard cert issue...
> https://download.fedorahosted.org/released/fedora-gnat-project-common/download/
> might be a
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Dan Horák wrote:
>> I think it was me who promised to sponsor Peter. Being fully loaded
>> with other work I waited for seeing the plus set for the review flag.
>
> Well, the idea is that the sponsor is the one who sets the fedora-review+
> fl
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
>> You can even now also mention in your bug that you are a packager and
>> would be willing to co-maintain. Not everyone would be interested, but
>> I suspect a lot of maintainers would be happy for the help and would
>> add you to make yo
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Tomas Orsava wrote:
> This means that for the vast majority of Python packages (those using PyPI
> to download sources) the Source0 link needs to be updated.
Has there been any discussion about having a provenpackager change all
the URLs in all the packages acros
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> BR of libjpeg-devel now pulls in libjpeg-turbo-compat-devel, but this
> doesn't really work as a drop in replacement because those headers are in
> /usr/include/libjpeg-turbo-compat/. Shouldn't libjpeb-turbo-devel provide
> libjpeg-devel a
I noticed our package review process doesn't explicitly say "After you
make an update to the package, bump the 'Release' number and post a
new link each time." This is a popular convention, but it doesn't seem
to be formally documented.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process
Should
Hi Till,
Alex and I are already packaging opdenkamp's xbmc-pvr-addons inside
the xbmc package RPM Fusion. We're shipping this plugin there.[1] I'd
be interested in collaborating with you on the best way to package the
plugins. Our latest spec file is in Git [2], along with some notes in
a TODO fil
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Ralph Bean wrote:
> I'm going to be bumping python-requests in epel6 from 0.11.1 to
> 0.14.1. If you are using python-requests and think this will cause
> issues for you, let me know so we can work out a solution.
No comment on the version bump itself; but should
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Kerberos clients can optionally verify reverse DNS records for services that
> they connect to as a way of trying to identify which realm they belong to.
> However in many cases these do not exist. Kerberos should fall back to it's
> defaul
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Please file a bug on mock. They need to push out a version with f19
> configs:
Thanks for pointing in the right direction. I've filed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/922268
- Ken
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin
I was talking with someone today about
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag , and they were
confused about the references to the Makefiles.
Can I have access to edit that particular page to clean that up?
Or how does one get access to do such a thing?
- Ken
--
devel mailing list
dev
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 29.11.2014 v 12:56 Pádraig Brady napsal(a):
>> On 29/11/14 09:44, Ali AlipourR wrote:
>>> Hi
>>> Is there any statistics about How many developers Fedora has?
>> Considering just packages:
>> https://www.openhub.net/p/fedora-packages
>>
>> O
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Jiri Popelka wrote:
> On 01/15/2015 04:24 PM, Jakub Jelen wrote:
>>
>> I look forward to future cooperation with you and thanks you all for
>> doing Fedora.
>
>
> Welcome Jakub !
Yes, welcome!
- Ken
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://adm
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:49:13 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Ultimately, it's about one thing: Help get more software into Fedora
>> without scaring people away.
>
> What is the background for this? Who has been scared away?
Here's one
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, today I just manually signed it and retagged it into f26.
> So, it should be in there now... sorry for the hassles.
>
> We will look at logs on the autosigner and see if we can figure out
> what happened.
My money's on ceph-debuginfo's hor
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon
wrote:
> Before I investigate what it would take to drop pkgdb entirely and let pagure
> handle the ACLs, I wanted to hear from you if you think this is a terrible
> idea
> or worth investigating.
I think it's fine to drop per-branch ACLs and
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
> We would like you to try it out and give feedback, it is very important
> for us! Just send it as reply to this message..
This is an interesting feature, thanks for announcing it and
presenting at DevConf.
Colin Walters made an interestin
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 5.6.2017 v 18:59 Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
>> It would be nice if this was more automated.
>
> Tito [1] can do it.
Also a shout out to https://github.com/softwarefactory-project/rdopkg
. This tool can between a "upstream" repo, a dow
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Most packagers have enough problems with workload without piling on a
> bunch of extra unnecessary vanity bollocks that provides absolutely
> ZERO value.
Agreed, the value is unclear to me as well.
We already have something that is cleaner
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I say this as someone who's spent the last
> couple of weeks whacking on a PHPland stack (Owncloud) with a wrench to
> achieve precisely that.
For what it's worth, I read over the GitHub tickets, I think you're
headed in the right direction
Hi Richard,
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> I noticed that EPEL 7 branches were created for several of my packages that
> have el6 branches, but not all of them. I didn't request them (yet) so I'm
> wondering, are some packages automatically added or did someone else reques
Would anyone mind sharing their mock configurations for EPEL 7?
/etc/mock/epel-7-i386.cfg
/etc/mock/epel-7-x86_64.cfg
It looks like mock-1.1.35-1.fc19.noarch doesn't ship these files yet.
- Ken
___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-de...@lists.fedoraproject
Hi Paul,
Whoops, thanks for pointing that out. The thing that confused me is
that perl-Readonly and perl-Readonly-XS are missing from
rhel-everything-7.0-beta-1-x86_64-dvd.iso .
- Ken
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
>
> On 24/01/14 16:29, Ken
Hi folks,
RHEL 7 does not ship perl-Readonly. This package is a dependency for
perl-boolean, which is a dependency for perl-MongoDB, so I'd like to
have it in EPEL 7.
Would one of you mind branching and building it for EPEL 7?
I did a scratch-build unmodified from perl-Readonly in Rawhide, and i
Hi Amanda,
I'm curious about this change: "Kerberos support in koji, fedpkg, OSBS "
Is koji.fedoraproject.org is going to eventually stop supporting TLS
authentication, and we'll have a Fedora-project-wide Kerberos
infrastructure instead?
- Ken
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Amanda Carter
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On martes, 25 de octubre de 2016 2:42:15 PM CDT Ken Dreyer wrote:
>> Hi Amanda,
>>
>> I'm curious about this change: "Kerberos support in koji, fedpkg, OSBS "
>>
>> Is koji.fedoraprojec
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> We implemented HTTPS proxying of the Kerberos protocol, based on
> MS-KKDCP specification. It is in MIT Kerberos 1.13+.
Oh, fantastic! I didn't know that standard, or that MIT Kerberos supported it.
- Ken
__
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 7:17 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> Heimdal does not support MS-KKDCP spec, so you are left with direct
> Kerberos communication over port 88/tcp or 88/udp, but these are enabled
> in Fedora infrastructure, yes.
I thought direct Kerberos service was going to be disabled, t
For several years I've run my kickstart installs through a squid proxy
that caches packages that I download. My kickstarts have something
like this:
url
--url=http://mirror.chpc.utah.edu/pub/fedora/linux/releases/31/Everything/x86_64/os/
--proxy=http://squid.example.com:3128
As I test many repea
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 2:24 PM Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> Well, a way to allow force pushes would be to have a git hook that
> branches the tree before the force push. (creating a branch named
> something like audit-force-push-)
In Ceph we do this at a slightly different point of time. We use
"rdopkg
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 11:51 PM Petr Pisar wrote:
> How do you backport fixes? Do apply the fixes directly to dist-git? Or do you
> apply the fixes to a corresponding patches branch that you occur to have
> around till needed (e.g. till the hitorical code is supported) for the purpose
> of backpo
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:45 AM clime wrote:
>
> Ken, would it be, please, possible to provide links to the patch
> branches and mentioned dist-git repos. I would like to have a closer
> look.
Sure. I can't share the links to the RH Ceph Storage dist-git repos,
so I will give one example where I
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 6:20 PM clime wrote:
> When you do rdopkg new-version and you are asked to force push, is
> also the current master-patches HEAD tagged with the current package
> NVR?
It's something that I have to do before I run "new-version". Here's
the command I ran today:
$ rdopkg ta
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 4:29 PM clime wrote:
> Probably there are more variants but I see these three right now. I
> think variants 1 and 2 where the spec file is kept in dist-git but
> patches can be in source-git are more within our reach right now (but
> I might be wrong, variant 3 is also inte
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 10:13 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> What's happening right now is the process of us trying something out
> and finding out where the problems are. That's what happens when you
> invent new stuff, it's harder than just carrying on doing the old
> stuff.
I agree Adam.
I think
I work on a team at Red Hat with Kefu. He is very active with upstream
Ceph, though I have not watched his Fedora activity or lack thereof.
Is there a particular Fedora bug that you need Kefu to address?
- Ken
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 4:59 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 7:11 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Remi Collet wrote:
> > Le 26/09/2019 à 11:36, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit :
> > > Here is what the vision we came to and that we would like to discuss:
> > >
> > > ○ Every changes to dist-git is
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
