only
suggestion of fedora-devel list :) ))
Greetings,
Ondrej Vasik
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
s on filesystems matching between a box
> > installed with RHEL5 and a box that gets newly installed with F16).
> >
> > -Toshio
>
> I'm not against wider announcement. I'm just not sure what is the right way -
> F16 Feature/Release Notes/ ? We can also annouce the 200 limit for
> reserved IDs. ;)
Probably makes sense :) ... even some ID sanity validator/checker might
be good idea for this "feature".
Ondrej Vasik
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
ns
dynamic system id's from the top of the range, going down - so the
conflicts with existing dynamic system accounts are really unlikely to
happen there.
Ondrej Vasik
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
ssigned. So if
the trend will continue, there is enough free id's for reservation for
~5-10 years - so the threshold at 200 seems to be enough atm (especially
if the dynamically assigned system id's assignments are going from the
highest limit down).
Ondrej Vasik
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
"a", {{1307271119, 468295223}, {1307265135, 0}}, 0) = 0
> setxattr("a", "user.qqq", "www", 3, 0) = 0
> chown32("a", 0, 0) = 0
> chmod("a", 0755)= 0
>
> Why is tar not workin
.0.usrmove.1/ ).
I'm sure that reverting the changes at the moment would mean much more
confusion and that there is the only option now - finish it.
But I hope that FESCO will learn from this "feature" and will set the
"deadlines" for distro-wide features with higher
On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 10:21 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Am 10.02.2012 08:36, schrieb Ondrej Vasik:
> > Given the fact that there is NO ultimate gain from the usrmove feature
> > (ok, I understand all the arguments for the usrmove, but I don't see
> > them that bright a
llation prefix based on the location of another
> binary, and get confused if that prefix is empty.
>
> Is this a reasonable change? I'll file a bug report if that's the case.
/bin and /sbin paths were already removed in latest setup package - as
you no longer need them... so n
- Original Message -
> On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 17:11 +0100, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 17:08 +0100, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > Dear developers,
> >
On Fri, 2014-07-11 at 15:55 -0700, Colin Walters wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking at user/group stuff more as part of the other thread on
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SystemdSysusers - but let's
> ignore that for a second.
>
> So on
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UsersAndGro
er-touch
mounts.
Greetings,
Ondrej Vasik
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 09:22 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> > On Aug 5, 2014, at 3:28, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> >
> >> On 04/08/14 19:13, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> >> Can someone point me to discussion which ended in /media being symlink
> >> to /run/media directory?
> >>
> >> I am now lookin
On Thu, 2014-08-14 at 06:17 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:06:11AM +0200, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> > Actually I'm going to revert the /media -> /run/media change. It is
> > really not solving the issue it was trying to help with and in addition
>
On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 08:07 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> > On 08/14/2014 12:17 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:06:11AM +0200, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> >>> Actually I'm going
intainer: 5
> Watched:0
Jan left Red Hat to continue with his university study. Feel free to
remove him from packages where he is Co-maintainer - primary ownership
was already transfered (or new comaintainer already asked for permission
approval).
Regards,
Ondrej Vasik
--
d
On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 18:01 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 05:12:07PM +0200, Peter Schiffer wrote:
> > On 10/15/2014 04:47 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> > >Once upon a time, Jan Chaloupka said:
> > >>there has been a discussion about if we need cache for man-db for
sign redhat-lsb
to me - I'm monitoring the bugzillas of redhat-lsb package anyway and
I'm the owner in RHEL. We discussed with Lawrence transfer even in
Fedora, but it never happened.
Greetings,
Ondrej Vasik
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedor
packages. Feel free to remove his co-maintainer status and move the tcsh
master branch either to me (ovasik) or praiskup .
Thanks!
Greetings,
Ondrej Vasik
>
> If we don't hear anything in a week, we will be removing their acls and
> will need to find new point of contacts, etc
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 10:30 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 06:12:45PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> > Am 10.07.2012 17:18, schrieb Orion Poplawski:
> > > Shouldn't that be /usr/ as well. Will it cause problems if it doesn't
> > > match
> > > with the /etc/passwd entry?
> >
On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 18:51 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 13:16 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > I noticed this:
> >
> > $ rpm -qf /usr/etc
> > filesystem-3.2-12.fc19.x86_64
>
> A quick git annotate shows it originates from:
>
> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/filesy
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 12:53 +0200, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 18:51 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 13:16 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > I noticed this:
> > >
> > > $ rpm -qf /usr/etc
> > > filesystem-3.2
On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 11:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Ondrej Vasik (ova...@redhat.com) said:
> > Now I probably see why I did that - it was in the RPM_BUILD_ROOT from
> > some reason and because of the capabilities change, I needed to
> > explicitly mention all d
On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 18:45 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Greetings all
>
> After sitting Dan's Walsh Secure Linux Containers talk at flock where he
> mentioned him and Dan B. had successfully scaled application containers
> to what 8000 instances or so and I noticing that his slide wh
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 08:21 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" said:
> > You would just overwrite in in your own .bashrc if you have long
> > hostname and they get in your way.
> >
> > Long hostnames are far more practical for administrators to use then
> > shor
- Original Message -
> 2013/5/17 Ondrej Vasik < ova...@fedoraproject.org >
>
>
> commit ed5396d91e0032fa7cbfd6cb0bde3d7850aba790
> Author: Ondřej Vašík < ova...@redhat.com >
> Date: Fri May 17 09:21:51 2013 +0200
>
> require glibc-devel to prevent b
- Original Message -
> 2013/5/17 Ondrej Vasik < ova...@redhat.com >
> - Original Message -
> > 2013/5/17 Ondrej Vasik < ova...@fedoraproject.org >
> >
> >
> > commit ed5396d91e0032fa7cbfd6cb0bde3d7850aba790
> > Author: Ondřej Vašík
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 04:25:43AM -0400, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> > > 2013/5/17 Ondrej Vasik < ova...@redhat.com >
> > > > 2013/5/17 Ondrej Vasik < ova...@fedoraproject.org >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > commit ed5396d91e0032fa7
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 06:22:09AM -0400, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 04:25:43AM -0400, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> > > > > 2013/5/17 Ondrej Vasik < ova...@redhat.com >
> > > > > > 2013/5/17 Ondrej Vasik < ova...@fedoraproj
> Am 17.05.2013 12:35, schrieb Ondrej Vasik:
> >> In that case, glibc maintainers need to re-consider their claim that it
> >> is only material for developers & put it in glibc-common or a glibc-docs
> >> package instead of the -devel package
> >
> >
join
http://scan2.coverity.com/ .
In addition, very beneficial thing is to get DIFFERENCE between two
scans - I would recommend codescan-diff
( https://git.fedorahosted.org/git/codescan-diff.git ) - it was
originally designed for the internal Coverity scans, but now it has
support for variou
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 09:12 +0100, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 13:17 -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >
> > The issues reported against libvirt all a
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 10:37 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 09:12:06AM +0100, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
>
> > Publishing them is a bit tricky - I can of course publish them (we scan
> > with cppcheck, enhanced gcc warnings, clang and coverity) - but the
>
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 16:47 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 18.12.2013 16:37, schrieb Dave Jones:
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 09:12:06AM +0100, Ondrej Vasik wrote:
> >
> > > Publishing them is a bit tricky - I can of course publish them (we scan
> > > wit
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 19:00 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 18.12.2013 18:54, schrieb Ondrej Vasik:
> > On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 16:47 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >> Am 18.12.2013 16:37, schrieb Dave Jones:
> >>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 09:12:
Hi Zbigniew,
yes, basesystem is there just to ensure installation order and it could
probably be achieved by that PR.
There is one more benefit from the retirement - as there are
occasionally bug reports (that should be filed against distribution)
reported as basesystem issues (similarly to setup p
35 matches
Mail list logo
