On Monday 11 January 2010, Charley Wang wrote:
> We also need (and would appreciate help with) the
> linking of failed build logs to their package owners.
If you want just an e-mail address per package, use -
ow...@fedoraproject.org. If you want more than that, see /usr/bin/fedoradev-
pkgowners
On Friday 15 January 2010, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Alternatives is system wide, but it can be per application.
Per application alternatives, as in alternatives(8)? How?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Saturday 16 January 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:14:53AM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > On Friday 15 January 2010, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > Alternatives is system wide, but it can be per application.
> >
> > Per application alternative
On Monday 18 January 2010, Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Farkas Levente wrote:
> > the real bottleneck is not the rpmbuild itself (with ccache it cab be
> > very fast), but the mock surroundings. suppose there is build which
> > takes about 2 minutes and in mock it takes about 5 minutes:
On Monday 18 January 2010, Clark Williams wrote:
> If package build times are your problem, you may want to modify the
> make command used by the specfiles. Mock just does what the specfile
> says to do (i.e. it just does an rpmbuild), so you might want to add a
> '-j16' to the make command line t
On Monday 18 January 2010, Tony Nelson wrote:
> On 10-01-18 11:34:44, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> ...
>
> > So instead of modifying specfiles, one can do something like this in
> > /etc/mock/site-defaults.cfg:
> >
> > config_opts['macros']['%_smp_mflags
On Tuesday 19 January 2010, Leigh Scott wrote:
> At the moment I am unable to build qbittorrent and torium (springlobby
> as well) at Koji due to broken deps.
> I have emailed Peter and requested commit rights for the devel branch
> but received no response.
Maybe he's still offline?
http://lists.
On Friday 22 January 2010, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Friday 22 January 2010 01:30:11 pm Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> > so one of the next steps might also be to allow some filesystems to be
> > read-only? Can be done manually of course but most of the time I am too
> > lazy to do that.
>
> That make
On Tuesday 26 January 2010, Roman Rakus wrote:
> Hi all,
> please take a look at bash faq section E - E14. Quoting:
>
> E14) Why does quoting the pattern argument to the regular expression
> matching conditional operator (=~) cause regexp matching to stop working?
[...]
> Please, take a look in y
On Friday 30 July 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 09:49:22AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> > That's a good question. fedpkg does not yet have a method for end user
> > defaults. That's not a quick patch either, but if somebody wants to
> > work on it, I'll certainly revie
Hello,
I no longer use cvs2cl, so I've orphaned it in package database. Go grab it
if you want it.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hello,
I have no regular need to use cvsps any more, so I've released its ownership
in pkgdb for the branches where I was the primary owner. There are co-
maintainers for it, but they did not respond to my mail about whether they'd
like to pick it up earlier this week, so I'm posting here in ca
commit db9267823b329a0d0e35af84c4f696fcd7d60307
Author: Ville Skyttä
Date: Tue Sep 7 00:21:26 2010 +0300
- Update to 0.65 (#630714).
.gitignore |2 +-
perl-Module-Signature.spec |7 +--
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4
The lightweight tag 'perl-Module-Signature-0.65-1.fc15' was created pointing to:
db92678... - Update to 0.65 (#630714).
--
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/mailman/l
On Saturday 09 October 2010, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Does this mean that no other package needs openlayers? If this is the
> case, can we update since there won't be any breakages?
If an update is known to break dependent software, it breaks it whether the
affected software is in Fedora or not.
--
On Tuesday 19 October 2010, Cleaver, Japheth wrote:
> A ton of this work was already done in initscripts through the use of the
> /etc/sysconfig/readonly-root hooks. Isn't that already working well enough
> now for that purpose, future systemd changes aside?
Not sure if it's directly related to t
On Thursday 21 October 2010, Neal Becker wrote:
> Right now I have:
> %dir %{python_sitearch}/mercurial
> %dir %{python_sitearch}/hgext
>
> I guess owning the parent dirs is not sufficient?
Right.
> I could auto-generate a list of directories, but don't know what to do with
> it.
>
> Right now,
On Tuesday 02 November 2010, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> Java SIG has prepared changes in current Java packaging guidelines. We
> would welcome wider discussion/comments at this point. From our point of
> view guidelines seem ready for approval by FPC.
>
> You can see current version of draft he
On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> FYI the versionless jar/javadocs files are now in the draft (thanks for
> the suggestion, somehow none of us thought of that)
Thanks for considering it.
> But keep those comments coming, we'll try to keep working on the
> guidelines to
On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mercredi 03 novembre 2010 à 19:27 +0200, Ville Skyttä a écrit :
> > 3) In my opinion, the whole alternatives setup in the JRE and SDK
> > packages should be purged. It's a relic from times that are long gone,
>
&
On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mercredi 03 novembre 2010 à 21:32 +0200, Ville Skyttä a écrit :
> > On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > Le mercredi 03 novembre 2010 à 19:27 +0200, Ville Skyttä a écrit :
> > > &g
On Wednesday 03 November 2010, Alexander Kurtakov wrote:
>
> There is no sane way to make javadoc crosslink in a sane way, i.e. without
> patching builds. That's why I would say let's postpone this until we can
> tell packagers HOWTO do it.
I'm not against postponing as long as it's not forgotten
On 07/18/2011 11:09 AM, Andreas Bierfert wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 08:57 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> I have a package that supplies translated man pages (only in Ukrainian
>> strangely enough). They are installed by the upstream under:
>>
>> %{_mandir}/uk/man1/
>> %{_mandir}/uk/ma
On 07/20/2011 11:17 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Richard Shaw (hobbes1...@gmail.com) said:
>> I don't know why I didn't notice before but I was reviewing a
>> build.log from a package and noticed it was only using -j2 when I have
>> -j4 in my .rpmmacros. If mock doesn't use .rpmmacros from the use
On 07/22/2011 10:33 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> The rpm changelog can reasonably be in any timezone.
It is better to always write the changelog timestamp in UTC to avoid
"%changelog not in descending chronological order" build errors if the
specfile is modified at unfortunate moments in differen
On 07/26/2011 12:48 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Ville recently proposed a different set of scriptlets that would do away
> with triggers but no one's committed to testing that the triggers work in
> all cases (lots of package upgrades and lots of reboots are needed to test
> that the scriptlets u
On 07/30/2011 07:44 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> Is there a way to check if the gcc version is sufficient with some rpm
> macro?
Do you actually need to have it as a macro? Often cases like this can
be handled with plain shell code in %prep, %build, etc. Or by patching
the build system to do the
On 08/20/2011 12:09 AM, Maciej Małecki wrote:
> Not worth it, one can always use which to verify if command is gone or
> is bash is going mad.
+1
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 10/21/2011 07:51 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> If it's being stripped there's probably a good *reason* for it to be
> stripped
I'd say its much more likely that they're just trying to save some space
on end user systems where stuff is built from source by users and the
users are too lazy to str
On 11/05/2011 07:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The list of packages that need to be rebuilt is attached.
I suggest maintainers take this opportunity to review whether all these
packages really need to be linked against libpng - I'm positive that the
list contains a lot of packages that don't. -Wl,--as
A soname bumping directfb update is coming to F-14 soon. xine-lib is
its only dependency in Fedora and will be pushed in the same update.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/directfb-1.4.11-3.fc14,xine-lib-1.1.19-2.fc14.2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673842
--
devel mailing li
On 03/24/2011 06:52 AM, John Reiser wrote:
>> they say on Debian and Ubuntu,
>> all shared libs have 0644 permissions.
>
> What they say is incorrect.
>
> I have Ubuntu 10.10 i686:
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1421892 2011-01-21 15:08 /lib/libc-2.12.1.so
[...snip more libc examples...]
libc is prob
On 03/22/2011 06:15 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> The Fedora 15 Test Day schedule continues to roll, and this week it's
> the turn of power management:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-03-24
I would like to participate but the live CD .iso (linked to in the above
page) downloads at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627032
There is an (unofficial) ongoing review for my w3c-linkchecker
submission, but for the reasons outlined there, I'm not going to finish
the review process as the submitter nor will be maintaining it in
Fedora. Feel free to pick it up as the submit
On 04/02/2011 05:02 PM, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> Hi fedora community,
>
> I maintain ftop package. I've made fedora and el6 packages. Taking
> account different requirements for epel5 packages, now I'd want to
> make an el el5 package. It's not clear what i should do.
>
> 1. If I create an new spec
On 04/11/2011 10:15 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:59:11 -0500, Jon wrote:
>> repoquery --whatrequires , which could be a name of an RPM, or a
>> solib name, like libfoo.so.0.
>
> Note that --alldeps option is the default for some time, so if you
> really want to be "a name
commit b7202fa520dd07814309c5db7aa49c45cb29062d
Author: Ville Skyttä
Date: Tue Apr 19 21:56:41 2011 +0300
Appease rpmbuild >= 4.9.
perl-Module-Signature.spec |8 ++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Module-Signature.spec b/perl-Mod
On 05/01/2011 09:46 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
> package: clapham-0.1.003-4.el6.noarch from fedora-epel-testing-6-ppc64
>unresolved deps:
> java>= 1:1.6.0
This is not an answer to your question, but if the above is exactly as
is from the mail you received, something needs a fix: the dependen
On 05/02/2011 01:48 AM, David Timms wrote:
> The -manual package can be used by either audacity or
> audacity-freeworld. At the moment the manual spec marks up the
> datadair/audacity folder and hence dually owns it with audacity if that
> is installed. Reading the packaging examples, seems that
On 05/13/2011 04:38 PM, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> Thanks Kalev, everyday one learn something new! However I've seen that
> mock when make a build for epel5 does not disable dependency tracking:
[...]
> Is that right?
Yes. --disable-dependency-tracking was added to %configure in
redhat-rpm-config ve
On 05/28/2011 02:47 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Ankur Sinha [28/05/2011 13:41] :
>>
>> For the time being, for the review request, do we need to ask the
>> submitter to patch the address to correct it?
>
> I view patching licenses as being a bad thing. I ask the submitter to
> file a bug upstre
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709647
I'd like to have bash-completion included in F-16's default install. In
my opinion it's in a good enough shape for that already now, and with my
upstream hat on I expect things to further improve before F-16 is out.
Why I'm writing here is that
On 06/03/2011 12:44 PM, David Howells wrote:
> Ville Skyttä wrote:
>
>> I'd like to have bash-completion included in F-16's default install. In
>> my opinion it's in a good enough shape for that already now, and with my
>> upstream hat on I expect thing
On 06/03/2011 06:25 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> Since you are asking...I have a suggestion since I've used
> bash-completion for a few years:
> - make it modular (perhaps depending on environment variables?)
>
> why? Because some completions take a lot of time to load, as has
> already bee
On 06/02/2011 04:51 PM, Petr Sabata wrote:
> Why would you include an "optional functionality" (a quote from Packaging
> guidelines) package in the default installation?
I don't think being "optional functionality" alone prevents something
being installed by default. And the point of the quoted
On 06/02/2011 05:47 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>From a size perspective, it's not a huge deal - 500k with no deps that
> aren't already in @core. From a functionality perspective, it would be
> good to fix the issues it has with disconnected machines, etc. - I've
> always removed it personally be
On 06/04/2011 02:20 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> I'd invite people to try out the latest packages, and if the issues are
> still present, filing bugs about them (preferably upstream at
> https://alioth.debian.org/projects/bash-completion/ if it's not
> packaging related
On 06/03/2011 05:52 AM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> Anyway, I'll tell Jeremy he'll need to manually remove/update.
In my opinion this is a good (or bad?) example how users' life is made
harder due to irrational fear of the Epoch. Telling Jeremy won't help
people who don't know that the problem exist
On 06/04/2011 02:38 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 04.06.2011 13:20, schrieb Ville Skyttä:
>> but it seems to me that most of the negative feedback is also
>> coming from people who haven't been using bash-completion for a while
>
> no - i am using bash-completio
On 06/05/2011 03:46 PM, Alexander Boström wrote:
> Consider a hypothetical bash-uncompletion which just blacklists tab
> completion in those cases where it doesn't make sense but never adds any
> new completion sources.
I've suggested that to bash-completion earlier this year; the idea
hasn't tak
On 06/02/2011 05:04 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Things like bash completion have massive performance implications on network
> and other slower file systems esp if its used for home directories.
Forgot to reply to this earlier, but I'd like to hear more details about
this, preferably in a bug rep
On 06/07/2011 07:25 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> Right, sometimes it is more convenient to start off with a bogus
> completion and manually modify intermediate parts afterwards.
> bash-completion is simply too smart for this kind of usage.
Hitting Alt-/ instead of tab can be used to force filename
On 06/07/2011 11:52 AM, Mattias Ellert wrote:
> You can do it on the version of the software. If it has a pkg-config
> file you can do something like this (taken from an existing specfile in
> Fedora):
>
> %prep
> %setup -q
> %if %(pkg-config --max-version 2.1.2 ftgl 2>/dev/null && echo 1 || echo
On 06/07/2011 07:04 AM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> I agree with you but this bug is a bit special in that it is several
> versions out of date. If this was F14 or even F13, the Epoch bump would be
> good. But adding a bump for a mistake on a F10 branch seems unnecessary now.
Even though that makes t
On 06/11/2011 10:15 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> In the meanwhile if you know your package contains executable scripts
> and was built within the last month (for rawhide), it will need a rebuild.
I suppose there are many cases where the missing script dependency does
not actually matter, because
On 06/17/2011 08:43 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Both seem to be in use by various packages. Which one is thought to be
> "correct"? Should this be in the guidelines somewhere?
I'd say at the moment nothing besides bash-completion itself should be
installing files to /usr/share/bash-completion, a
On 06/18/2011 01:06 AM, Aaron Sowry wrote:
> n Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:41:14PM +0100, Martin Dengler wrote:
>> As you point out, git-log and --help do this too. It's excellent.
>> Make it configurable if you must, but I'd be interested to think why
>> you think it's not always the useful thing to
On 06/18/2011 03:02 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Ask us nicely and we'll add SYSTEMD_PAGER for you, taking precedence
> over PAGER.
>
> Even more convincing might be prepping a patch for this.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38439
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.
On 06/19/2011 01:41 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 19.06.2011 12:32, schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
>>
>> Seems to me very unlikely to see a new systemd services in F15
>
> i better not comment this with more than "normally F15 should have not been
> released
> without them" and if so it should be fix
On 06/24/2011 05:15 PM, Matt Domsch wrote:
> * Bug 716267 - mock 1.1.11 moves to build step even if buildroot had
> depsolving problems.
I'm looking into this.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 07/06/2011 11:33 PM, Jerry James wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoReqProv_%28draft%29#Removing_items_from_the_provides_stream_.28post-scan_filtering.29
>
> Or rather
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AutoProvidesAndR
On 07/12/2011 04:31 PM, Tim Bielawa wrote:
$ wget
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3192896\&name=BackupPC-3.2.1-1.fc14.src.rpm
[...]
> 2011-07-12 09:30:45 (819 KB/s) -
> “getfile?taskID=3192896&name=BackupPC-3.2.1-1.fc14.src.rpm” saved
> [525870/525870]
>
> Not ideal though...
On Wednesday 03 February 2010, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 19:16 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 19:04 -0500, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> > > I work on another open-source project that is considering using
> > > pkg-config, and we are trying to establish st
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562316
Why did this bug end up in the FTBFS list? I don't think rpmdevtools has
actually failed to build from source according to the logs available right
now, this bug has nothing directly to do with FTBFS (or at least nothing that
a script could po
On Tuesday 23 February 2010, Iain Arnell wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Jay Hankinson
> > * Current build process uses $ORIGIN for relative RPATH linking.
>
> This one is slightly trickier. Using rpath for system libraries is
> absolutely forbidden. But packaging guidelines has info
On Friday 26 February 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:12:53PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 17:14 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > > Also repoquery returns F12 results but accepts --releasever:
> > > $ repoquery --releasever=rawhide --repoid=fedora kernel
> >
On Saturday 27 February 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> > About new package point, what about the negative impact of newly
> > pushed package on distribution as a whole if it breaks to launch or
> > crashes in some event(produced in some essential functionality) and
> > was misse
On Saturday 27 February 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> If they Obsolete something else, then they're not really new packages.
I that's the blanket generalization I read it as, I don't agree with it, but
meh.
> Well, true, new packages which Provide some common virtual Provides like
> bluez-dbus-pi
On Thursday 04 March 2010, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 05:21 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > On 03/04/2010 12:07 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> >> On 3 March 2010 21:45, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> >>> Here are the list of changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
> >> I've done some up
On Sunday 07 March 2010, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> I've been refraining from commenting on these update-threads but as it
> seems folks have started actually counting the pro semi-rolling vs
> conservative updates style replies... for the record:
>
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > I'd
On Sunday 07 March 2010, Johan Cwiklinski wrote:
Not that I know anything about BackupPC, but:
> If I change the path in conf.d/BackupPC.conf ; users who have modified
> the .conf file will get a conf.rpmnew file ; that's fine.
If apache.users moves from /usr/share/BackupPC to /etc/BackupPC, it'
On Monday 08 March 2010, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
> Hello All!
>
> I just found that many java-related packages have packaging issues,
> and one of them draws my attention - explicit "Requires: %{name} =
> %{version}-%{release}" in some *-javadoc packages. Since my java
> experience is rather small,
On Monday 08 March 2010, Chen Lei wrote:
> Requiring Base Package
>
> Devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
> dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}. Usually,
> subpackages other than -devel should also require the base package using a
> fully version
On Sunday 14 March 2010, Colin Walters wrote:
> If you maintain a desktop app, please check for StartupNotify=true,
> and if your app uses GTK+ or Qt, then please submit a patch *upstream*
> to add it, and at your option apply that patch in Fedora.
If an app uses GTK+ or Qt, does that alone alway
On Friday 19 March 2010, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/barrage/Fedora/
> 13, 500, Unknown HTTP Server Response)
>
> This is while creating an update.
I got that earlier today too, when the "close bugs" checkbox was ticked. I
managed to submit th
On Friday 19 March 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 06:47:44PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > On Friday 19 March 2010, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> > > ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/barrage/Fed
> > > ora/ 13, 500, U
On Wednesday 31 March 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 11:44 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:36:29AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Nvidia has announced that they are deprecating it
> > >
> > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/ar
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Module-Signature:
49a961502c0786797dabfea9c7fd30c3 Module-Signature-0.63.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
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Module-Signature/devel
In directory cvs01.phx2.fedoraproject.org:/tmp/cvs-serv13350
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Module-Signature.spec sources
Log Message:
* Fri Apr 23 2010 Ville Skyttä - 0.63-1
- Update to 0.63.
- Sync with current
On 11/05/2011 11:20 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 22:02:42 +0100, KK (Kevin) wrote:
>
>>> Lots of executables end up linked with libpng12 due to other libs (cairo,
>>> gdk-pixbuf2) being linked with it. Neither -lpng12 or -lpng is added
>>> explicitly.
>>
>> Not due to them bei
On 11/06/2011 12:26 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Puzzles me. The F-16 build doesn't depend on libpng* directly:
>
> $ rpm -qR geeqie|grep png
> $ rpm -q geeqie
> geeqie-1.0-13.fc16.x86_64
I noticed a similar thing with gkrellm-volume -- the F-15 build did have
a dependency on it, but the F-16 o
On 11/07/2011 01:57 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> * The %configure macro (at least since F-16) does
> LDFLAGS="${LDFLAGS:--Wl,-z,relro }"; export LDFLAGS;
>so one cannot simply export a customized $LDFLAGS in the spec file
>without disturbing the macro.
That's what I meant by "(in
On 11/14/2011 07:57 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 18:18 +0100, Honza Horak wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> GNU database indexing library (gdbm) has changed its license to GPLv3+.
>
> A quick scan says this affects:
[...]
> ypserv (GPLv2)
This one looks like an incompatibility.
--
devel mai
On 11/14/2011 08:59 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 20:46 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
>> On 11/14/2011 07:57 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 18:18 +0100, Honza Horak wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> GNU database in
On 12/03/2011 05:32 PM, Nicoleau Fabien wrote:
> So now, F15 and rawhide both have a maintained version, but F16 provides
> a quvi that is not maintained. Problems will appear because the websites
> handeled by libquvi often change.
[...]
> My question is : what must I do ? backport 0.4.x ? down
On 12/04/2011 04:00 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
>> $ echo "const int TIXML_MAJOR_VERSION = 2;" | sed 's/const int
>> TIXML_MAJOR_VERSION = \([0-9]+\).*/\1/'
>> const int TIXML_MAJOR_VERSION = 2;
>
> By replacing (sed 's/../../') with (sed -n 's
On 12/12/2011 08:15 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> To me, the easiest solution for you is probably going to be dropping ypserv
> from the distribution. But if that's not possible, then attempting to
> convince the gdbm upstream to switch back to GPLv2+ would likely be
> a worthwhile investment.
On
On 12/12/2011 10:16 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
> 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?
Please don't do that. In my opinion the lookaside cache is the proper
place for patches for
On 12/12/2011 10:29 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 22:26 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
>> On 12/12/2011 10:16 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
>>
>>> There was some discussion a while back about preventing certain
>>> extensions from being uploaded to t
On 12/12/2011 11:22 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:47:53PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
>> On 12/12/2011 10:29 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>>> Patches should never be in the lookaside cache, because
>>> it is very difficult to vi
Hello,
I have no need for gkrellm-volume any more, so I've orphaned it in pkgdb
for all Fedora versions. It has been orphaned for EPEL already for a while.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 2011-12-19 10:32, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> I can tell you right now that cornercases will never be caught with
> tools like this. Licensecheck only looks at headers/comments, whereas
> licensing depends on many things and can be quite confusing. I am sure
> that rpmdevtools maintainers wou
On 2011-12-31 13:56, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> gcc-4.7.0-0.1.fc17 on x86_64
Is this package available somewhere?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 2012-01-03 16:07, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>
> If you never do a build in Rawhide - your latest build is the F16 one
> - Rawhide automatically inherits the F16 (or older) builds.
> I find it useful.
Me too, but beware, sometimes the inheritance is explicitly disabled.
http://lists.fedoraproject.o
On 2012-01-05 03:25, Reindl Harald wrote:
> why in the world introducing updates the installation
> of devel-packages?
Packaging bugs, in this case https://bugzilla.redhat.com/748362 .
Looks like I didn't end up in Cc for that bug so I've missed the mail
for comment 4, but I'll look into pushing t
On 2012-01-05 19:18, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> ideally drop all the disttags prior to fc17
I hope I'm just having trouble parsing this correctly. Could you rephrase?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 2012-01-05 20:34, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Ville Skyttä wrote:
>
>> On 2012-01-05 19:18, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>>
>>> ideally drop all the disttags prior to fc17
>>
>> I hope I'm just having trouble parsing this correctly. Could you
>> rephrase?
&
On 2012-01-08 21:42, Paul Howarth wrote:
> I've been doing some rebuilds of my packages for the gcc 4.7 mass
> rebuild and when comparing the F16 and newly-rebuilt packages, I seem
> to be losing a lot of the perl dependencies.
file 5.10 has changed magics for various scripts in a way that causes
On 2012-01-10 12:22, Petr Pisar wrote:
> Considering koji build root regeneration, all (Perl and Python) packages
> whose build task started between post-event-4227982 rotation and
> post-4250009-event rotation are affected.
Not all of them are -- in fact I believe few are. Regarding Perl, the
i
On 2012-02-16 05:34, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> 2) The bash-completions add-on. Which does all kinds of wonderful
> things which when they work is really nice.. it will autocomplete
> hostnames if you type ssh f, it will autocomplete depending on
> the command you typed the most obvious items..
1 - 100 of 325 matches
Mail list logo
