es --all", which is xz-compressed only 4K on
my system or 7.4 GB for 1.8 million profiles.
Regards
Till
pgpauhgTxzbhl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:39:02PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 23:47 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > to how these numbers have changed in a week. I hope then everyone from
> > the QA SIG is using the script to report feedback, so it will be save to
> > s
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 11:42:28PM -0500, Tony Nelson wrote:
> On 10-03-05 17:00:12, Till Maas wrote:
> ...
> > But it seems that os.getlogin() is too smart for this purposes, e.g.
> > for me it always uses the username that started X, even if I "su -"
> >
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:18:37PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 10:42:32AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Imho for the beginning, there is no need to be able to query complete
> > profiles, but it would b
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:34:08AM +, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 06/03/10 09:04, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:18:37PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >> On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 10:42:32AM -0
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:53:59AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > Also a link to an example spec would be helpful.
The fedora-easy-karma.spec now uses this, so in case anyone else is
interested to test it, it can be used.
But I ne
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:19:27AM +, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 06/03/10 10:04, Till Maas wrote:
> --snipped--
> >>>>> DB)
> >>>>> 3) once a day a crawler reads all files and counts for each package how
> >>>>> often they are install
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 06:49:03PM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> maintainers, I think KDE or this update show that we were better off
> with an official policy.
Did the mc update break something?
Regards
Till
pgpdxHb1B1LoX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:14:38AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:27 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > Especially it needs to be made sure that only bugs created prior to
> > adding "F13" to RedHat Bugzilla or the branching of F13, depending on
in testing or needs more intensive
testing than the average updates, consider disabling the "karma
automatism" or select a higher threshold for the automatic push to
happen.
Regards
Till
[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Easy_Karma
pgpqOcw7LjFTR.pgp
Description: PGP signatur
ower the chances
of regressions. Btw. upstream releases most often contain bug fixes, even
if they also contain new features.
Regards
Till
pgphiH81rmtzk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
ason to
> support f11. Just update all machines to f12...
Not everything can be supported in both releases, e.g. when KDE 4 was
released, the older Fedora release with KDE 3 did not update to KDE 4.
Also e.g. when pam_mount (a package I maintain) was partly rewritten and
changed the con
se from
> the upgrade. Now think how someone who administers more than one
You do not have to update immediately and for security updates you can
use "yum --security update" or PackageKit.
Regards
Till
pgpu8iA1c25f8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@li
ion. It might work in some cases,
> but generally it's bound to fail.
But you have nothing to loose if you try it. You won't get more updates
than without trying to reduce them to the security updates. Even if it
might in theory not work that good, maybe it does in practice.
Regards
Ti
or newsgroups instead of a forum, if there
are multiple options.
Regards
Till
pgpag5UnQ7QGh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
olicy hidden? There is no ticket with a link at in the
FESCo agenda report:
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
Regards
Till
pgpGIVRNdjukT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 10:09:17AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 20:07 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:14:38AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:27 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > >
> > > &
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:42:19PM -0600, Mike Chambers wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 14:06 +0100, Thomas Spura wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, den 09.03.2010, 07:50 -0500 schrieb Stephen Gallagher:
> > > On 03/06/2010 05:21 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> > > > [0]
o be) in the fedora-packager comps group, so yum install
@fedora-packager should install it iirc (after the next comps to repo
sync, if it's not working yet).
Regards
Till
pgpBgays2gKyU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproj
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 04:51:52PM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Till Maas wrote:
> > You need to update packages from updates-testing first and then it's
> > useful to run it. Please look at the wiki for example output.
>
> Would your script break, say, if he
a certain amount of karma, but nobody seems to care,
that packages do (did) not get that much comments. And instead of first
improving the amount of comments, before taking the next step, it's just
ignored. This improved with my script for F12 and F13, but the only
available metrics say that
ecided to become Fedora package maintainers.
No volunteer package maintainer is in general forced to create updates
and I am very sure that the volunteer package maintainers usually do not
create updates that they do not want to use. So if you forbid package
maintainers to package the versio
g. for KDE
afaik the KDE SIG only switched to a new branch when the old one was not
supported anymore.
Regards
Till
pgptNx3GWrrTr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
I am not sure,
whether this is a good idea. Users will still need a FAS account,
install packages from updates-testing and know that it exist to use it.
Regards
Till
pgpTHf1fv9kZQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ma
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:22:37AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 13:08 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > Afaics this does not affect some minor issue, but a fundamental reason
> > why package maintainer decided to become Fedora package maintainers.
> &
lso perform some
additional query commands. Maybe this could be one of them.
Regards
Till
pgpDtUfkKyZZ9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
ady.
fedora-easy-karma by default already skips updates, that you already
commented on, this can be disabled with "--include-commented". So would
it be enough, if there is an option "--list-only", that skips the
questions whether or not to comment, but only displays t
difference compared to the remaining system. E.g. a
SheevaPlug[0] consumes 2.3W in idle mode or 7W with full CPU according
to wikipedia and running Fedora on it is supported within the secondary
archs project.
Regards
Till
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SheevaPlug
pgp6lvw9oKhw9.pgp
Description:
A. What
> > about using a bugzilla account instead?)
> >
>
> What is the problem you have with the CLA?
Imho it is to complex, which scares potential contributor away.
Especially if only a comment and a karma value are required, the CLA is
way to complex to require it.
Regar
eople are using this tool?
The git version will set it's own http user agent so people with access
to the server logs can create some usage statistics. But I could also
add this, if nobody objects.
Regards
Till
pgp2R9CL6KBE0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
gajim, there is a
50% chance that the wrong person becomes the new owner.
Regards
Till
pgpfe7oRfcTPo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_64 conflicts with file from
> package gstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10.17-2.fc12.x86_64
> file /usr/bin/gst-camera from install of
If you look closer, you will notice that one of the packages comes from
RPMFusion.
Regards
Till
pgpgkzPMvc1oa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
d
there might be something wrong.
Regards
Till
pgpm8rpFAFZnz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
; >
> > What is recommended way?
>
> As others have already recommended: Don't use that junk. :-)
The python rpmdev-newspec templates use %__python btw. I do not know,
whether it is somehow required for the python multiple stack support,
though.
Regards
Till
pgp6QtQtbi2lp
o this
yourself, after you have calmed down and maybe got some distance.
Regards
Till
pgpdEi6glyilv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
e current situation is, that
I did not push fedora-easy-karma from testing to stable in F13, because
fedora-packager >= 0.4.0 is still in testing there, but it is in stable
in F12, which is why I only pushed it to stable for F12 now.
Regards
Till
pgplAZv3UKeSt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
d
ra? Think of relatively small would-be software, without a GUI.
Maybe there is something for you on the Fedora wishlist:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WishList
Regards
Till
pgpexEyWzo3Z8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject
ed enough testing. If this implies, that
that the package should also be pushed in F13, then this should happen
automatically, too. Automatic default behaviour that leads to failure
should not exist.
Regards
Till
pgp09FUxKrPBa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
d
dates should go out to all releases at the same
> time, based on the sum of the testing done for all of them, then we won't
> have such upgrade path problems, ever.
It would be enough to only push the update that got enough testing and
all updates in newer releases to keep the upgra
file from package
| libpng-2:1.2.42-1.fc12.x86_64
What is wrong there? The png.5.gz file has the same md5 in both arch
packages for each version, which is afaik the only issue that might
create multilib conflicts.
Regards
Till
pgp7Wbz2UmLwX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:05:29PM +, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On 18/03/10 13:27, Till Maas wrote:
> > Hiyas,
> >
> > there is a -1 karma comment claiming that libpng is broken, because the
> > new x86_64 package conflicts with the old i686 package:
> >
> >
ut this will leave it to me to make the math instead of
doing it automatically. :-( I am not sure how well mdadm will behave,
but it seems not to have any parameter to tweak the alignment or the
sector size.
Regards
Till
pgprj13mtowwb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 05:12:26PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> for a new partition. Shouldn't it then default to sector 16, which is
I mean sector 8 here. So I just gave an example why the tools should do
the math for me. ;-)
Regards
Till
pgp1RMnbl3DjQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
problems.
Regards
Till
[0] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table
[1]
http://ata.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/ATA_4_KiB_sector_issues#Random_thoughts_and_comments_.28mostly_for_distros.29
pgpzeDWF2QxQb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
best tool seems to be for
me bdisk, which uses modern GPT partition tables, that do not care about
tracks or cylinders.
Regards
Till
pgpg9RKYU0niB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:32:48PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> me bdisk, which uses modern GPT partition tables, that do not care about
^
*sigh* This is meant to be gdisk.
Regards
Till
pgp0Dg1isND4s.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:34:59AM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:25:45PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:55:37PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > how about using GPT[0] partitions for F14 for all ins
about making it possible to overwrite the wrong reported values,
e.g. by making /sys/block/sdb/queue/[physical_block_size
writable,minimum_io_size} writable.
Regards
Till
pgphdeK5S3ddA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:22:56PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:34:59AM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> > I am also pretty sure that a BIOS does not consider the partition table
> > to boot,
> I can vouch for at least 2 Intel
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 01:04:29PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 21:55 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > how about using GPT[0] partitions for F14 for all installations that wipe
> > the whole disk to install Fedora? It is also considered to be good by
> >
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 09:21:53AM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> On 03/19/2010 08:08 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:21:47PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> Alexander Boström wrote:
> >>> ons 2010-03-10 klockan 15:57 -0600 skrev Eric Sandeen:
> &
so there are already
real world issues. It was mentioned on this thread I and have a WD20EARS
that shows this problem, too.
Regards
Till
pgpd1sn5UyTmK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
rt:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575143
Regards
Till
pgpnWwPDsAwPy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
re page is available here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GUID_Partition_Table
Regards
Till
pgpjbS1ETkSKd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:43:16PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> Ok if they are from the same login session and same UID it is reasonable
> to expect them to share /tmp.
Iirc, it would be more FHS compliant to use /var/tmp instead.
Regards
Till
pgp70p2xBXwfN.pgp
Description: PGP sig
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 11:34:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sat, 20.03.10 10:34, Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:43:16PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> >
> > > Ok if they are from the same login session and same UID
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 07:38:43AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Till Maas wrote:
> > These requirements render the karma automatism useless for all branches
> > except F13, because the fedora-packager package in F12 was iirc pushed
> > automatically after it received en
I just looked a little through the bugs and the oldest bug is nearly a
year old without any response by Karsten. Also I could close 3 bugs as
duplicates and one seems to be fixed upstream.
Regards
Till
pgpLCY6Sj4ZA3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorap
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:36:10AM +0100, Matthias Runge wrote:
> if you need assistance, I'm happy to support you.
> Sadly, I'm not approved, yet, this could get a bit tricky.
Next weekend is a Fedora Action Day in my region, I am sure I will get
to sponsor you the
erman keyboard, too, and I never hit any such bug. I only have
to set it when I install it or boot a live medium. Btw. is the support
to set the keyboard for a live medium via kernel commandline gone?
Regards
Till
pgps53fLT6gcI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fed
is whole thread is strange. If you think something is odd, please
say what it is. If you wonder, whether it requires PHP, look at the
spec.
Regards
Till
pgp4TTWdC2LdB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 02:16:14PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/3/26 Till Maas :
> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:04:51AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> >> Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> >> > 2010/3/26 Jon Ciesla :
> >> >
> >> >
ection about informing upstream about half a year ago,
therefore I guess the majority of package maintainer did not do this. I
know I never did this, unless they already list other distributions or I
had to send a patch.
Regards
Till
pgpjZuS9P5wca.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailin
ble in a format that can be easily parsed, would
be nice, too. Maybe this could be done with adding smolt information in
the feedback and the tested features (XV, VGA, DVI, 3D, ...) and the
update needs to have some meta data, which kind of devices are supported
(e.g. only Geforce devices for t
x27;s way into Fedora. Then everyone on the CC list of the Fedora
bug will also not notified once the update is there. Except that these
bugs do not show up in searches for open bugs, I do not see anything bad
with this approach.
Regards
Till
pgp5H1ikqmSZL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
de
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:37:33AM +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:21, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 16:33 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> >> 8. The package updated sucessfully, but was not used intentionally. No
> >> breakage no
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:13:18PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> Till Maas wrote:
> > Even
> > if an update is there to fix something, it does not mean that one can or
> > will test it completely (special hardware might be required). In this
> > case it is still inte
all Fedora releases, than probably all
comments except for the comments regarding only the update for a certain
release need to be mirrored manually to the other bugs afaik. And this
will only cause huge mail spam, because all (co-)maintainers would
receive every comment up to 4 times for Fedora.
R
le to
> patch in.
Maybe it would be enough to somehow store the information in Bugzilla,
e.g. using a flag for each supported release or some Whiteboard
Keywords, and then implement another Bugzilla Frontend that uses the
XML-RPC interface of Bugzilla to provide a Frontend that can be better
use
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:09:51PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 14:56 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> > Till Maas wrote:
> > > Maybe it would be enough to somehow store the information in Bugzilla,
> > > e.g. using a flag for each supported
might be to request a manual override using the Fedora Infrastructure
track ticket system:
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/
Regards
Till
pgpJUAimIoDm5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
0110.fc12.noarch
Cnucnu does not really use twisted so as long as the python import still
works, nothing will be broken.
Regards
Till
pgp6A9VdMlYvL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
broke pam_mount:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559953
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239375
Hopefully it will be moved back to /lib eventually and then syslog-ng
could use SSL support, too.
Regards
Till
pgp5vLISDg2px.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@
gt; > will stay in /usr/lib though.
> >
> > I will do that change in F14 packages. Till Maas asked me for this
> > change also in F13, but I am a little hesitant to do this as I am afraid
> > of regressions. Do you think this change could break things in F13?
>
&g
t would be nice if Bodhi would support to create a new update using
an old update as a template, then editing the builds attached to an
update would probably not be needed.
Regards
Till
pgploWN8EJGjw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
d logs, download it and then undecode it. Or you can create a
SPEC to only build and package rescomp and submit it as a scratch build.
Regards
Till
pgpPpHidvV3OB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
o replaced to x86 x86_64
> hosts.
> or ...?
You might need to wait until F11 is EOL, because there ppc is still a
primary arch iirc.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
hank you for maintaining them for so long.
I took youtube-dl, because I already asked off-list for it previously,
but I approved you as a co-maintainer.
Regards
Till
pgp1hbQY3SHkW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Kind regards
Till
[0]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-15856/kernel-2.6.41.1-1.fc15
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
mber that there has been a script that checked the health status
of packages in Fedora by examining when the last build happened and
maybe other facts. What happened to it?
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi,
I want to offer a review swap for hxtools:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683610
It is a dependency I need to update and probably fix several bugs in
pam_mount.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo
focus should be on untouched important bugs. If they pile up,
then the maintainer needs help.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
ributor that performed informal
reviews as stated in the wiki. Or at least there was not trace of the
informal reviews in the review ticket. Back to the question: I guess the
main skill needed is to be able to monitor the sponsoree's activities
and to identify bad behaviour.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
gt; -#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(3, 1, 0)
|
| It may have be helpful for the faked 2.6.4x kernels to still present a
| 3ish LINUX_VERSION_CODE. AFAIK, faking the number is for the benefit of
| userspace, not any kernel module. Perhaps it's not too late?
Regards
Till
--
devel m
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:51:52AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 23:40:52 +0100
> Till Maas wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 02:03:43PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >
> > > This has come up nearly every release cycle. Problem is that nob
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:03:05PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> * The list of test cases associated with the package, with a PASS / FAIL
> choice for each
A "Did not test" choice is missing here.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorap
you read "%bcond_with ocaml" as 'add a
"--with-ocaml" build condition flag' to the spec.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 07:13:03AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Or perhaps better asked, what
> about rawhide makes it
> unsuitable for use as a rolling Fedora release?
The rpm packages in Rawhide are not signed.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.
e package in question.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
as been filed,
therefore I do not see any reason to remove it from Fedora. And in case
it really does not build, I expect a bug report.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
to build
from source "--comment "$package fails to build from source. Please fix
this, otherwise the package is going to be removed on 2012-04-01. See
http://example.com/ for more information"
Btw. I just re-built aircrack-ng.
Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproj
er available to fix
the verified bug.
Regards
Till
pgpWI5Fnw3N0N.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
t the
update was broken and made proftpd not start anymore, this is usually
not as bad as having the system corrupted by an evil attacker.
Regards
Till
pgpzMROcoN2qI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
estoring the whole system. But this is what people using Fedora
with proftpd and being exploited have to do.
Regards
Till
pgpICiImShN3l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
p would help here. But what is certainly
missing is proper monitoring of updates that need to be tested asap and
notify testers or people in charge of untested updates.
Regards
Till
pgpwTifkIi9b8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 02:22:42PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:21:30AM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > The documented issues do not seem to be as bad as a system being
> > exploited. It is only about dependency breakage or services not working
> &
ng only for updates of packages
that have a dedicated team of testers. E.g. people who want certain
packages to be tested properly can subscribe to them and test them and
as a benefit they won't get any broken updates.
Regards
Till
pgpAgx3zQF2gq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel ma
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:03:35AM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 13:59:24 +0100,
> Till Maas wrote:
> > The optimal case is to provide well tested security updates fast, but
> > this is not what Fedora achieves. In my example there is no indication
&
onally test each other updates
manually and to maintain test machines is not a good idea. The whole
update criteria enforcement only works if there are enough dedicated
testers that provide extra manpower. Or if the testing is all automated.
Regards
Till
pgp2GTVHDgxv3.pgp
Description: PGP sig
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:44:43AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 11:23 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:18:38PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > > place. The idea was never that some magic independent group of testers
&g
301 - 400 of 1153 matches
Mail list logo
