On 02/19/2015 07:48 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 20:11 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer authoritatively.
S
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 20:11 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> > On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
>
> > Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer authoritatively.
> >
> > Stephen, is this group intended fo
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Dan Mossor wrote:
> IIRC, if you don't supply --product, it returns a "Usage" error, IOW the
> --product specifier is required.
OK good. So no user is unwittingly ending up with some outcome they
haven't signed up for.
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
> Good question, let's kick it up to someone who can answer authoritatively.
>
> Stephen, is this group intended for user consumption? If yes, how; if no,
> can you hide it please?
>
>
>
On 02/18/2015 04:45 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
I'd agree with Pete that this isn't *really* something we intend to
'support'; you're supposed to pick a product by, well, installing that
product (and, as a one-time thing, on fedup from <21).
> On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 18, 2015 3:33 PM, "Chris Murphy" wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
> >
> > > In my personal, arguably pedantic opinion, this isn't something that
> > > should
> > > be encouraged.
> >
> > That's
On Feb 18, 2015 3:33 PM, "Chris Murphy" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
>
> > In my personal, arguably pedantic opinion, this isn't something that
should
> > be encouraged.
>
> That's reasonable. What's the rationale for group "Fedora Server"
> being visible instead
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> I'd agree with Pete that this isn't *really* something we intend to
> 'support'; you're supposed to pick a product by, well, installing that
> product (and, as a one-time thing, on fedup from <21). You're not
> really supposed to 'convert
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
> In my personal, arguably pedantic opinion, this isn't something that should
> be encouraged.
That's reasonable. What's the rationale for group "Fedora Server"
being visible instead of one of the many hidden groups?
--
Chris Murphy
--
test
On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 18:49 -0700, Bodhi Zazen wrote:
> Found my bug on this -
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157258
See also
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F21_bugs#environment-product-conflictsÂ
and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1160917 , which
a
Found my bug on this - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157258
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Murphy"
To: "For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases"
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:57:45 PM
Subject: Convert nonproduct to productX
Cur
On Feb 17, 2015 1:57 PM, "Chris Murphy" wrote:
>
> Currently installed F22 lxde spin, which contains:
> fedora-release-nonproduct-22-0.12.noarch
> fedora-release-22-0.10.noarch
>
> But how to convert it to server product? It seems like this should
> work but it fails:
> # dnf group install "Fedora
search bugzilla ther are several bugs on this and a nice discussion. Can't find
teh link at the moment
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Murphy"
To: "For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases"
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:57:45 PM
Subje
Currently installed F22 lxde spin, which contains:
fedora-release-nonproduct-22-0.12.noarch
fedora-release-22-0.10.noarch
But how to convert it to server product? It seems like this should
work but it fails:
# dnf group install "Fedora Server"
Using metadata from Mon Feb 16 21:33:49 2015
Error: pa
14 matches
Mail list logo
