Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691913
--- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2011-03-30 08:45:13
EDT ---
Jerry, if you are in the Fedora packager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691896
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:34:39 -0500 Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 03/29/2011 03:01 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Can you paste the kmsg context of the starting please?
[ 42.087581] systemd[1]: Got D-Bus activation request for
bluetooth.service
The bluez D-Bus service activates bluetooth.service
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:56 PM, valent.turko...@gmail.com
valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Marko,
glad to see compiz working for you. In the meanwhile I found this bug
already reported:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653085
So anybody please join in if you have this
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:57 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com
valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:56 PM, valent.turko...@gmail.com
valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Marko,
glad to see compiz working for you. In the meanwhile I found this bug
already reported:
Hi fellow Fedorans.
I'd like to push a minor update of Lua, which incorporates a small
bugfix patch, and some cosmetic fixes to the builds script. First
testing by a proven tester has been done successfully, but I need more
testing to be able to push it, please have a look, try it and comment:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
It's a fairly minor technical change, though presumably people consider
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
It's a fairly minor
Summary of changes:
3b22373... Update to 0.28 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what
The lightweight tag 'perl-Package-Stash-0.28-1.fc15' was created pointing to:
3b22373... Update to 0.28
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or
The lightweight tag 'perl-Package-Stash-0.28-1.fc16' was created pointing to:
3b22373... Update to 0.28
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit 4752cd705e37cfe05a705c2444e5fff5c8b34214
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Sun Mar 27 14:53:53 2011 +0100
Tidy up changelog entries
perl-Perl-Critic.spec |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Perl-Critic.spec
commit 8d08a157e5cd0bc91e679e82130af91876657251
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:06:27 2011 +0100
Update to 1.114
- New upstream release 1.114:
- Documentation::RequirePodLinksIncludeText now handles nested POD
formatting
(CPAN RT#65569)
commit f7d19979d285f3a7e9cadd80594332363f5dbd9b
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:16:09 2011 +0100
Drop redundant (for modern rpm) BuildRoot tag and buildroot cleaning
perl-Perl-Critic.spec | 11 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
---
commit 0bc1d1f650a3bdd7a856e2855792208bc0031fc7
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Tue Mar 29 13:31:19 2011 +0100
Split Test::Perl::Critic::Policy off into its own package
perl-Perl-Critic.spec | 27 +++
1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
commit 2868c631b83d5485b99bf59454790c74c7ba66f5
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Wed Mar 30 09:23:02 2011 +0100
Tidy dependencies and add --with authortests build option
- BR/R: optional modules perl(Readonly::XS), perl(Term::ANSIColor) = 2.02
- BR: perl(Pod::Spell)
On Wed, 30.03.11 14:04, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it,
On 03/30/2011 02:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what
Ralf Corsepius wote:
It's a massive FHS violation
= release blocker.
who cares ? also /cgroup /selinux /sys /debug ...
FHS is frozen since seven years ago.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 03/30/2011 05:34 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677888
Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 03/30/2011 05:34 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=676688
Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:54:30PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
The actual code changes we needed to implement this scheme were trivial
(basically, just bind mount /var/run and /var/lock instead of mounting two
new tmpfs' to them.), which is why we opted to do this so late in the F15
On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 01:54:30 PM Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
Lennart Poettering wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other directories below / are allowed? I can't find that. And hence
this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#PURPOSE2
Applications must never create or
I just tried the new mesa* packages in Fedora 15 updates-testing on my
Sandy Bridge (Core i7 2600) system, and the results were not pretty.
X was completely unusable, with both of my screens flashing solid
black every few seconds.
These messages appeared in the syslog:
Mar 30 06:24:23 ian
On 03/30/2011 06:00 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other directories below / are allowed? I can't find that. And hence
this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
Added to the release notes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691896
--- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2011-03-30 08:38:17
EDT ---
Thanks, I will apply:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 02:30:40PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other directories below / are allowed? I can't find that. And hence
this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
More than that, it's explicitly allowed. So we're
Hello!
2011/3/30 Ian Pilcher arequip...@gmail.com:
I just tried the new mesa* packages in Fedora 15 updates-testing on my
Sandy Bridge (Core i7 2600) system, and the results were not pretty.
X was completely unusable, with both of my screens flashing solid
black every few seconds.
I
On 03/30/2011 01:11 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the
Le Mer 30 mars 2011 14:04, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 14:11 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which
establishes a
Le Mer 30 mars 2011 14:30, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other directories below / are allowed? I can't find that. And hence
this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
%
Applications must never create or require special
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Nicolas Mailhot
nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
The FHS is about having major distros agree about file locations, and
documenting the result. Which seems to be exactly what happened here.
Well, documentation on a mailing list is fine for F15, but it really
On 03/30/2011 02:42 PM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
On 03/30/2011 01:11 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:10 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
2011/3/30 Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691896
--- Comment #5 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2011-03-30 09:02:56
EDT ---
Also ported it to F15:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:36:38AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
No flames from me. This is a sensible, thought-through change with
cross-distro buy-in and no major downsides. It is outside of the FHS, but is
in the _spirit_ of it, and would fit into an updated release of the
standard, if there
On 03/30/2011 02:36 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:54:30PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
The actual code changes we needed to implement this scheme were trivial
(basically, just bind mount /var/run and /var/lock instead of mounting two
new tmpfs' to them.), which is
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other directories below / are allowed? I can't find that. And hence
this change is perfectly FHS compliant.
Am 30.03.2011 15:05, schrieb Ralf Corsepius:
No flames from me. This is a sensible, thought-through change with
cross-distro buy-in and no major downsides.
I could not disagree more.
without any argument?
if all distributions agree with it where exactly do you have
a problem? After 7 years
On 03/30/2011 02:08 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other directories below / are allowed? I can't find that.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691896
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-30
09:14:51 EDT ---
ocaml-3.12.0-5.fc15 has been
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 03:05:35PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:36 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
It is outside of the FHS,
It's a clear violation of the FHS.
Indeed, but there really is no suitable FHS-compliant location for files
of these types, so we had no choice but to
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other directories below / are
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
There are many directories already in Fedora that are not
defined by FHS and even though we have asked them to update
it (libexec, /selinux /sys etc), there is noone maintaining
it.
This is stunningly untrue. I've worked for years in the
fields
Russ herrold wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
There are many directories already in Fedora that are not
defined by FHS and even though we have asked them to update
it (libexec, /selinux /sys etc), there is noone maintaining
it.
This is stunningly untrue. I've worked for
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:03, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
I also don't think you can really justify the massive qualifier in your
assertion. The actual text of the (7 year old) FHS has this to say:
7 year old doesn't mean obsolete and doesn't mean to adopt any crack
ridden idea
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Lennart Poettering
mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote:
With this upload Fedora and Suse have already adopted /run now. Debian
folks will suggest this for their coming release. Ubuntu has agreed with
introducing /run as well.
Bravo!
m
--
martin.langh...@gmail.com
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS would say no
other
On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 04:05:27 PM Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Also, can
On 03/30/2011 07:00 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
This is stunningly untrue. I've worked for years in the
fields of LSB, FHS and LANANA to make sure there are traceable
paths for such requests. Post the URLs to your bugs in the
LSB / LF tracker if you assert you have done such
commit 9180174161f5fd90971a01eaa80b60b406ab8bd4
Author: Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com
Date: Wed Mar 30 10:21:00 2011 -0400
1.223
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Gtk2.spec | 15 ++-
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
---
diff
On Wed, 30.03.11 19:56, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 03/30/2011 07:00 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
This is stunningly untrue. I've worked for years in the
fields of LSB, FHS and LANANA to make sure there are traceable
paths for such requests. Post the URLs to your bugs in
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:54:30PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
SNIP
So, this is what is implemented for F15 now. For F16 we will make a
minor change on top of this: /var/run and /var/lock will become symlinks
to /run (resp /run/lock), so that we don't have to use bind mounts
anymore which
On Wed, 30.03.11 09:35, Adam Miller (maxamill...@fedoraproject.org) wrote:
Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally done
in Fedora land.
Well, the technical change is actually minimal, and this is
On Wed, 30.03.11 13:54, Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) wrote:
With this upload Fedora and Suse have already adopted /run now. Debian
folks will suggest this for their coming release. Ubuntu has agreed with
introducing /run as well.
I guess I need to clarify this. Ubuntu actually
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Lennart Poettering
mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 09:35, Adam Miller (maxamill...@fedoraproject.org) wrote:
Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
On behalf of everyone at anaconda, thanks for fixing something we've all
Hi,
thanks all for participation in Power Management Test Day -
we received great response. If you missed the event, you can
still participate (all feedback is very valuable for us):
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-03-24
PM Test Day Stats:
28 unique participants
27 unique
Michal Schmidt (mschm...@redhat.com) said:
Compare this with org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.service which uses an
indirect alias that can be enabled/disabled by systemctl:
SystemdService=dbus-org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.service
This was discussed in February on systemd-devel:
Am 30.03.2011 13:54, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
dracut and udev
Hi all,
The latest libedit update is CRITPATH, so it needs some karma. The
direct consumers of libedit, if my repoquery-fu is up to the task, are
the following, with their maintainers listed first, followed by
comaintainers:
Io-language: limb
asterisk: jcollie, fabbione, itamarjp
ceph: josef,
On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 08:05:49PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On 03/08/2011 06:46 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
Hi,
guile-2.0.0 has been released, there are some important changes.
- The license changed from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv3+.
Looks like that could cause some licensing issues:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691913
--- Comment #3 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2011-03-30 12:52:52 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #2)
Jerry, if you are in
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 14:16 +0200, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 01:54 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:35 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally done
in Fedora land.
Well, up to a point, Lord Copper. We have a features process with lots
of
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:34 -0600, Jerry James wrote:
Hi all,
The latest libedit update is CRITPATH, so it needs some karma. The
direct consumers of libedit, if my repoquery-fu is up to the task, are
the following, with their maintainers listed first, followed by
comaintainers:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590074
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590074
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
There are many directories already in Fedora that are not defined by FHS
and even though we have asked them to update it (libexec, /selinux
/sys etc), there is noone maintaining it.
FWIW, libexec can be argued not to be a violation of the current FHS,
because the FHS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590074
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-30
13:32:49 EDT ---
perl-Net-CUPS-0.61-3.el6 has
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590074
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-30
13:32:32 EDT ---
perl-Net-CUPS-0.61-3.el5 has
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:24:42AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:35 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
everyone equally follow suit on the way things are traditionally done
in Fedora land.
Well, up
On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
of times, to simply go ahead and commit significant changes that _could_
have been 'features', not submit them as features, and happily bypass
the entire 'feature' process with all its bureaucracy.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Adam Miller
maxamill...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
however, a little concerned with the precedence it is either creating or
following in the path of.
This has behind is something IMHO bigger than FESCo: the agreement of
key maintainers across distros. That's hard
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 12:49 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:24:42AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:35 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
Again, I'm not against that this is being done, but I would like to see
everyone equally follow suit on the way
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
of times, to simply go ahead and commit significant changes that _could_
have been 'features', not submit them as features, and happily bypass
On 03/30/2011 11:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
Please give specific examples that previously evaded the 'feature' process.
I have better things to do than spend my morning looking through old
changelogs and freeze dates, thanks. Are you
On 03/30/2011 07:54 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya,
I just uploaded a new version of systemd into F15, which establishes a
directory /run in the root directory. Most likely you'll sooner or later
stumble over it, so here's an explanation what this is and why this is.
It's a fairly minor
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 23:42 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/30/2011 11:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
Please give specific examples that previously evaded the 'feature' process.
I have better things to do than spend my morning looking
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/30/2011 11:19 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
So we should disband FESCo and just let everyone commit whatever changes
they want without oversight or community inclusion and just hope it builds
and runs in the end?
Yes,
On 03/30/2011 11:01 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
of times, to simply go ahead and commit significant changes that _could_
have been 'features',
On 03/26/2011 12:52 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Does anyone have a means to contact Axel Thimm and confirm he's ok and
if he wishes to maintain his packages in Fedora moving forward?
(I've cc'ed him on this as well).
As far as OK at least, he seems to have been OK on
Mon Mar 28
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 11:16 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
On 03/30/2011 11:01 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
On 03/30/2011 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
It's perfectly possible, and has been done lots
of times, to simply go ahead and commit
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 20:16 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
FHS does not require every RPM package to not add arbitrary
directories, but Fedora packaging guidelines do. We have a packaging
standard. This change violates that packaging standard, so there are
three possibilities:
Can you cite
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:20:55 -0500
Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/26/2011 12:52 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Does anyone have a means to contact Axel Thimm and confirm he's ok
and if he wishes to maintain his packages in Fedora moving forward?
(I've cc'ed him on
Am 30.03.2011 20:01, schrieb Adam Williamson:
Please give specific examples that previously evaded the 'feature' process.
I have better things to do than spend my morning looking through old
changelogs and freeze dates, thanks. Are you really suggesting it's
never happened?
if you have no
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2011-03-30)
===
Meeting started by nirik at 17:30:01 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-03-30/fesco.2011-03-30-17.30.log.html
Meeting summary
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 20:16 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
FHS does not require every RPM package to not add arbitrary
directories, but Fedora packaging guidelines do. We have a packaging
standard. This change
On 03/31/2011 12:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
so please do the better things instead flaming here about a
single folder which introducing is not political correct enough
for your eyes
Pretty sure you completely misunderstood Adam Williamson. He has not
flamed anybody.
Rahul
--
devel
On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
What more would you want? Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?
But FHS permits this change to be done by distributions. All it says is
that it should be carefully considered.
Rahul
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
What more would you want? Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?
But FHS permits this change to be done by
Am 30.03.2011 20:44, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
What more would you want? Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?
But FHS permits this change to be done by distributions. All it says is
On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 00:14 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/31/2011 12:01 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
What more would you want? Fedora packages must follow the FHS. 'Must
follow' means that if you don't follow it you violate it?
But FHS permits this change to be done by distributions.
The lightweight tag 'perl-Devel-Cycle-1.07-1.el4' was created pointing to:
2eb04c9... Merge branch 'el4' into el5
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 03/31/2011 12:09 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Sure, and the distribution in question does such changes - via its
packaging guidelines.
It might be obvious to you that this change requires a packaging
guideline but that requirement is not well documented and is not
mandated by what you are
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
