Moving to i686+SSE2 while still keeping full support for i586 would imply:
* A secondary arch
* Bits in preupgrade/anaconda to pick the secondary arch on upgrade
* Extra confusion on the download page
Of course, those aren't all hard requirements, but still, I doubt it's
worth the trouble...
Le Lun 15 juin 2009 23:18, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit :
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:53:13PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
- AMD Geode
I'm a little worried about this one.
IIRC my employer uses many Geode GX2 embedded boxes (no mechanical
parts is a design requirement). They're not on
Le Lun 15 juin 2009 20:47, Casey Dahlin a écrit :
On 06/14/2009 02:08 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Gah. Allowing packages to pierce the firewall just makes the
firewall
redundant.
Not true. Allowing any listening program to poke a hole in the
firewall would make it redundant. Packages
Josh Boyer, Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:28:04 -0400:
Another option would be to retain the current i586 support, and add the
i686+SSE2 as a new primary arch, with an eye towards depreciating the
current x32 support down the road. There would seem to be less initial
pain involved here, and everyone would
On 06/15/2009 10:04 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 03:21:40PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
I've just build ImageMagick 6.5.3.7 for rawhide. This version
introduces *silent* ABI breakage, as the ABI has changed without
changing the soname (woohoo way to go upstream!)
Can you not
Tom Lane wrote:
Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com writes:
drago01 (drag...@gmail.com) said:
Moving to i686 is fine, non i686 chips are mostly dead (but the
perfomance gain from moving to i686 from i586 is questionable at
best).
... how so? It's consistently 1-2% in reasonable benchmarks
Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Mon, 15.06.09 12:41, Thomas Woerner (twoer...@redhat.com) wrote:
So, what should happen here? Should we leave the firewall enabled in
these cases* by default and require admins to open them? If so, is
there any way that we can make this easier in some
Bill Nottingham wrote:
What CPUs do we lose that F11 supports?
- Intel Pentium III
- AMD Geode
- VIA C3
I still have this three in production.
If somebody want some gain and have modern computer [1] he should use
x86_64. He will get SSE2 from scratch and as bonus he will get lm, nx
and
On 06/15/2009 07:53 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Way back when in February [1], FESCo decided that for Fedora 11, i586 would
be the default architecture, and for Fedora 12, it would be some variant of
i686. It's time to follow through on that action item.
I've submitted
Steve Grubb wrote:
On Friday 12 June 2009 09:02:39 am Daniel Lezcano wrote:
As I only need the CAP_SYS_BOOT, I will define it manually in the source
code and will remove the include, that's ugly but anyway... :/
Alternatelyas of today, libcap-ng is now in Fedora. It has a far
Roberto Ragusa wrote:
Thomas Woerner wrote:
Please think of a scenario like this: Service A is adding
firewall rules for opening port 20 and 21 (ftp-data and ftp) for
everyone and service B is opening port 20 and 21 only for a specific
network segment. What do you want to have here? If you
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 13:53 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Way back when in February [1], FESCo decided that for Fedora 11, i586 would
be the default architecture, and for Fedora 12, it would be some variant of
i686. It's time to follow through on that action item.
I've submitted
==
The results in this summary consider Test Updates!
==
Summary of broken packages (by src.rpm name):
avahi
bareftp
gnome-guitar
liferea
==
The results in this summary consider Test Updates!
==
Summary of broken packages (by src.rpm name):
db4o
gadget
llvm
php
python-morbid
2009/6/15 Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Rex Dieter wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
So if you're on x86_64
and you have foo-1.1.i386 and foo-1.0.x86_64
and you run:
yum install foo
you would expect foo-1.1.i386 to be installed instead of foo-1.0.x86_64?
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 13:09 +0100, Paul wrote:
Hi,
Prior to the big push to f12, my system had full audio. No problems.
Lovely, lovely sounds.
For some reason, alsa and pulseaudio are completely failing to pick up
my sound card (either the onboard one or my soundblaster). This is
despite
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 09:06:37AM +, Matej Cepl wrote:
Josh Boyer, Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:28:04 -0400:
Another option would be to retain the current i586 support, and add the
i686+SSE2 as a new primary arch, with an eye towards depreciating the
current x32 support down the road. There would
Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Jon Ciesla wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Jon Ciesla wrote:
BTW are those new VIA netbooks SSE2-capable?
Additionally, what will this do to RHEL? I can't imagine RHEL
customers being too happy about this for RHEL7(?), and if i386
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frank Murphy wrote:
On 16/06/09 04:56, Matt Domsch wrote:
with a BIOS a little over 5 years old. Is it long in the
tooth? sure. Is it still very
functional? you bet.
I wouldn't go so far as to require sse2 in such a move.
I would
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Bill Nottingham wrote:
What CPUs do we lose that F11 supports?
- Intel i586 (all)
- Intel Pentium Pro
- Intel Pentium II
- Intel Pentium III
- 32-bit AMD Athlon
- AMD Geode
- VIA C3
- Transmeta Crusoe
Oh joy. I still have PIII laptops, Athlon desktops and servers here
Once upon a time, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com said:
Jon Ciesla (l...@jcomserv.net) said:
Additionally, what will this do to RHEL? I can't imagine RHEL customers
being too happy about this for RHEL7(?), and if i386 would still be in
RHEL, it would worry me that it would only be
Chris Adams wrote:
I think the big question is this: is this worth the effort? Almost all
the new systems should just be running x86_64 anyway. Why does x86 (32
bit) need to throw out working architectures? Adding them back as a
secondary arch just increases the workload (for somebody) that
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Bill Nottingham wrote:
It is 25 actively reporting machines. I've heard the following
reasons why a Centaur or similar CPU class may be reported low:
- Hey, we use a non-GUI server!
- Hey, we're LTSP!
- Hey, we didn't run the firstboot client!
- Older hardware is
Once upon a time, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com said:
Because that's significantly less of our userbase. I'd love to have
harder numbers, but we're still talking about a set of CPUs that
(outside of corner cases like the Geode and C3) ceased production
anywhere from 4 (Athlon) to 6 (P3)
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Could you expand on this? What part of it do you not like?
How can we improve it?
We have the source and the upstream maintainer has been very responsive
so far, so hopefully we can enhance it to meet our needs.
Why do we need this bot at all? All it takes is a human
On 16/06/09 16:34, Chuck Anderson wrote:
Is there any pointer to best practices for packing a web application
that provides static content, cgi scripts, integrates with Apache
configuration, and works with SELinux? How should I package the
SELinux policy needed to make this work?
The Packaging
Jesse Keating wrote:
And this is what pisses me off, and why I say you're holding us hostage.
Whether or not it is a good idea to continue to produce them, you don't
care, you're just going to do it anyway. Great way to run a project.
Just drop support for split media from Anaconda, then they
On 06/16/2009 11:34 AM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
Is there any pointer to best practices for packing a web application
that provides static content, cgi scripts, integrates with Apache
configuration, and works with SELinux? How should I package the
SELinux policy needed to make this work?
The
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 04:46:00PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 16/06/09 16:34, Chuck Anderson wrote:
Is there any pointer to best practices for packing a web application
that provides static content, cgi scripts, integrates with Apache
configuration, and works with SELinux? How should I
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:42 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) said:
Removing support for still-functional hardware is a trademark of
Microsoft, not Linux.
I'd also argue that doing another full rebuild of the OS for a 1%
performance gain on a single
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.atwrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
1. we're going to need split media for dvds - we're SOL there anyway - so
the code will need to live on.
Just kick out all the i18n stuff and you won't.
It doesn't make sense to force people to
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:22 AM, King InuYashangomp...@gmail.com wrote:
Ubuntu seems to do fine including quite a few language packs on their LiveCD
while providing a decent desktop.
Can you make me a full accurate list of the languages supported on the
Ubuntu LiveCD.
-jef
--
Jonathan Dieter (jdie...@gmail.com) said:
The 1% comes from i586 - i686; SSE2 would be additional on top of
that. But given the vehement opposition, I can see dropping the SSE2
requirement. I'm still fairly convinced that going to i686 is the right
move - we really don't support i586 as a
Fedora 11 Retrospective Recap
2009-06-16
Wiki version: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Retrospective_Notes
Invitees: Cross section of people and leads from each group:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Retrospective_Invitees
Attendees: James Laska, Bruno Wolff, Jóhann B.
Charles Butterfield wrote:
* My supported NVIDIA card (Quadro NVS 295)
Supported by what? Who said it's supported? If it's NVidia, that's
irrelevant, as their driver is proprietary and NOT supported or included in
Fedora.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
- Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
No, we could just drop support for it and have FedoraUnity decide
whether
they want to fork Anaconda (and no longer be able to use the Fedora
name)
or just stop shipping split media.
Kevin Kofler
Rock on, let this be an example
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote:
- Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
No, we could just drop support for it and have FedoraUnity decide
whether
they want to fork Anaconda (and no longer be able to use the Fedora
name)
or just stop shipping split media.
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 22:56 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 06:01:14PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Because that's significantly less of our userbase. I'd love to have
harder numbers, but we're still talking about a set of CPUs that
(outside of corner cases like the Geode
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:42 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) said:
Removing support for still-functional hardware is a trademark of
Microsoft, not Linux.
I'd also argue that doing another full rebuild of the OS for a 1%
performance gain on a single
Way back when in February [1], FESCo decided that for Fedora 11, i586 would
be the default architecture, and for Fedora 12, it would be some variant of
i686. It's time to follow through on that action item.
I've submitted https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support. It
defines the
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:42 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) said:
Removing support for still-functional hardware is a trademark of
Microsoft, not Linux.
I'd also argue that doing
On 6/16/2009 4:05 PM, Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
hello,
I filed RFE bugs claiming that in fedora we have no way to use the DVD as a
repo
including PK, yum cli,yumex, apt-get, smart, ...
I tried all the tools and non can add a DVD as a media repo
all my bugs were closed by Bug Zappers and
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:42 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) said:
Removing support for still-functional hardware is a trademark of
Microsoft, not Linux.
I'd also argue that doing
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 07:51:25PM +0200, Laurent Jacquot wrote:
Le lundi 15 juin 2009 à 14:48 +0200, Karel Zak a écrit :
We need to backport
commit 4271e23942bdc60e1fa6c0b26bc666a94a8b3e1d
Author: Karel Zak k...@redhat.com
Date: Mon Apr 27 15:00:57 2009
I wrote:
No, we could just drop support for it and have FedoraUnity decide whether
they want to fork Anaconda (and no longer be able to use the Fedora name)
or just stop shipping split media.
and one of the FedoraUnity folks responded by posting a rant on his blog
about how I am against the
Bill Nottingham wrote:
The desktop spin in F11 still had language groups, AFAIK.
Uh no it doesn't, kde-l10n-* doesn't fit... oh wait, you mean the GNOME
spin! ;-)
There's more than one desktop around. Why can't the GNOME spin be called
GNOME spin?
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list
Bill McGonigle wrote:
One population I've been recommending for Fedora lately is folks with
Apple PPC gear which has been abandoned by Apple. Devices like iBooks
often came standard with CD-ROM.
PPC is planned to become a secondary architecture in Fedora 13. At that
point, it will be up to
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:40:07AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Bill McGonigle wrote:
One population I've been recommending for Fedora lately is folks with
Apple PPC gear which has been abandoned by Apple. Devices like iBooks
often came standard with CD-ROM.
PPC is planned to become a secondary
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 01:01 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
The question is not *if* Fedora Unity would take on that burden, the
question is whether upstream will let us.
Upstream accepts reasonable patches. It happens all the time. Of
course, what also happens all the time is multiple
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 00:30 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Your signature promotes freedom^2 but this pisses you off?
The reasoning behind it is what irks me. It really seems to come down
to I'm just going to do it so neener neener neener :p
Whether or not it is a good idea to continue
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:11:11 -0700, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 01:01 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
The question is not *if* Fedora Unity would take on that burden, the
question is whether upstream will let us.
Upstream accepts reasonable patches. It
Please read my clarification in the thread:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-June/msg01389.html
to see what I'm really up to.
Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote:
Rock on, let this be an example of the leadership the community can expect
if Kevin is elected. Hold the community
On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 19:36 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
there is an interesting issue;
if you poke a hole in your firewall for all the ports that are listening
automatically. you might as well not have a firewall in the first
place...
Well, not exactly. For instance, making it
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 16:39 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 19:36 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
there is an interesting issue;
if you poke a hole in your firewall for all the ports that are listening
automatically. you might as well not have a firewall in the
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:15:54 -0700, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 00:30 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Your signature promotes freedom^2 but this pisses you off?
The reasoning behind it is what irks me. It really seems to come down
to I'm just going to do
Martin Ebourne wrote:
Clearly the human volunteer idea didn't work. It was a shambles that
there were so many meetings with no minutes or even transcripts coming
out of them. Didn't look at all good for an open project.
It worked until it was decided that having one volunteer is not fair (or
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 01:37 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Dear Jesse,
you yourself do not accept patches beyond what you then, at that moment,
think are applicable use-cases of Fedora Project Release Engineering only
to work something up yourself two weeks later.
Yes, if I didn't like
Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
We've also seen upstream reject very reasonable patches -that were in the
upstream repo already, authored by @redhat.com of course- be cherry-picked
to another branch for whatever reason I've offered to help with (some QA
concerns for one).
That's the other side of
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 12:22 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Casey Dahlincdah...@redhat.com wrote:
The ability for nautilus to prompt for credentials when the user tries to
do something outside his permission level has been missing for far too
long. Its
On 6/16/09, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
I honestly don't care whether or not it's influenced by what I think. I
just wish you project put some thought and effort into discovering why
people ask for or download split CDs other than just shutting off
Jesse Keating wrote:
Yes, if I didn't like the patch, or how it was done, I didn't accept it.
Just like any other upstream. Did I use your exact code when I did it
myself two weeks later? Probably not.
Speaking of rel-eng patches, what happened to my patch to the EVR checker to
properly
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:48:07 -0700, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 01:37 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Dear Jesse,
you yourself do not accept patches beyond what you then, at that moment,
think are applicable use-cases of Fedora Project Release
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 02:05 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Speaking of rel-eng patches, what happened to my patch to the EVR checker to
properly support testing repos (e.g. updates-testing, but the code is
general enough to also work for things like RPM Fusion's or EPEL's testing
repos)?
Seth Vidal wrote:
read that again? You would expect higher ver i386 to install over x86_64
ON an x86_64 box?
I'd expect that too. There's certainly a reason why the current version is
not available natively, if not, it's a bug in the repo.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 01:43 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
If by better alternatives you mean LiveCDs, please note that these do not
allow one to upgrade the existing Fedora installation, nor do they allow as
much flexibility in configuration during the installation procedure.
Any upgrade
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
read that again? You would expect higher ver i386 to install over x86_64
ON an x86_64 box?
I'd expect that too. There's certainly a reason why the current version is
not available natively, if not, it's a bug in the
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 19:50 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
drago01 (drag...@gmail.com) said:
Way back when in February [1], FESCo decided that for Fedora 11, i586
would
be the default architecture, and for Fedora 12, it would be some variant
of
i686. It's time to follow through
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 16:17 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
Its the next circle, the less frequent administrative chore tasks,
that I'm not sure its well defined in terms of which applications need
PolKit support added in. Maybe Nautilus is that circle, maybe its not.
Maybe its not time to start
Jeremy Sanders wrote:
Why not leave it be and suggest people move to the less brain dead x86-64
instead? Innovation and legacy support.
Crazy suggestion: What if we make 32-bit x86 a secondary arch and keep only
x86_64 as primary? ;-)
Of course, that'd be pretty radical and it's likely too
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Is there going to be a way to tell which binaries actually use sse2
instructions, so that the others can be inherited by a secondary arch?
Due to how GCC works, if the compiler flags enable SSE/SSE2, basically all
the binaries will be using some SSE/SSE2 instructions.
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 02:38 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
User: I only have a CD-ROM, what do I do?
Fedora: We know you wanted to install a different set of packages, but
here's a LiveCD that you can then tweak after the installation, to get the
packages you originally wanted. Ohw, and
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 08:16:36PM -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
2009/6/16 梁穗隆
I hear that Fedora administrator will change the default 32-bit x86 arch for
Fedora 12. The default arch is i686+SSE2.
In my opinion, I do not want to change it. Or only change to i686. SSE2 is
not necessary.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 08:16:36PM -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
- Let's keep F-12 the same: ppc, ppc64, i586, x86_64
- Since ppc and ppc64 are going to be dropped from F-13, fill in the
blank spot with i686+SSE2, i.e. F-13: i586, i686+SSE2,
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:56:58 -0700, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com
wrote:
Something else not terribly unreasonable, instead of split CD media, a
single CD offered that is netinst.iso plus the contents of @core and
@base if it'll fit on a CD. Then they can do whatever custom install
they
Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
For as far as Fedora is concerned (not third party repositories) at least
it seems obvious that our update process is somewhat flawed in this
aspect, breaking the upgrade path.
And that's why preupgrade exists.
Any upgrading method not relying on the network will
Ingvar Hagelund wrote:
But amarok-2.x does not (yet) support non-hardware (that is, not found by
HAL) mounts.
What would such a non-hardware mount be? Are you trying to use a partition
or directory on your computer as a fake iPod? Why?
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
Adam Miller maxamill...@gmail.com wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
I honestly don't care whether or not it's influenced by what I think. I
just wish you project put some thought and effort into discovering why
people ask for or download split CDs other than just shutting off your
brain at
Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
I filed RFE bugs claiming that in fedora we have no way to use the DVD as
a repo including PK, yum cli,yumex, apt-get, smart, ...
I tried all the tools and non can add a DVD as a media repo
Note that this is of only very limited usefulness because packages often
have
On 6/16/2009 10:16 PM, Mani A wrote:
David dgbo...@comcast.net wrote:
To have the DVD *always* as a source to check for packages is a pain in
the neck IMO.
Mandriva does that. The install DVD is a default source. *Every time*
that you try to *install*, or *update*, you have to find and
On 06/16/2009 07:57 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 12:22 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Casey Dahlincdah...@redhat.com wrote:
The ability for nautilus to prompt for credentials when the user tries to do
something outside his
Den 2009-06-17 03:07, Josh Boyer skrev:
Someone else ask what the real benefit to moving to i686+SSE2 is.
I haven't seen overwhelming evidence that a huge benefit exists.
I think somone is working on gathering more data, but unless it shows
massive gains
To be relevant, such data gathering
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=505576
Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Author: xavierb
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/rt3/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv25734
Modified Files:
.cvsignore README.fedora.in rt3.spec sources
Log Message:
rt 3.6.8 [SECURITY]
Index: .cvsignore
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Types/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31627
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Types.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 16 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.12-1
- auto-update to 0.12 (by cpan-spec-update
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Types/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31216
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Types.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 16 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.12-1
- auto-update to 0.12 (by cpan-spec-update
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-AttributeHelpers/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv672
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-AttributeHelpers.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 16 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.19-1
- drop br on CPAN
-
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-AttributeHelpers/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv1080
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-AttributeHelpers.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 16 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.19-1
- drop br on CPAN
-
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Emulate-Class-Accessor-Fast/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2586
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Emulate-Class-Accessor-Fast.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sun May 31 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.00900-1
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Emulate-Class-Accessor-Fast/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2852
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Emulate-Class-Accessor-Fast.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sun May 31 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.00900-1
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Getopt/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv3130
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Getopt.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Apr 25 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.18-1
- update to 0.18
Index:
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Getopt/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv3351
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Getopt.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Apr 25 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.18-1
- update to 0.18
Index:
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Log-Log4perl/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4295
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Log-Log4perl.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue May 26 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.40-2
- add br on CPAN
Index:
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Log-Log4perl/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4574
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Log-Log4perl.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue May 26 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.40-2
- add br on CPAN
Index:
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-MethodAttributes/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4865
Modified Files:
sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 09 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.14-1
- auto-update to 0.14 (by cpan-spec-update 0.01)
Index:
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Object-Pluggable/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv5153
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Object-Pluggable.spec sources
Log Message:
* Wed May 20 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.0011-1
- auto-update to 0.0011
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Object-Pluggable/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv5527
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Object-Pluggable.spec sources
Log Message:
* Wed May 20 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.0011-1
- auto-update to 0.0011
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Role-Parameterized/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7061
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Role-Parameterized.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 16 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.09-2
- drop README,
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Role-Parameterized/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7280
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Role-Parameterized.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 16 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.09-2
- drop README,
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Singleton/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7514
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Singleton.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 02 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.17-1
- auto-update to 0.17 (by
Author: cweyl
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-MooseX-Singleton/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7795
Modified Files:
perl-MooseX-Singleton.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Jun 02 2009 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 0.17-1
- auto-update to 0.17 (by
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
