Re: Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal is AWOL, 25 packages looking for new owners
Am Mittwoch, den 03.02.2010, 00:15 +0100 schrieb Christoph Wickert: * pychess -- Chess game for GNOME I've taken this. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
A comps OpenOffice.org-devel group ?
As per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CompsXml I'm wondering if a OpenOffice.org-development group makes sense for Comps ? I see that openoffice.org-testtools and openoffice.org-pyuno are listed at the moment in comps under Office/Productivity. Both of those are targeted at development for or with OOo and so best listed elsewhere. Other related packages, currently unlisted, such as the sdk, the rhino and beanshell scripting integration packages and so on could be lumped in there then. C. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal is AWOL, 25 packa ges looking for new owners
Hi, On 02/03/2010 12:15 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: * gnome-do -- Quick launch and search * notify-sharp -- A C# implementation for Desktop Notifications * solfege -- Music education software I have taken these. Best regards, Christian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
review swaps and looking for new (co-)maintainers
Hello, I have few packages in the review queue and would do a swap with someone scribus-stable https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=519135 uboot-mkimage https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520569 (Fedora/ARM specific, some discussion still needed) flash-kernel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548422 (Fedora/ARM specific) libdmtx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561286 Also I would welcome new maintainers or co-maintainers for some packages from my collection https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/sharkcz If you are interested in taking one, please let me know and we discuss the details. With regards Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Reordering in package changelogs (was Re: rawhide report: 20100129 changes)
Le Mar 2 février 2010 22:11, Kevin Kofler a écrit : Nicolas Mailhot wrote: This changelog style conforms to the existing spec, it has been in use in Fedora for several years, it may surprise you, but changing the spec retroactively is not the way to prove your point. Uh, the Fedora packaging guidelines DO have the power to change the requirements, they're not cast in stone. Even existing changelogs can be fixed. Again, last time changelog was discussed some practises like putting the version in the changelog header were accepted even though they conflict with rpm internals (as was re-affirmed again by rpm people). This is a much bigger problem than your cosmetic issues with my way of using changelog style #3 (which, incidentally, means my changelogs are not randomly reordered so in practice it works better than other styles) -- Nicolas Mailhot -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:38:38PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 07:52:55PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 05:16:14PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 01:11:47PM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: The way things are now works because of status quo. We tell anybody who wants to change status quo to go start a fork and do it there. Wait... The entire list of times I can remember someone being encouraged to take their contributions elsewhere are: 1) Kernel modules 2) Non-free software 3) Free software with legal issues 4) I think something to do with packaging content may have resulted in something but I don't know anything about the outcome there. Who's been told to fork Fedora because of the status-quo-target-audience? Not in so many words, but the whole Zope/Plone fiasco from a few releases ago seems a prime example here. Fedora moved on with python, and we didn't allow a compat-python package for Zope and Plone to continue working. The reasons were varied, but they boiled down to python being a framework and having two frameworks providing almost identical things was not deemed to be something Fedora was going to do [1]. Once again, not a target audience decision. We didn't say, Fedora is not for web developers, therefore we don't care enough to support zope and plone. We said, the python maintainer thinks that supporting multiple python stacks is infeasible therefore we aren't going to support this. It was a contributor and technical decision. Not a target-audience decision. It is. It's one step removed. There were people actively wanting to make Zope/Plone work via a compat-python stack. It went all the way to FESCo and got voted down. The zope/plone users were the target audience there. There were people willing to do the work, all they needed was a yes from FESCo. We told them no. As Jesse has mentioned, 'status quo' won out. Those are the kinds of headaches Bill is talking about. And I agree there are headaches there. But I think if something is valuable enough to a contributor, they'll step up to solve the headaches if they're requisites to being able to fulfill their vision. Instead of forbidding things we should be identifying the headaches and allowing them Not sure if you truncated that last sentence, but this whole paragraph sounds counter to your one above. After all, everything we do now is one big headache. Yet we have contributors willing to deal with every aspect of that. Everything we do is a big headache? I'm prone to hyperbole myself, but that's a bit over the top. If everything was a headache, nobody would volunteer for it. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Sindre Pedersen Bjørd al is AWOL, 25 packages looking for new owners
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 12:15:41AM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: * xdotool -- Fake keyboard/mouse input I have taken xdotool which I was co-maintaining before. -- sven === jabber/xmpp: s...@lankes.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: --host=i386-redhat-linux-gnu --target=i686-redhat-linux-gnu ???
On 02/03/2010 02:20 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 02/03/2010 10:05 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Panu Matilainen (pmati...@laiskiainen.org) said:
%{_host} is set by the rpm package in the macros file, %{_build}
defaults
to the value of %{_host}. %{_target_platform} comes from --target on
the command line, plus the usual vendor/OS bits
--target is what is set by rpm/mock. I think it defaults to %{_host}
if it's not otherwise specified, but we specify it when building
for i686,
as we could theoretically still build i386 packages.
Yup, and all wonderfully mixed up - rpm's idea of --target is
something
completely different from what auto*foo from this century thinks
of it.
Dunno if it ever was really valid but certainly not anymore.
rpm= 4.8.0 no longer sets the --target on %configure but that's been
masked by the redhat-rpm-config version of %configure. That's been
fixed
too as of today.
Is either %_host or %_build set based on --target?
No... as there's no correct way to map rpm's --target to autotools
expectations.
There is: rpm's --target is autoconf's --host
Yes, that's what would be the clean mapping. But as I said in the
latter part (which you cut out here):
I am aware about these issue. As you might recall, I am cross-building
rpms and canadian crossbuilding rpms for many years.
The rpm-specs I am using for this are cluttered with clutches to work
around rpm's / redhat-rpm-config's brokeness wrt. rpm's --target handling ;)
much/most of the time rpm's --target is used to specify
sub-architecture optimization levels (--target i686 on i386 or
--target i686 on x86_64) which aren't cross-compiles. Just mapping
rpm's --target to autoconf --host causes autoconf to complain in these
situations.
Have a closer look: It only complains about bogus arguments being used.
As long as you manage to derive CFLAGS/CPPFLAGS/CXXFLAGS etc. from rpm's
--target, these autoconf checks currently fall back to what you expect.
I dont feel quite confortable to changing it to something that causes
this will not be supported in future and other warnings.
Well, there are several work arounds:
a) Not using any of --build or --host unless --target is passed to rpm
This would be the ultimate solution .
b) Explicitly pass --build=rpm's target == --host == rpm's target.
This suppresses the configure check because autoconf presumes the
invoker to know what he does.
Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
rawhide report: 20100203 changes
Compose started at Wed Feb 3 08:15:11 UTC 2010 Broken deps for i386 -- PySolFC-cardsets-1.1-5.2.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1 PySolFC-music-4.40-5.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1 doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.i686 requires libextractor.so.1 easystroke-0.5.2-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_serialization-mt.so.5 fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_iostreams-mt.so.5 fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_serialization-mt.so.5 fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_system-mt.so.5 fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_program_options-mt.so.5 fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.i686 requires libboost_filesystem-mt.so.5 geglmm-0.1.0-2.fc12.i686 requires libbabl-0.0.so.0 gnome-python2-totem-2.29.1-4.fc13.i686 requires libtotem-plparser.so.12 gnuradio-3.2.2-1.fc12.i686 requires libboost_thread-mt.so.5 ibus-chewing-1.2.0.20100125-1.fc13.i686 requires libibus.so.1 ibus-hangul-1.2.0.20091031-1.fc13.i686 requires libibus.so.1 ibus-rawcode-1.2.0.20090703-4.fc13.i686 requires libibus.so.1 ibus-sayura-1.2.0.20090703-3.fc13.i686 requires libibus.so.1 k3d-0.7.11.0-1.fc12.i586 requires libboost_program_options-mt.so.5 k3d-0.7.11.0-1.fc12.i586 requires libboost_python-mt.so.5 k3d-0.7.11.0-1.fc12.i586 requires libboost_regex-mt.so.5 k3d-devel-0.7.11.0-1.fc12.i586 requires libboost_program_options-mt.so.5 k3d-devel-0.7.11.0-1.fc12.i586 requires libboost_python-mt.so.5 k3d-devel-0.7.11.0-1.fc12.i586 requires libboost_regex-mt.so.5 koan-2.0.2-1.fc13.noarch requires mkinitrd kst-fits-1.8.0-5.fc12.i686 requires cfitsio = 0:3.140 kst-netcdf-1.8.0-5.fc12.i686 requires libnetcdf_c++.so.4 kst-netcdf-1.8.0-5.fc12.i686 requires libnetcdf.so.4 linphone-2.1.1-4.fc12.i686 requires libortp.so.7 netbeans-apisupport1-6.7.1-1.fc12.noarch requires netbeans-platform = 0:6.7.1 netbeans-apisupport1-6.7.1-1.fc12.noarch requires netbeans-platform-harness = 0:6.7.1 qgis-python-1.0.2-4.fc13.i686 requires sip-api(6) = 0:6.0 qmf-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qmf-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidc-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidc-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidc-perftest-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidc-perftest-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidc-rdma-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidc-rdma-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidc-ssl-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidc-ssl-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidd-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidd-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidd-acl-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidd-acl-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidd-cluster-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidd-cluster-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidd-rdma-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidd-rdma-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidd-ssl-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidd-ssl-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 qpidd-xml-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 qpidd-xml-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 rhm-cpp-server-store-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 rhm-cpp-server-store-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 ruby-qmf-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_program_options.so.5 ruby-qmf-0.5.819819-1.fc13.i686 requires libboost_filesystem.so.5 usrp-3.2.2-1.fc12.i686 requires libboost_thread-mt.so.5 zikula-module-menutree-2.2-1.fc13.noarch requires zikula = 0:1.2 Broken deps for x86_64 -- PySolFC-cardsets-1.1-5.2.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1 PySolFC-music-4.40-5.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1 doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.i686 requires libextractor.so.1 doodle-0.6.7-5.fc12.x86_64 requires libextractor.so.1()(64bit) easystroke-0.5.2-1.fc13.x86_64 requires libboost_serialization-mt.so.5()(64bit) fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.x86_64 requires libboost_system-mt.so.5()(64bit) fusecompress-2.6-3.fc12.x86_64 requires libboost_program_options-mt.so.5()(64bit)
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Mike McGrath said the following on 02/02/2010 09:01 AM Pacific Time: This particular question has already been answered, I've not yet put it on the wiki yet. The notes from our last meeting yesterday hasn't gone to the list, I'll update the wiki today though. The notes from our last meeting are here: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2010-February/007899.html -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Bug 561389] New: amavisd-new always reports Shutting down amavisd: Daemon [19248] terminated by SIGTERM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: amavisd-new always reports Shutting down amavisd: Daemon [19248] terminated by SIGTERM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561389 Summary: amavisd-new always reports Shutting down amavisd: Daemon [19248] terminated by SIGTERM Product: Fedora Version: 12 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: amavisd-new AssignedTo: st...@silug.org ReportedBy: fedor...@grifent.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: st...@silug.org, fedora-perl-devel-l...@redhat.com Classification: Fedora Description of problem: amavisd-new always reports Shutting down amavisd: Daemon [19248] terminated by SIGTERM which shows up in daily email from spamassassin when amavisd is restarted by the spamassassin cron job. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): amavisd-new-2.6.4-1.fc12.noarch How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. Stop or restart or condrestart amavisd 2. 3. Actual results: Shutting down amavisd: Daemon [19248] terminated by SIGTERM Expected results: If the daemon is shutting down normally, then don't report it. If it is not shutting down normally, then fix it so is does. Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- 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/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: A comps OpenOffice.org-devel group ?
Caolán McNamara (caol...@redhat.com) said: As per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CompsXml I'm wondering if a OpenOffice.org-development group makes sense for Comps ? I see that openoffice.org-testtools and openoffice.org-pyuno are listed at the moment in comps under Office/Productivity. Both of those are targeted at development for or with OOo and so best listed elsewhere. Other related packages, currently unlisted, such as the sdk, the rhino and beanshell scripting integration packages and so on could be lumped in there then. We don't really have app-specific development groups at the moment - heck, we don't have python or perl development groups. So maybe it's best to just drop them from the office group, or list them in the general devel groups. Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said: Would that mean that users who don't start with one of these 'products' get to magically try and choose which implementation of which they want? Perhaps even mix and match, leaving QA and the developers to sort out the results. Nope. Users get a Product. That product has made choices about what packageset they receive. Mixing and matching of implementations is done at the level before the end-user. The Project can find ways to make this saner without going all the way to if you conflict with the target audience your vision is not valuable here. ... and the people who chose the net install get what, exactly? Furthermore, you then leave 'downstream' higher-level packages and applications having to, for example, code to PolicyKit0, PolicyKit1, or consolehelper, depending on what each 'product' use case might use. Or, having to build their python extensions simultaneously for python2.4, python2.6, and python3.0. These sorts of things would be extremely painful for developers, and would bloat the QA matrix excessively. Also no. You think that you can make people work on things they don't have an interest in? I certainly don't. Let's look at PolicyKit0 and PolicyKit1. KDE has one or two apps that uses PolicyKit0, Gnome has many apps that use PolicyKit1. People concerned with Gnome are packaging PolicyKit1. KDE SIG volunteers to package PolicyKit0 for their apps' consumption. Do the gnome apps have to support building with PolicyKit0? no. Do the KDE apps have to support building with PolicyKit1? no. You have people doing the work they need to in order to realize their vision. Sure, and then if you run a GNOME app on KDE, you get what, exactly? If you have a non-GNOME, non-KDE app, which do you choose to support? By letting each desktop choose their own environment, you make things worse for anyone that has to support both. Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Bug 561404] New: This package should be removed (perl-NOCpulse-Gritch)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: This package should be removed (perl-NOCpulse-Gritch) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561404 Summary: This package should be removed (perl-NOCpulse-Gritch) Product: Fedora Version: 12 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: perl-NOCpulse-Gritch AssignedTo: msu...@redhat.com ReportedBy: jschn...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-l...@redhat.com, msu...@redhat.com Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: All of the NOCpulse modules should be removed. They are part of a Red Hat product that was never released as open source and is now defunct. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- 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/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:36 AM, John Poelstra poels...@redhat.com wrote: snip These are *working drafts and in process documents* all the in spirit of transparency. It would be more helpful to these discussions to get clarification on advisory-board first rather than conclude that the board has run off the rails by using words like letting and allowing in documents that are brainstorming and unfinished. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that we've posted all meeting recaps to advisory-board list and there has been ZERO discussion or inquiries there. We specifically asked for feedback to the original list of unanswered questions on advisory-board. Is there a particular reason you did not respond there? http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2010-January/007886.html I feel like you are discounting the board's efforts and misdirecting a lot energy by launching a new thread here with your concerns before first getting clarification on advisory-board. I'm not on some crusade to undermine the Board if that's what you think, I'm honestly looking for clarification but not only from those involved in the Board but the community as well and both are located here on this list. I don't see why it matters where the questions are asked, just so long as they are asked. As far as replying to the advisory-board mailing list first, I will be sure to do so in the future. I apparently forgot my place in the hierarchy for a moment. Apologies for not following protocol. -AdamM -- http://maxamillion.googlepages.com - () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On 02/02/2010 09:07 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: * A user who downloads any one of these products gets a different experience than someone who downloads one of the others. * Switching from one product to another is not an easy task of merely installing one package group and removing another. You have to know what packages to install and what packages to uninstall and sometimes you also need to know what configuration switches to hit. spins don't help this situation. They do. I tried to switch from the Desktop spin to the KDE spin in F10 and ended up without a usable desktop environment. Reinstalled from the KDE spin and it worked. So how do you get KDE on your computer? Install the Fedora KDE spin. Easy answer. Spins make sense when there is a deep-reaching feature that touches a majority of packages on the system. Examples include: - the desktop environment with all the supporting runtime libs - I would say 32 and 64-bit environments are two 'spins' - a hypothetical major version of glibc-based 'spin' I don't understand why 'Electronic Design Lab' is a separate spin: if I install all the EDA-related packages that it contains, would I not get an equivalent capability? The only reason I can think of is the media capacity limitation, which forces dropping some packages to make space for someone's desired set which is not already part of the mainstream collection. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Adam Miller said the following on 02/03/2010 08:02 AM Pacific Time: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:36 AM, John Poelstrapoels...@redhat.com wrote: snip These are *working drafts and in process documents* all the in spirit of transparency. It would be more helpful to these discussions to get clarification on advisory-board first rather than conclude that the board has run off the rails by using words like letting and allowing in documents that are brainstorming and unfinished. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that we've posted all meeting recaps to advisory-board list and there has been ZERO discussion or inquiries there. We specifically asked for feedback to the original list of unanswered questions on advisory-board. Is there a particular reason you did not respond there? http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2010-January/007886.html I feel like you are discounting the board's efforts and misdirecting a lot energy by launching a new thread here with your concerns before first getting clarification on advisory-board. I'm not on some crusade to undermine the Board if that's what you think, I'm honestly looking for clarification but not only from those involved in the Board but the community as well and both are located here on this list. I don't see why it matters where the questions are asked, just so long as they are asked. Thanks for your clarification. I think it is great to ask questions, I ask a lot of them myself. I question how productive it is to all of us though, to ask questions if the starting point of those questions is incorrect. My sense here was that a few words on a wiki page struck you the wrong way so instead of going to the people that wrote them by asking, Hey, what do you guys mean? These ___ things concern me for these reasons. It was first asked instead to a mailing list that didn't write them :). I specifically requested feedback on advisory-board for this very purpose and received no responses. Is there something I could have done better on advisory-board list to engage the people that have participated so freely here? As far as replying to the advisory-board mailing list first, I will be sure to do so in the future. I apparently forgot my place in the hierarchy for a moment. Apologies for not following protocol. I didn't mean to imply that you'd broken any rules. I thought we might be able to have a more productive discussion if we had an accurate starting point. John -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
REMINDER: Re: Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal is AWOL, 25 packages looking for new owners
Just a reminder here folks. If you take over an orphaned package, please remember to check for any open bugs on the package and re-assign them to yourself. This won't happen automatically, so you will need to make sure and do it manually. If you don't those bugs will stay assigned to the old maintainer and not get attention they need. You might also take this chance to check upstream for new versions or outstanding issues and/or sign up for mailing lists or the like. Thanks, kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Bug 561409] This package should be removed (perl-NOCpulse-Utils)
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=561409 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com 2010-02-03 11:45:09 EST --- No. You are wrong. These NOCpulse modules are part of RHN Satellite (module Monitoring) and together with rest of RHN Satellite has been opensourced as project Spacewalk in year 2008. It has been released by Red Hat under GPLv2 licend and we (RHN Satellite team) are trying to push whole Spacewalk to Fedora (BZ F-Spacewalk). Closing as NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- 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/listinfo/perl-devel
[Bug 561404] This package should be removed (perl-NOCpulse-Gritch)
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=561404 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com 2010-02-03 11:45:08 EST --- No. You are wrong. These NOCpulse modules are part of RHN Satellite (module Monitoring) and together with rest of RHN Satellite has been opensourced as project Spacewalk in year 2008. It has been released by Red Hat under GPLv2 licend and we (RHN Satellite team) are trying to push whole Spacewalk to Fedora (BZ F-Spacewalk). Closing as NOTABUG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- 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/listinfo/perl-devel
Bodhi borked?
What's this now... li...@fecusia F-12]$ make update * Wed Feb 2 2010 Linus Walleij tr...@df.lth.se 1.0.2-1 - New upstream version, lots of bug fixes. Creating a new update for libmtp-1.0.2-1.fc12 ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save, 500, Internal Server Error) Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/bin/bodhi, line 153, in main data = bodhi.save(**update_args) File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py, line 111, in save 'bugs': bugs, File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/fedora/client/baseclient.py, line 316, in send_request req_params = req_params, auth_params = auth_params) File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/fedora/client/proxyclient.py, line 292, in send_request raise ServerError(url, http_status, msg) ServerError: ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save, 500, Internal Server Error) make: *** [bodhi] Fel 255 [li...@fecusia F-12]$ Not my fault I hope... Is there some infrastructure list where this stuff should go or is devel OK? Linus Walleij -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: A comps OpenOffice.org-devel group ?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote: We don't really have app-specific development groups at the moment - heck, we don't have python or perl development groups. We certainly have Perl Development in comps already. -- Iain. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Bodhi borked?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/03/2010 11:50 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: What's this now... li...@fecusia F-12]$ make update * Wed Feb 2 2010 Linus Walleij tr...@df.lth.se 1.0.2-1 - New upstream version, lots of bug fixes. Creating a new update for libmtp-1.0.2-1.fc12 ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save, 500, Internal Server Error) Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/bin/bodhi, line 153, in main data = bodhi.save(**update_args) File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py, line 111, in save 'bugs': bugs, File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/fedora/client/baseclient.py, line 316, in send_request req_params = req_params, auth_params = auth_params) File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/fedora/client/proxyclient.py, line 292, in send_request raise ServerError(url, http_status, msg) ServerError: ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save, 500, Internal Server Error) make: *** [bodhi] Fel 255 [li...@fecusia F-12]$ Not my fault I hope... Is there some infrastructure list where this stuff should go or is devel OK? infrastruct...@lists.fedoraproject.org Linus Walleij - -- Stephen Gallagher RHCE 804006346421761 Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAktprP4ACgkQeiVVYja6o6MQ1QCeNUUQ7SC0Cl0j+P4vEDMqSRY1 hbEAoID2BbNc6UDrZLSY9Caa4Ek25sdt =19tx -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:26 AM, John Poelstra poels...@redhat.com wrote: snip Thanks for your clarification. I think it is great to ask questions, I ask a lot of them myself. I question how productive it is to all of us though, to ask questions if the starting point of those questions is incorrect. My sense here was that a few words on a wiki page struck you the wrong way so instead of going to the people that wrote them by asking, Hey, what do you guys mean? These ___ things concern me for these reasons. It was first asked instead to a mailing list that didn't write them :). I specifically requested feedback on advisory-board for this very purpose and received no responses. Is there something I could have done better on advisory-board list to engage the people that have participated so freely here? snip Ah, ok. Makes sense. Thanks for clarification on that. snip I didn't mean to imply that you'd broken any rules. I thought we might be able to have a more productive discussion if we had an accurate starting point. snip My mistake, I must have taken it out of context or incorrectly. Apologies. -AdamM -- http://maxamillion.googlepages.com - () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Mike McGrath wrote: Spins didn't help, reinstalling did. No. His problem was with switching desktop environment. It was solved by reinstalling with the spin for the target environment, getting the exact package selection optimized for that target environment. (That said, adding KDE to a system installed from the GNOME spin is *supposed* to work! Removing GNOME, on the other hand, is near-impossible. Hint: yum groupremove does not and cannot work for this purpose.) Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Josh Boyer wrote: On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 12:44:08AM -0800, Ryan Rix wrote: On Tue 2 February 2010 9:10:13 pm Jesse Keating wrote: What functionality has been lost here? Working KDM, for one... Installing from the live DVD (as Kevin Kofler mentioned earlier) is essentially broken if you want KDE as the primary DE but choose to install any other comps. We didn't have live media previously. It's not lost (or regressed) function. It's simply not working on the newer media type. I think he actually means the NON-live DVD. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: pkg-config standards for .pc file location?
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 standards. I found the
guidelines for how to package .pc files in Fedora (and EPEL), but I'm
curious if there are Fedora or Red Hat standards for the location where
the files are placed when the package is installed?
Normal .pc files go into %{_libdir}/pkgconfig
Arch-independent .pc files go into %{_datadir}/pkgconfig
That's helpful, thanks!
See also https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14975
The new feature doesn't seem that helpful with arch dependent/independent
locations though.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Josh Boyer wrote: The Board is responsible for Fedora overall. They are concerned with Fedora uptake and ways of increasing contribution. Based on that, they are trying to come up with personas that seem a likely candidate to use and eventually contribute to Fedora. Based on that, they are trying to come up with a target audience for the DEFAULT spin. The whole concept of a default spin is what I and a few others here object to in the first place. There should be no one default! There should be a set of 2 or 3 primary spins (GNOME, KDE and possibly some third option, probably something lightweight and/or netbook-oriented) to choose from as equal first-class citizens. (And FWIW, I really don't see why the Fedora Project insists on abusing the word Desktop to mean GNOME.) Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Przemek Klosowski wrote: Spins make sense when there is a deep-reaching feature that touches a majority of packages on the system. Examples include: - the desktop environment with all the supporting runtime libs … and applications! Our spins also select core applications (file manager, text editor, web browser, word processor etc.) which are part of the desktop environment. I don't understand why 'Electronic Design Lab' is a separate spin: if I install all the EDA-related packages that it contains, would I not get an equivalent capability? Yes, but having a spin with them already on it is much simpler for its target audience. (That said, I wouldn't use it since they moved away from KDE to GNOME. :-/ If I needed FEL, I'd rather either groupinstall their comps group on a KDE spin install or install individual apps.) Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Retiring gnome-applet-netspeed
Hello, today I have decided to retire gnome-applet-netspeed. The upstream repository has not seen a single commit which is not a translation in ages, and with abrt running I'm getting crash reports filed every now and then [1-3]. So, I think that the best way to handle this case is to retire the package. That is, unless somebody with necessary skills is willing to pick it up. I'll wait a few days and then I'll start the retirement process if no one speaks up. Julian [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530920 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=544938 [3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560502 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said: Yes, but having a spin with them already on it is much simpler for its target audience. (That said, I wouldn't use it since they moved away from KDE to GNOME. :-/ If I needed FEL, I'd rather either groupinstall their comps group on a KDE spin install or install individual apps.) Would it be possible to put spin kickstarts on the common install DVD, with an option in anaconda to choose them (and notes that network access may be required for some packages)? This would give an easier way to install alternate spins, without having to download and burn lots of CDs, boot, and then transfer to the hard drive. -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
John Poelstra wrote: I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that we've posted all meeting recaps to advisory-board list and there has been ZERO discussion or inquiries there. We specifically asked for feedback to the original list of unanswered questions on advisory-board. Is there a particular reason you did not respond there? Probably because it's yet another mailing list most maintainers don't read? Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: REMINDER: Re: Sindre Pe dersen Bjørda l is AWOL, 25 packages looking for new owners
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 09:43:39AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Just a reminder here folks. If you take over an orphaned package, please remember to check for any open bugs on the package and re-assign them to yourself. This won't happen automatically, so you will need to make sure and do it manually. If you don't those bugs will stay assigned to the old maintainer and not get attention they need. You might also take this chance to check upstream for new versions or outstanding issues and/or sign up for mailing lists or the like. A handy URL for that: https://bugz.fedoraproject.org/PACKAGENAME This URL redirects to the pkgdb which queries bugzilla for open bug reports in Fedora and EPEL against PACKAGENAME. (Thanks to skvidal for the pkgdb code and wwoods for python-bugzilla) -Toshio pgpK9zeMc2mZm.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:26 AM, John Poelstra poels...@redhat.com wrote: Adam Miller said the following on 02/03/2010 08:02 AM Pacific Time: I'm not on some crusade to undermine the Board if that's what you think, I'm honestly looking for clarification but not only from those involved in the Board but the community as well and both are located here on this list. I don't see why it matters where the questions are asked, just so long as they are asked. Thanks for your clarification. I think it is great to ask questions, I ask a lot of them myself. I question how productive it is to all of us though, to ask questions if the starting point of those questions is incorrect. While I understand your point I think (reading too much into draft remarks with possibly not the full context of the surrounding discussions) I do think after all this time there are still a number of people in the community (I am one of them) who aren't convinced that the board isn't going down an unproductive path founded in assumptions of a community structure that doesn't really exist. I believe that what fundamentally makes the Fedora Project a great place to be is that it is an open community where the participants share a group of core values that guide them both individually and collectively toward an unwritten end that is worth pursuing and I see danger ahead in trying to write that ending in advance because that short-circuits the evolving direction the project gets from the collective wisdom of its contributors. I wonder how widely that belief is held in the community?! My sense here was that a few words on a wiki page struck you the wrong way so instead of going to the people that wrote them by asking, Hey, what do you guys mean? These ___ things concern me for these reasons. It was first asked instead to a mailing list that didn't write them :). I can't speak for Adam here, but to me it isn't a few words on a wiki page causing the concern, those words reinforce the concern. The board has a really difficult task when it comes to its leadership role. Since it doesn't have much structural authority to impose its will on contributors it requires that the board make a case that is compelling to the contributors so that they internalize and adopt it as part of what they do. If contributors won't do that, then stating our target audience is X will fall on deaf ears. While I've not been convinced that defining a target audience is remotely a good idea, I know from talking to a lot of people in the community that *they* do think it is. So don't be too discouraged, the folks with doubts are more likely to jump up and down than the folks who agree. I specifically requested feedback on advisory-board for this very purpose and received no responses. Is there something I could have done better on advisory-board list to engage the people that have participated so freely here? Perhaps that indicates that the advisory-board list wasn't the best place to ask. John -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Bug 484865] perl-Net-IPv4Addr : Conflicts with other packages
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=484865 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||iarn...@gmail.com Resolution||RAWHIDE AssignedTo|sindr...@fedoraproject.org |iarn...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2010-02-03 13:54:12 EST --- perl-Network-IPv4Addr is a dead package since 2009/08/24; obsoleted by perl-Net-IPv4Addr. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- 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/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote: Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said: Yes, but having a spin with them already on it is much simpler for its target audience. (That said, I wouldn't use it since they moved away from KDE to GNOME. :-/ If I needed FEL, I'd rather either groupinstall their comps group on a KDE spin install or install individual apps.) Would it be possible to put spin kickstarts on the common install DVD, with an option in anaconda to choose them (and notes that network access may be required for some packages)? This would give an easier way to install alternate spins, without having to download and burn lots of CDs, boot, and then transfer to the hard drive. snip That's actually a really cool idea and I'd be curious to know if it was possible as well. -AdamM -- http://maxamillion.googlepages.com - () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Would it be possible to put spin kickstarts on the common install DVD, with an option in anaconda to choose them (and notes that network access may be required for some packages)? This would give an easier way to install alternate spins, without having to download and burn lots of CDs, boot, and then transfer to the hard drive. We talked about something along these lines at the last FUDCon, but other pressures have ensured I've had no time to spend working on it. I'd still like to, or at least sit down and type up what we hashed out so other people can take a stab at it. - Chris -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Chris Lumens (clum...@redhat.com) said: Would it be possible to put spin kickstarts on the common install DVD, with an option in anaconda to choose them (and notes that network access may be required for some packages)? This would give an easier way to install alternate spins, without having to download and burn lots of CDs, boot, and then transfer to the hard drive. We talked about something along these lines at the last FUDCon, but other pressures have ensured I've had no time to spend working on it. I'd still like to, or at least sit down and type up what we hashed out so other people can take a stab at it. Not to hijack a completely different bug report/thread, but I suspect that product.img could be used for this (or multiple product.img files)? Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
Kevin Kofler (kevin.kof...@chello.at) said: John Poelstra wrote: I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that we've posted all meeting recaps to advisory-board list and there has been ZERO discussion or inquiries there. We specifically asked for feedback to the original list of unanswered questions on advisory-board. Is there a particular reason you did not respond there? Probably because it's yet another mailing list most maintainers don't read? The devel list is for development of the distribution; advisory-board is for project-wide direction. While there's certainly overlap with the devel list for this, advisory-board is the far more appropriate place for issues of project-wide direction. Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)
Commitee members present abadger1999 hansg tibbs racor rdieter SmootherFrOgZ Committee members absent rathann limburgher (technical difficulties) spot (parental duties) We approved two guidelines: SRPM Buildtime macros https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SRPM_Buildtime_macros For: 5 hansg, SmootherFrOgZ, tibbs, abadger1999, rdieter Against: 0 Emphasize correct SF.net SourceURL https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/SourceURL_sourceforge_downloads_admonition For: 5 hansg, rdieter, abadger1999, SmootherFrOgZ, tibbs Against: 0 These now go to FESCo for approval. The committee also voted to recommend no exception for some of the libraries that wordpress bundles to fesco (the ones that are not heavily modified). Committee will discuss what qualifies as a functionally modified version of a library and whether that's acceptable this week on the packaging mailing list and at next week's meeting. Recommend no exception for the list of non-heavily modified libraries For: 5 abadger1999, rdieter, tibbs, racor, SmootherFrOgZ Against/abstain: 1 hansg had to leave before the vote was announced but while present he semed to favour grandfathering in non-heavily modified libraries that are not already packaged for Fedora. The committee started voting on new Guidelines for python modules that includes Guidelines for python3 but suffered network difficulties in the middle of the discussion. This will ocntinue on the packaging mailing list and hopefully be voted on later this week. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Python3 Current state: For: 3 rdieter, tibbs, abadger1999 Against: 1 racor racor wants to have a note in the guidelines of when the python-2.x package will be removed from Fedora. Other committee members argued that this was 1) out of scope for the FPC (would be a packagr or FESCo decision) and 2) impossible to know at this juncture as the uptake of python3 among module authors is not yet very high -- that leads to no one being able to port because their dependencies have not been ported. Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-02-03/fedora-meeting.2010-02-03-16.04.html Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-02-03/fedora-meeting.2010-02-03-16.04.txt Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-02-03/fedora-meeting.2010-02-03-16.04.log.html -Toshio pgpwg3pWFZXgJ.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Comaintaining a package
Hi, I should want to know which is the process to request to comaintain a package. Regards, Alain -- Les pages de manuel Linux en français http://manpagesfr.free.fr signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Comaintaining a package
Am 03.02.2010 20:39, schrieb Alain Portal: I should want to know which is the process to request to comaintain a package. Ask the main maintainer. If he/she is OK with your request, you can request the ACLs on the pkgdb. -of -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On 02/03/2010 11:46 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 11:23 -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: I don't understand why 'Electronic Design Lab' is a separate spin: if I install all the EDA-related packages that it contains, would I not get an equivalent capability? The only reason I can think of is the media capacity limitation, which forces dropping some packages to make space for someone's desired set which is not already part of the mainstream collection. There is also the issue of multiple providers of a given functionality. When all are present, an algorithm tries to pick the best provider, which may not make sense to a human, but every human is different. By breaking up the large package set into a smaller subset, one can short circuit that best selection by only having one provider for that given functionality. What do you mean by 'functionality'? Is it what's provided by an RPM package? This would suggest that packages in spins would be functionally different---which is a little uncomfortable to me, because how can I ever know that I have the best version of every tool? To make sure I would have to try all the tools from all the spins, in principle. FEL exists for the reason you stated above, but also as a marketing tool, as it is very easy to install from a Live image, you had somebody a disk and say install this, you'll have an electronics lab. Much easier than handing them a stack of DVDs and saying Start this install, select this package here, this group there, remove this package here, format accordingly, and hopefully you got all the right selections done. I have a generic Fedora install with an 'Electronics' tab in the 'Applications' menu. I got it after I selected it from the Engineering section in the yumex GUI, I believe. This is preferable to me, as compared to installing a separate spin. I can see a psychological difference here. I am used to having one computer on which I do everything, from watching youtube videos to designing PCBs, rather than several computers for specialized tasks. Maybe the kids today see it differently :). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: pkg-config standards for .pc file location?
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 20:22 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
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 standards. I found the
guidelines for how to package .pc files in Fedora (and EPEL), but I'm
curious if there are Fedora or Red Hat standards for the location where
the files are placed when the package is installed?
Normal .pc files go into %{_libdir}/pkgconfig
Arch-independent .pc files go into %{_datadir}/pkgconfig
That's helpful, thanks!
See also https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14975
The new feature doesn't seem that helpful with arch dependent/independent
locations though.
Interesting. Thanks.
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Comaintaining a package
Le mercredi 03 février 2010 20:41:42, Oliver Falk a écrit : Am 03.02.2010 20:39, schrieb Alain Portal: I should want to know which is the process to request to comaintain a package. Ask the main maintainer. If he/she is OK with your request, you can request the ACLs on the pkgdb. OK, thanks. Regards, Alain -- Les pages de manuel Linux en français http://manpagesfr.free.fr signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[389-devel] Please review (revised): [Bug 560827] Admin Server templates: DistinguishName validation fails
Thanks to Rich and Nathan for their comments and even debugging my code
:). I revised the proposal based upon their suggestions.
Summary: Admin Server templates: DistinguishName validation fails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560827
Description of problem:
Some template file contains double quotes in the DN string, which
are not escaped.
Sample broken entry in 01nsroot.ldif.tmpl
dn: ou=uid=%as_uid%, ou=Administrators, ou=TopologyManagement,
o=NetscapeRoot,ou=UserPreferences, ou=%domain%, o=NetscapeRoot
objectClass: top
objectClass: organizationalUnit
aci: (targetattr=*)(version 3.0; acl UserDNControl; allow (all)
userdnattr=creatorsname;)
ou: uid=%as_uid%, ou=Administrators, ou=TopologyManagement, o=NetscapeRoot
Related bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=77
77 - Syntax validation fails for ou=NetscapeRoot tree
[Proposed fix (ldapserver)]
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=388648)
git patch file (ldapserver)
Description: adding a perl subroutine dnEscape to escape special
characters and eliminate spaces around ',', which is to make
the given dn compliant with RFC4514.
[Proposed fix (adminserver)]
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=388650)
git patch file (adminserver)
Description:
admserv/newinst/src/dirserver.map.in
/register_param.map.in
--- added escapedrootdn key, which is an escaped rootdn compliant
with RFC4514
admserv/schema/ldif/*.tmpl
--- removed unescaped '' from dn strings, which violates RFC4514.
escaped special characters ('=' and ',') which used to be a
value surrounded in the double quotes ''.
removed spaces around ','
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 12:54 -0600, inode0 wrote: I believe that what fundamentally makes the Fedora Project a great place to be is that it is an open community where the participants share a group of core values that guide them both individually and collectively toward an unwritten end that is worth pursuing Perhaps the problem is we don't all agree on those core sets of values, or how those values should guide us to what unwritten end. Or we suspect we don't agree because so much of it is unwritten. If the assumption is that we all share these values, what are they? The four F's? Those are just vague enough to be practically meaningless in this context. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 22:19 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: A side-effect, is that spec parsers that read the file in a buildroot which is missing the package providing the macro, will sometimes think the macro call is part of the subpackage %summary. This is unfortunate, but I don't see how to avoid it without making another part of the spec harder for us. So long as it doesn't disrupt what is viewed as the summary from the srpm stored in Koji, I think you'll be fine. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
File BZ-Client-1.03.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by eseyman
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-BZ-Client: 0e6eb6509afa40d9c03e9ee96d1f273f BZ-Client-1.03.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.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 19:08 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Josh Boyer wrote: It is. It's one step removed. There were people actively wanting to make Zope/Plone work via a compat-python stack. It went all the way to FESCo and got voted down. The zope/plone users were the target audience there. There were people willing to do the work, all they needed was a yes from FESCo. We told them no. As Jesse has mentioned, 'status quo' won out. I think this was just a bad decision. I complained back then and I still think we did the wrong thing. We should be as encompassing as legally possible within our Free Software ideals. Those packages eventually ended up in RPM Fusion anyway, like most of the stuff we refuse, so what was the point of preventing them from going into Fedora? Supportability concerns aren't going to vanish just because the package ends up in a third-party repository, and we have no way to prevent that. I also think for the same reasons that we should allow acceptably-licensed (GPLv2 or compatible) kernel modules as external packages in Fedora, banning them gains us nothing and loses us hardware support we could gain without any moral (software freedom) compromises or legal risks. What happens if we rebuild the kernel and one of the sub-modules doesn't get rebuilt and the maintainer goes awol? or it needs major rework to get built. Clearly you've never actually read any of the reasoning behind why we do this. Dave. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:55:25PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 13:28 -0800, Jesse Keating a écrit : On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 22:19 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: A side-effect, is that spec parsers that read the file in a buildroot which is missing the package providing the macro, will sometimes think the macro call is part of the subpackage %summary. This is unfortunate, but I don't see how to avoid it without making another part of the spec harder for us. So long as it doesn't disrupt what is viewed as the summary from the srpm stored in Koji, I think you'll be fine. Unfortunately, I dimly remember seing the macro call appear in the past in the summary shown in packagedb or koji (don't remember the package name, and it may not occur with new koji/packagedb versions). Easy to check, what's a package that does this macro directly after Summary: or %description? -Toshio pgpR4Uokxyz5W.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 12:54 -0600, inode0 wrote: I believe that what fundamentally makes the Fedora Project a great place to be is that it is an open community where the participants share a group of core values that guide them both individually and collectively toward an unwritten end that is worth pursuing Perhaps the problem is we don't all agree on those core sets of values, or how those values should guide us to what unwritten end. Or we suspect we don't agree because so much of it is unwritten. We are about to fall off the edge of the philosophical cliff now. I really don't analyze how my values guide my actions. I approach the check-out counter behind a little old lady. I could speed up and cut in front of her, I could slow down and let her go first. I make a decision which I believe is formed in large part by my values without thinking about them. If the assumption is that we all share these values, what are they? The four F's? Those are just vague enough to be practically meaningless in this context. Enumerating the values with surgical precision is meaningless too if you want it to lead to an idea of what the Fedora distribution will look like in 5 years. It just doesn't work that way. John -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:29:18PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: The committee started voting on new Guidelines for python modules that includes Guidelines for python3 but suffered network difficulties in the middle of the discussion. This will ocntinue on the packaging mailing list and hopefully be voted on later this week. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Python3 Current state: For: 3 rdieter, tibbs, abadger1999 Against: 1 racor racor wants to have a note in the guidelines of when the python-2.x package will be removed from Fedora. Other committee members argued that this was 1) out of scope for the FPC (would be a packagr or FESCo decision) and 2) impossible to know at this juncture as the uptake of python3 among module authors is not yet very high -- that leads to no one being able to port because their dependencies have not been ported. This was passed via vote on the mailing list so it has been added to the list of Guidelines for FESCo to ratify at its next meeting. -Toshio pgpuPUWmdgsNF.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 16:25 -0600, inode0 wrote: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 12:54 -0600, inode0 wrote: I believe that what fundamentally makes the Fedora Project a great place to be is that it is an open community where the participants share a group of core values that guide them both individually and collectively toward an unwritten end that is worth pursuing Perhaps the problem is we don't all agree on those core sets of values, or how those values should guide us to what unwritten end. Or we suspect we don't agree because so much of it is unwritten. We are about to fall off the edge of the philosophical cliff now. I really don't analyze how my values guide my actions. I approach the check-out counter behind a little old lady. I could speed up and cut in front of her, I could slow down and let her go first. I make a decision which I believe is formed in large part by my values without thinking about them. If the assumption is that we all share these values, what are they? The four F's? Those are just vague enough to be practically meaningless in this context. Enumerating the values with surgical precision is meaningless too if you want it to lead to an idea of what the Fedora distribution will look like in 5 years. It just doesn't work that way. John Since we can't act as a single hive mind, we have to come to some sort of agreement, and to do so, we need guidelines rather than whatever I feel like today. You seem to be sidestepping any point that has to do with a conflict within the project. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)
Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 17:14 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit : On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:55:25PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 13:28 -0800, Jesse Keating a écrit : On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 22:19 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: A side-effect, is that spec parsers that read the file in a buildroot which is missing the package providing the macro, will sometimes think the macro call is part of the subpackage %summary. This is unfortunate, but I don't see how to avoid it without making another part of the spec harder for us. So long as it doesn't disrupt what is viewed as the summary from the srpm stored in Koji, I think you'll be fine. Unfortunately, I dimly remember seing the macro call appear in the past in the summary shown in packagedb or koji (don't remember the package name, and it may not occur with new koji/packagedb versions). Easy to check, what's a package that does this macro directly after Summary: or %description? adf-accanthis-fonts is probably the most recent complex font package but I wouldn't vouch the declaration happens exactly in the same order in all font packages. The general pattern is the same but packagers have different tools and habits so slight variations exist. -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Outage Notification - 2010-02-03 23:00 UTC
There will be an outage starting at 2010-02-03 23:00 UTC, which will last approximately 1 hour. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2010-02-03 23:00 UTC' Affected Services: Bodhi Buildsystem CVS / Source Control Database Fedora Account System Fedora Community Fedora Hosted Fedora Package Database Mail Mirror System Translation Services Websites Unaffected Services: DNS Fedora People Fedora Talk Torrent Ticket Link: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1964 Reason for Outage: Network team is working on stuff in PHX2. This is a there may be an outage type deal so it's quite possible this will have no impact on us. Contact Information: Please join #fedora-admin in irc.freenode.net or respond to this email to track the status of this outage. ___ devel-announce mailing list devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)
Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 23:46 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 17:14 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit : On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:55:25PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 13:28 -0800, Jesse Keating a écrit : On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 22:19 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: A side-effect, is that spec parsers that read the file in a buildroot which is missing the package providing the macro, will sometimes think the macro call is part of the subpackage %summary. This is unfortunate, but I don't see how to avoid it without making another part of the spec harder for us. So long as it doesn't disrupt what is viewed as the summary from the srpm stored in Koji, I think you'll be fine. Unfortunately, I dimly remember seing the macro call appear in the past in the summary shown in packagedb or koji (don't remember the package name, and it may not occur with new koji/packagedb versions). Easy to check, what's a package that does this macro directly after Summary: or %description? adf-accanthis-fonts is probably the most recent complex font package but I wouldn't vouch the declaration happens exactly in the same order in all font packages. The general pattern is the same but packagers have different tools and habits so slight variations exist. Anyway here is one occurence of what I worried about in all its glory http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=130814 -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 17:05 -0600, inode0 wrote: Guilty as charged. The Board, Steering Committees, various guidelines exist and have been used to resolve conflicts for years, right? This is about more than conflict resolution, isn't it? This is about giving direction to the efforts of those working on the distribution, isn't it? If it isn't, someone should make that very clear now. Outside of a very very few people, we can only suggest what people work on. We can't dictate what people volunteer their time for. We can however say what kind of changes and work would be seen as favorable and likely to find other like minded people to help out with, vs not. We can say what we'd /like/ to see marketing target, and what we'd /like/ to see QA focus efforts on. I see the target audience discussions as both conflict resolution and as charting a course for where we'd /like/ to see the project go. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Reminder: Fedora 13 Feature Freeze in Six Days (2010-02-09)
Greetings, A friendly reminder that this coming Tuesday, February 9, 2010, is FEATURE FREEZE. Feature Freeze means that all accepted feature for the release are *significantly* feature complete, ready for testing, and have a current status. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Feature_Freeze_Policy. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy/Milestones#Feature_Freeze If you have any questions about what this means, please ask now. Features which are not significantly feature complete at Feature Freeze will be accepted on an exception basis by FESCo or deferred to Fedora 14. Thank you, John p.s. If you have questions about our release processes or milestones please reply to this email or contact me directly and I will be glad to assist. A summary of the Fedora 13 milestones and exception process is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Important_Release_Milestones ___ devel-announce mailing list devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
library bump heads up: clutter
Hi All, Just to let you know I'm about to push clutter 1.1.6 to rawhide. soname major hasn't changed so there shouldn't be an issue and it all seems fine from the testing I've done on my local rawhide system. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: pkg-config standards for .pc file location?
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 21:11 -0500, 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 standards. I found the
guidelines for how to package .pc files in Fedora (and EPEL), but I'm
curious if there are Fedora or Red Hat standards for the location where
the files are placed when the package is installed?
Normal .pc files go into %{_libdir}/pkgconfig
Arch-independent .pc files go into %{_datadir}/pkgconfig
That's helpful, thanks!
And just to be clear, this is not Fedora-specific. You can also find
this in man pkg-config, where the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable
is described.
--
Braden McDaniel bra...@endoframe.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Mike McGrath wrote: I really don't know what our users are a measure of. I don't think it's marketing as inode0 suggests, because the people using Fedora already know about it. But if we step back and take our users seriously. We'll find that since Fedora Core 6 released in 2006-10-24 to today, we've experienced a net growth of negative 3%. Yup, a 3% loss of users. Our own users are moving _AWAY_ from Fedora. For whatever reason more users have chosen to not use Fedora then who have chosen to use Fedora. I suspect many have moved downsteam to Enterprise Linux. Which is ok but it's an indication that people came, tried Fedora, and moved on. Along with the above... If we're going to be the best at something don't we need to pick something to be the best at? http://www.linux.com/learn/docs/ldp/282996-choosing-the-best-linux-distributions-for-you I particularly like this: Ubuntu edges out its closest contenders, Fedora and openSUSE, because its development team is constantly focused on the end-user experience. What is it we're focused on? Do I need to just ask everyone individually and hope we all say the same thing? -Mike -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgr...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Mike McGrath wrote: I really don't know what our users are a measure of. I don't think it's marketing as inode0 suggests, because the people using Fedora already know about it. But if we step back and take our users seriously. We'll find that since Fedora Core 6 released in 2006-10-24 to today, we've experienced a net growth of negative 3%. Yup, a 3% loss of users. Our own users are moving _AWAY_ from Fedora. For whatever reason more users have chosen to not use Fedora then who have chosen to use Fedora. I suspect many have moved downsteam to Enterprise Linux. Which is ok but it's an indication that people came, tried Fedora, and moved on. Along with the above... If we're going to be the best at something don't we need to pick something to be the best at? http://www.linux.com/learn/docs/ldp/282996-choosing-the-best-linux-distributions-for-you I particularly like this: Ubuntu edges out its closest contenders, Fedora and openSUSE, because its development team is constantly focused on the end-user experience. What is it we're focused on? Do I need to just ask everyone individually and hope we all say the same thing? Sadly they don't have categories like the best linux distribution for developers there. John -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, inode0 wrote: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgr...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Mike McGrath wrote: I really don't know what our users are a measure of. I don't think it's marketing as inode0 suggests, because the people using Fedora already know about it. But if we step back and take our users seriously. We'll find that since Fedora Core 6 released in 2006-10-24 to today, we've experienced a net growth of negative 3%. Yup, a 3% loss of users. Our own users are moving _AWAY_ from Fedora. For whatever reason more users have chosen to not use Fedora then who have chosen to use Fedora. I suspect many have moved downsteam to Enterprise Linux. Which is ok but it's an indication that people came, tried Fedora, and moved on. Along with the above... If we're going to be the best at something don't we need to pick something to be the best at? http://www.linux.com/learn/docs/ldp/282996-choosing-the-best-linux-distributions-for-you I particularly like this: Ubuntu edges out its closest contenders, Fedora and openSUSE, because its development team is constantly focused on the end-user experience. What is it we're focused on? Do I need to just ask everyone individually and hope we all say the same thing? Sadly they don't have categories like the best linux distribution for developers there. Is that what we're doing? If so would we win it? -Mike-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgr...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, inode0 wrote: Sadly they don't have categories like the best linux distribution for developers there. Is that what we're doing? If so would we win it? One thing I know that I am not doing is competing with Ubuntu for the market it appeals to. Another thing I know that I am not doing is trying to win anything. I am trying to support a community that works in a variety of ways to promote freedom, whether that be in terms of software or in terms of content or in terms of culture. It is well known for being an engine of innovative, cutting-edge technology largely accomplished by working closely with upstream projects. I suspect that is something that appeals to a healthy segment of the developer pool and that distinguishes us from other distributions. I don't need to win a prize or see Fedora in a poll finish ahead of Ubuntu to view this as a success. ... omission of about 50 other things we stand for and promote ... If we foster the sort of community described on the overview page of the wiki, we are winning what matters - we are living the mission we defined. John -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)
Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 18:33 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit : On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 11:48:52PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le mercredi 03 février 2010 à 23:46 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : adf-accanthis-fonts is probably the most recent complex font package but I wouldn't vouch the declaration happens exactly in the same order in all font packages. The general pattern is the same but packagers have different tools and habits so slight variations exist. Anyway here is one occurence of what I worried about in all its glory http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=130814 Yep. So, while less than ideal from your standpoint of putting the definition of the subpackage together with the call to the macro, does rearranging things like this do the trick? That would probably avoid the koji display problem but is sure to introduce packaging bugs. The macro call has been put in this particular place because experience shows that reduces human mistakes. It's never easy to do back and forths between two parts of the same file, but in this case they are compounded by the kind of syntax forced on us by the use of a macro. Everything needs to be cramed on a single line. Any syntax error and things fail without proper error messages (I've tried to add some debug output. I caused mock build to stop dead). You can not do as many calls as you want (like you can for %doc) or rpm will complain of multiple %posts or %files for the same subpackage (without telling you exactly which subpackage fails) The choice that was made was to minimize human error risk at the expense of some prettiness in koji. I'd do the same choice today in a blink. We are severely limited what the tools can do, but trying to accomodate tools at all costs results in undue human burden and lots of bad packages. Humans have limits too. -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Bug 533773] Build perl-Test-File-Contents for EL-5
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=533773 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||0.05-5.el5 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[Bug 504256] Please build latest perl-Math-BigInt-GMP for EPEL 4 and 5
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=504256 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-03 15:03:23 EST --- perl-Math-BigInt-GMP-1.24-5.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[Bug 533733] Can we have perl-Regexp-Assemble for EPEL - EL5
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=533733 Bug 533733 depends on bug 533773, which changed state. Bug 533773 Summary: Build perl-Test-File-Contents for EL-5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533773 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-03 23:11:31 EST --- perl-Regexp-Assemble-0.34-3.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Regexp-Assemble-0.34-3.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
