Re: Differences between Fakeroot and Mock Suggested method

[Matt Eskes]

Rich, Matthew, and Richard


Thanks for your guys' input. It's good to know that I can turn here,
when I have to and not have it seem that I'm asking a silly question. I
will try to keep everyone abreast of progress and once I'm ready for
review, I'll let you all know.

Thanks again.
M
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Differences between Fakeroot and Mock Suggested method

[Matt Eskes]

 Hi folks.


It's taking a bit of time, but I plan to start packaging a couple of
packages that are not currently available for either Red Hat nor Fedora.
The main reason for it taking a bit longer really has to do with
personal infrastructure and setting up my build host, etc.

However, that doesn't really pertain to the question at hand. I come
from a Debian centric environment, and have come back to Red Hat and
Fedora after more than a decade. As such, I have quite a bit more
experience building my packages with fakeroot, than I do with mock, and
I'm wondering what the differences between the two packages/processes are.

Will using mock in this environment be more beneficial to using
fakeroot? Will it be harder for lack of a better word, to build from
within the build system using fakeroot , once I get to that point or, is
Koji flexible enough so that it really wouldn't matter from an
infrastructure point of view as to whether or not I use one or the other?


As I am more familiar with fakeroot, I'd like to keep using that, but
at the same time, I'd like to do it the Red Hat way to ensure that the
package conforms to both Red Hat and Fedora packaging standards.


Thanks in advance for your guidance.
M
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

F20 release name election

[Matt Eskes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

FINALLY! there was someone who hated release names as much, if not
more than I. I say we forgo a release name on f20, as well.

M

On 08/22/2013 07:29 PM, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
 Send devel mailing list submissions to 
 devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit 
 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel or, via
 email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 
 devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org
 
 You can reach the person managing the list at 
 devel-ow...@lists.fedoraproject.org
 
 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
 specific than Re: Contents of devel digest...
 
 
 Today's Topics:
 
 1. Re: F20 release name election? (Dan Mashal) 2. Re: F21 schedule:
 what would you do with more time? (Chris Murphy) 3. Re: F20 release
 name election? (Josh Boyer) 4. Re: F19 server install experience
 (Chris Murphy) 5. Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more
 time? (Adam Williamson) 6. Re: F20 release name election? (Chris
 Murphy) 7. Re: F19 server install experience (Adam Williamson) 8.
 Re: F19 server install experience (Chris Murphy) 9. Re: F20 release
 name election? (Dan Mashal) 10. Re: Bundled Flash (Adam
 Williamson) 11. Re: F19 server install experience (Adam
 Williamson) 12. Re: F20 release name election? (Billy Crook) 13.
 Re: F20 release name election? (Chris Murphy) 14. Re: F20 release
 name election? (Paul Wouters)
 
 
 --

  Message: 1 Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:05:57 -0700 From: Dan Mashal
 dan.mas...@gmail.com To: Development discussions related to
 Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: F20 release
 name election? Message-ID: 
 CALJqFwoUPEcJYdim=QjU-p6QQFr=au8vjarebeywdgjo3te...@mail.gmail.com

 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
 
 On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Chris Murphy
 li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
 *smack own forehead* I like that better than the other options
 also. For me, one extra point for Vidalia onion over 20.
 
 Heck I like Crazy Train based on a recent Matthew Miller
 assertion.
 
 Assuming there can be no late add ins though, the overwhelmingly
 obvious correct answer is Heisenbug. I attract more Heisenbugs
 than anyone I know. It's funny. It's true, they totally exist.
 And (sorry!) all the other options are snoozers. Now, had it been
 Santa's reindeer that might have made it a *little* less
 obvious, what the correct answer is.
 
 
 How about no release name, just this one time. In his honor? I
 love release names, and while I didn't know Seth very well
 personally, probably the main reason I use Fedora/RHEL/CentOS is
 because of yum. He deserves the honor in my opinion. The choices up
 there are lame.
 
 If i I had to choose I guess I'd vote for Santa Claus but this is
 ridiculous.
 
 With all due respect can someone please explain to me how this
 release is dedicated to Mr. Vidal?
 
 Dan
 
 
 --
 
 Message: 2 Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 18:11:16 -0600 From: Chris Murphy
 li...@colorremedies.com To: Development discussions related to
 Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: F21 schedule:
 what would you do with more time? Message-ID:
 cb4f8822-2a1a-4093-86e2-030749e2f...@colorremedies.com 
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 
 
 On Aug 22, 2013, at 3:03 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
 wrote:
 
 QA, releng and anaconda are on a more or less permanent
 iteration treadmill from Alpha TC1 onwards, severely limiting the
 time we have to work on anything else. We can only really get
 substantive work done on 'things that are not release validation'
 in the ~two months (on a regular cycle) between FNN Go and FNN+1
 Alpha TC1.
 
 
 I'm going to take a wild guess here, QA could probably use a month
 of going into a black hole for starters, as in, en vacaciones, no
 me contacte. So in reality, that probably translates into maybe a
 four day weekend. But how much time do you think QA needs for
 things other than release validation? So far the push back range
 is a wee bit broad, 2 weeks to six months.
 
 If it needs to be six months, fine. But there's also a risk of
 losing a lot of momentum with a six month hiatus. That's why I
 arbitrarily came up with 3 months on the high end. There are still
 positives to the Fedora pressure cooker (ANOTHER RELEASE NAME
 IDEA!), a.k.a. crazy train.
 
 
 Chris Murphy
 
 --
 
 Message: 3 Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 20:12:10 -0400 From: Josh Boyer
 jwbo...@fedoraproject.org To: Development discussions related to
 Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: F20 release
 name election? Message-ID: 
 ca+5pva4dstdhxx0+vlitxagykb6lk_dcocmpsxu3bha_w3o...@mail.gmail.com

 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
 
 On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Dan Mashal dan.mas...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:44 PM, 

Introduction

[Matt Eskes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi guys, my name is Matt. I'm obviously new to the community. My nick
on irc is syn-ack and I'm planning on packaging the Fingerprint-GUI
application for Fedora. That is, if you guys will have me, :)

This application is works via the fprint libs as well as having a
convenient gui to assist you in assigning and recording your
prints I used this application during the time I was on Debian and
was somewhat disappointed to see that it wasn't here on Fedora as
well. Where this app differs from straight fprint, is that it adds
support for UPEK/Authentec devices. Therein lies a small issue The
UPEK drivers. while open are considered non-free and as such I'm
wondering how I should go about the packaging. Should I break it into
a Free and non-free component, as is done in Debian and/or Ubuntu,
or is that sill going to cause issues? I'm also looking into maybe
contacting UPEK and opening discussions on maybe re licensing it into
a compatible licence; one in which conforms to Copy-left so that it
will no longer be an issue. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks for taking the time to read and respond with your suggestions.


Matt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSBCPMAAoJEBKk3f1RCyxTy24IAKd/crmzhI75djjQ8nsvvwS5
7uObC9feSvKvQdib/peYALcEIeVfj14V3HEAqDsA30Z4Y0wVnqiZph5vk40fr4MC
sQpBY7ZvUNJbTowwgbKuPZ+FGwU+dDz9PoMiAyyNju+iLSKwbJGnVXsKeFgTWave
iKKRDXapKhNnCaM3e0EVYsv4ljRCDVgLYUnAankGBnK3rJ9mja6Sefge2kuiYYSX
LNIjsjdYZjBVBTCKGG5l0A4DfrDdzHYwUQxr0W1xdOydsQqKzQrDZzYpyLtSGPx5
2ouLtkxlr3DHeGHkigdrt2ZfaB4XJZLw3i9twSJFtUnAeWIRO7NQVEVF+emD4lk=
=Z2Fe
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct