parsecvs repo? [Re: Help wanted with dist-cvs to git conversion
Jesse Keating wrote: > I'm currently playing with a utility called parsecvs to convert our cvs > stuff into git. This utility can also translate the raw usernames that > CVS has into more useful names+email addresses that you'd typically get > out of git. But to make this conversion it needs a translation file. I've used parsecvs a lot. Over the course of converting the likes of coreutils, glibc, emacs, diffutils, gzip, grep, etc. I've made a number of changes to fix NULL-dereferences, adapt to evolving GIT APIs and to remove at least one performance bottleneck that dramatically sped up the conversion of glibc. I've even added a testing framework and a test case (the first!) and pushed another that was contributed privately. All local, but I'd rather share. Does anyone know of a public and *maintained* repository for parsecvs? I've looked numerous times (as recently as a few weeks ago), and tried to contact Keith Packard, hoping he would still be maintaining it, but have had no luck. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: parsecvs repo? [Re: Help wanted with dist-cvs to git conversion
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 03:43:12PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: >Jesse Keating wrote: >> I'm currently playing with a utility called parsecvs to convert our cvs >> stuff into git. This utility can also translate the raw usernames that >> CVS has into more useful names+email addresses that you'd typically get >> out of git. But to make this conversion it needs a translation file. > >I've used parsecvs a lot. >Over the course of converting the likes of coreutils, glibc, emacs, >diffutils, gzip, grep, etc. I've made a number of changes to fix >NULL-dereferences, adapt to evolving GIT APIs and to remove at least >one performance bottleneck that dramatically sped up the conversion >of glibc. I've even added a testing framework and a test case (the >first!) and pushed another that was contributed privately. All local, >but I'd rather share. > >Does anyone know of a public and *maintained* repository for parsecvs? >I've looked numerous times (as recently as a few weeks ago), and tried >to contact Keith Packard, hoping he would still be maintaining it, >but have had no luck. I'd suggest creating a fedorahosted project for it, or something similar. I think there are many random versions of it out there and starting a project to try and consolidate would be great. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Problems updating - YUM - kmod-VirtualBox...
# yum --skip-broken update ... gnome-keyring-sharp i686 1.0.1-0.5.133722svn.fc12 fedora 20 k kmod-nvidia-173xx-2.6.31.6-166.fc12.i686.PAE i686 173.14.22-1.fc12.4 rpmfusion-nonfree-updates 1.8 M Removendo para as dependências: kmod-VirtualBox-OSE-2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686.PAE i686 3.0.10-1.fc12.4 installed 393 k kmod-nvidia-173xx-2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686.PAE i686 173.14.22-1.fc12 installed 7.5 M Resumo da transação Instalar 4 Pacote(s) Atualizar 53 Pacote(s) Remover4 Pacote(s) Reinstalar 0 Pacote(s) Desatualizar 0 Pacote(s) Tamanho total: 106 M Correto? [s/N]:s Baixando pacotes: Executando o rpm_check_debug Erro com o rpm_check_debug vs depsolve: kernel-uname-r = 2.6.30.9-96.fc11.i686.PAE is needed by (installed) kmod-VirtualBox-OSE-2.6.30.9-96.fc11.i686.PAE-3.0.10-1.fc11.3.i686 kernel-uname-r = 2.6.30.8-64.fc11.i686.PAE is needed by (installed) kmod-VirtualBox-OSE-2.6.30.8-64.fc11.i686.PAE-3.0.8-1.fc11.i686 kernel-uname-r = 2.6.30.9-90.fc11.i686.PAE is needed by (installed) kmod-VirtualBox-OSE-2.6.30.9-90.fc11.i686.PAE-3.0.10-1.fc11.i686 Concluído! -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Problems updating - YUM - kmod-VirtualBox...
On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 13:49 -0200, Casimiro de Almeida Barreto wrote: > # yum --skip-broken update Wrong list. VirtualBox is part of RPM Fusion, not Fedora. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Help wanted with dist-cvs to git conversion
Seth Vidal wrote: > And let me put it this way: if fedora decides to post my non @fp.o address > somewhere, like in git entries, I'm going to be extremely pissed off about > it. As for me, I don't mind publishing my real email address but I would prefer not to have my fedoraproject.org alias published where the spammers can find it. I don't particularly like having forwarding aliases created for me, but if you have to give me one then please don't publish it. I have a spam blocker that makes my address pretty much unspammable. It's unspammable even if the spam comes through a forwarding alias, but in that case backscatter may be generated. The spam blocker is implemented such that my own server never sends out backscatter, but I naturally have no control over the fedoraproject.org server or other forwarding servers. Therefore I try to avoid using forwarding aliases in ways that might allow spammers to find them, not because it affects me but to be nice to other netizens who don't have as effectual spam blockers as I have. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Help wanted with dist-cvs to git conversion
I have only successfully pushed up one package, but I'll tell you that I don't like having my personal email address attached to it. An fp.o email address alias would be preferable to me. I can immediately have my account filter all emails sent to fp.o and deal with it there. It makes me somewhat uncomfortable to have my personal email address floating around unprotected in the internet. I am aware the same thing happens when I post in a mailing list, but it's somewhat protected there. 2009/12/12 Björn Persson > Seth Vidal wrote: > > And let me put it this way: if fedora decides to post my non @fp.o > address > > somewhere, like in git entries, I'm going to be extremely pissed off > about > > it. > > As for me, I don't mind publishing my real email address but I would prefer > not to have my fedoraproject.org alias published where the spammers can > find > it. I don't particularly like having forwarding aliases created for me, but > if > you have to give me one then please don't publish it. > > I have a spam blocker that makes my address pretty much unspammable. It's > unspammable even if the spam comes through a forwarding alias, but in that > case backscatter may be generated. The spam blocker is implemented such > that > my own server never sends out backscatter, but I naturally have no control > over the fedoraproject.org server or other forwarding servers. Therefore I > try > to avoid using forwarding aliases in ways that might allow spammers to find > them, not because it affects me but to be nice to other netizens who don't > have > as effectual spam blockers as I have. > > Björn Persson > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Help wanted with dist-cvs to git conversion
>> And let me put it this way: if fedora decides to post my non @fp.o address >> somewhere, like in git entries, I'm going to be extremely pissed off about >> it. > > As for me, I don't mind publishing my real email address but I would prefer > not to have my fedoraproject.org alias published where the spammers can find > it. I don't particularly like having forwarding aliases created for me, but if > you have to give me one then please don't publish it. Here you go: rombobe...@fedoraproject.org rombobe...@fedoraproject.org rombobe...@fedoraproject.org rombobe...@fedoraproject.org rombobe...@fedoraproject.org Now what? Cheers, Debarshi -- One reason that life is complex is that it has a real part and an imaginary part. -- Andrew Koenig -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: parsecvs repo? [Re: Help wanted with dist-cvs to git conversion
On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 15:43 +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: > Does anyone know of a public and *maintained* repository for parsecvs? > I've looked numerous times (as recently as a few weeks ago), and tried > to contact Keith Packard, hoping he would still be maintaining it, > but have had no luck. Kristian Høgsberg has a repo for the changes he made and used for gnome conversion: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~krh/parsecvs It is slightly newer than Keith's repo. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: X on UEFI systems.
On Dec 12, 2009, at 1:27 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 17:14 -0500, Peter Jones wrote: >> On 12/11/2009 02:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >>> On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 08:57 +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote: Dne 10.12.2009 07:36, Vasily Levchenko napsal(a): >> Does it not work without an xorg.conf, that would be the first goal. >> > > No. File a bug please, attaching your xorg.conf, Xorg.0.log and output of the dmesg command (all from inside of VB virtual machine, of course). >>> >>> ...nd (oh boy, I love it when a plan comes together) mark it as >>> blocking F13Beta , because I reckon this breaks beta criterion #4: >>> >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_13_Beta_Release_Criteria >> >> I like the sentiment here, but I'm not sure this is really in the >> spirit of the criteria - Vasily, as I understand it, is still in the >> process of implementing the support for UEFI on VirtualBox. >> >> Which is to say, yes, we need to fix the parts that are distro problems, >> but I'm not sure we've gotten to the point where VirtualBox+UEFI is >> expected to be a working system in the first place. >> >> But maybe I'm wrong - Vasily, what do you think? > Right, we still in progress (e.g. VBox 3.1 is failing to load FC12 with ACPI, and it can't load Windows Vista and 7/EFI) but with VBox 3.1 with manually edited config runs FC11(i386/x86_64) fine. >> From what I saw in the thread, the bug seems to be that X is assuming > the presence of a VGA BIOS, which would seem to be a fairly generic > problem that would hit any EFI setup. I guess real EFI systems has proprietary drivers + corresponding drivers, e.g. nvidia, and there're no serious reasons to use vga bios. > AIUI anyway. See Vasily's message > of a couple of days ago. But I could be wrong, and also I'm not sure why > he's testing with F11 rather than F12 or Rawhide. > About rawhide, could you please give me some pointers on ISO images, instructions for kernel compilations (looks like it bit different from compilation of vanilla kernels)? > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org > http://www.happyassassin.net > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
