Re: abrt issue
On Wednesday 09 December 2009 12:47:44 Neal Becker wrote: I just got a crash in kde plasma. Traceback is not useful, because of missing debug pacakges. Downgrading hal and hal-libs fixes the crash. I noticed the other thread where this bug is reported. I was seeing both https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=545639 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=545258 You need to downgrade hal-libs as well or else yum will pick hal-libs.i686 and that will require to install glibc.i686 and friends. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Request for help maintaining packages while away.
On Wednesday 09 December 2009 19:38:55 Jeff Spaleta wrote: For F13 you probably want to push latest versions of the both scipy and matplotlib together. So if you take scipy* sign up for matplotlib* as well. Not only those but also: python-basemap -- Plots data on map projections (with continental and political boundaries) python-basemap-data -- Data for python-basemap python-dateutil -- Powerful extensions to the standard datetime module pytz -- World Timezone Definitions for Python and also not directly related but ScientificPython -- A collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing is more or less on the bundle. Those are packages that interest me, and I would like to see them in good shape. :-) FWIW, the sage bundle would be a nice bonus. :-) -jef -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: More broken deps for F11 texlive-2009
On Tuesday 17 November 2009 08:54:38 Jindrich Novy wrote: Do you see anything broken on non-x86_64 arches? I checked the F12 repo and everything looks sane to me. You are right, it was a problem on my side. Jindrich -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: More broken deps for F11 texlive-2009
On Tuesday 17 November 2009 02:27:08 Matthew Saltzman wrote: Latest F11 texlive-2009 update complains about dependencies of the new packages (which have .fc12 version suffixes!) on libpoppler.so.5()(64bit). The same complain happens on F12 (on a x86_64 no less). :-) -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: texlive2009 f11 broken by today's update
On Friday 13 November 2009 00:38:21 Neal Becker wrote: Was working, but after today's update: pdflatex pll_freq_ramp.tex This is pdfTeX, Version 3.1415926-1.40.10 (Web2C 2009) kpathsea: Running mktexfmt pdflatex.fmt I can't find the format file `pdflatex.fmt'! I have been testing this on F-12 and sometimes update break with this same error. The latest updates are working here. The symptom is that running fmtutil-sys --all as root returns nothing. I have still determine what causes this, and since the last update is working I don't have an incentive to continue searching. :-) -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: texlive 2009 - should set TEXMFCNF?
On Thursday 29 October 2009 17:26:25 Jonathan Underwood wrote: IMO I think we'd be better off adopting the texlive versions of the packages, rather than doing a half-and-half job on this by packaging individual upstreams. The reason being that Fedora then benefits from the integration and testing work done by the texlive team. The texlive xdvipdfmx, for example is (I think), ahead of the 0.4 upstream release. J. I am not sure if Jindrich is talking about this but the same could be said about the other pure latex packages. If the packages are available on texlive they could obsolete the previous versions available on Fedora. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: prelinked octave segfaults in F-12
On Tuesday 27 October 2009 16:58:43 Orion Poplawski wrote: I'd like to call attention to this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526833 Apparently, prelinking octave on F-12 causes it to segfault on startup. Can anyone else reproduce this? I am sorry for not reporting this before but I had the same problem and I found the same solution. When octave segfaults on start the first step is to run prelink -u /usr/bin/octave and then it works again. Does anyone have an idea as to why this might happen? Not me. :-( -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Major reorganization of TeX Live packages
On Thursday 22 October 2009 19:46:29 Jiri Cerny wrote: Hi Jindrich, (sorry for not replaying to the original message, I was reading the list through archives) I was using TeXLive 2009 repository before, without any problem. After seeing your message, I followed the instruction In case you have an older TL2009 installed on your system from the testing repository, please consider removing it and installing again. and after 'yum install texlive' I get a lot of missing dependencies. Installing texlive requires dvipdfm from the F12/rawhide repository, which requires kpathsea from the same repository and which in turn requires texlive-2007. Will it be fixed with texlive-2007-45 build? You can get the texlive-2007-45 build meanwhile with koji download-build --arch=i686 137706 in this case arch=i686 refers to the architecture of the machine where I am testing texlive and 137706 refers to the id of the build for texlive-2007-45 in f12 (it has been done for f10-13). With this update of the selected packages the update for the new texlive works. :-) Jiri -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
problems with the latest texlive-2009 update on rawhide
After the update of texlive-2009 packages on rawhide latex has ceased to work: $ pdflatex mnc_modulo_2-mod-graph This is pdfTeX, Version 3.1415926-1.40.10 (Web2C 2009) restricted \write18 enabled. kpathsea: Running mktexfmt pdflatex.fmt I can't find the format file `pdflatex.fmt'! The suspect here seems to be ftmutil-sys # fmtutil-sys --all # No output from fmtutil-sys as opposed to the very verbose output of previous versions. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
texlive problem when updating to rawhide
Hi, I have updated my laptop to rawhide using preupgrade. It worked without any major hitch, my only problem after update was with texlive (I changed the repo to the rawhide version). I had installed the F11 version. # yum update Loaded plugins: dellsysidplugin2, presto, refresh-packagekit Setting up Update Process Resolving Dependencies -- Running transaction check -- Processing Dependency: tex(dvips) for package: html2ps-1.0-0.3.b5.fc12.noarch -- Processing Dependency: tex(dvips) for package: lyx-1.6.4-1.fc12.i686 --- Package texlive-collection-basic.noarch 0:2009-14054.fc12 set to be updated -- Finished Dependency Resolution lyx-1.6.4-1.fc12.i686 from installed has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: tex(dvips) is needed by package lyx-1.6.4-1.fc12.i686 (installed) html2ps-1.0-0.3.b5.fc12.noarch from installed has depsolving problems -- Missing Dependency: tex(dvips) is needed by package html2ps-1.0-0.3.b5.fc12.noarch (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tex(dvips) is needed by package html2ps-1.0-0.3.b5.fc12.noarch (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tex(dvips) is needed by package lyx-1.6.4-1.fc12.i686 (installed) You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: package-cleanup --problems package-cleanup --dupes rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest Due to a silly mistake on my part (the url repo for texlive-rawhide had an extra s in package_s_.rawhide the update of texlive packages occurred using yum after the update and not using preupgrade as it was my original purpose. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: TeXLive 2009 texconfig
On Wednesday 09 September 2009 Matthew Saltzman wrote: texconfig from TeXLive 2009 in F11 hangs when I attempt to set the dvips default paper type. The hang occurs when I run texconfig as a user and texconfig or texconfig-sys as root. It works for me on either scenario (F11/texlive-2009/i586). -- Matthew Saltzman -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Tuesday 08 September 2009 Jindrich Novy wrote: The main texlive package now contains a dependency to texlive-latexrecommended so all the LaTeX recomended stuff should be pulled in automatically when just installing texlive. Thank you. :-) It is nice to see texlive-2009 shaping so well for Fedora. :-D Jindrich -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Friday 04 September 2009 Jindrich Novy wrote: It should be fixed now altogether with new packages in the repository. Jindrich Thank you. Now I have installed on rawhide and it works (TM). :-) -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Review needed....
On Friday 04 September 2009 Josephine Tannhäuser wrote: Perhaps it is luck, but I'm happy about that fact that not all contributors with an open review request begging on devel list for a reviewer. If anybody will do it, the devel list will explode with review beggars. It's strange to see that most of the baggers are working for a big north american distributor, or living in india, or both! No, I don't want a pony!!! Is it difficult to be patient? There are many more open reviews which are older... Please qry your friends (if you have some) or be patient.. Is there any review you want us to look to? -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Friday 04 September 2009 Jindrich Novy wrote: It should be fixed now altogether with new packages in the repository. Jindrich One (really) minor hiccup, when installing all the doc files with yum install texlive-*-doc I get a missing dependency texlive-wadalab-doc is needed by package texlive-cjk-doc. Excluding the later from the transaction works. This problems appears (unsurprisingly) on both F11 and rawhide. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Wednesday 26 August 2009 Jindrich Novy wrote: Hi, first off, thanks many people who sent me RFE and bugfix proposals. I've tried to fix most of them in the current package set in the testing repository: OK, I have finally installed texlive on F11. With this update all worked (with the exception of some quirks already reported in this list). Unfortunately in the end I had a non working latex. Making this story short for some reason texlive-latex was not installed when I had update the system. Installing it fixed the problem. Does it make sense to have the latex packages depending on this? Thanks, Jindrich Thanks for the hard, :-) -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Thursday 27 August 2009 Jindrich Novy wrote: On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 03:02:18PM +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote: Hi, first off, thanks many people who sent me RFE and bugfix proposals. I've tried to fix most of them in the current package set in the testing repository: rpm -i http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/texlive-release-2009-0.1.fc11.noarc h.rpm Forgot to mention that the initial rawhide repository is now available as: rpm -i http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/texlive-rawhide-release-2009-0.1.fc11 .noarch.rpm The update when using the more recent rawhide failed. I suspect that the metadata is not updated as I get lots of Package does not match intended download. Jindrich -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Monday 31 August 2009 Jindrich Novy wrote: This should be fixed with the new packages in the repository now. The new packages obsolete the ancient tetex stuff: tetex-tex4ht tetex-IEEEtran tetex-bytefield tetex-elvevier tetex-perltex tetex-prosper and these utilities: dvipdfm dvipdfmx dvipng xdvi xdvipdfmx Installation of LyX/dvipdfm, etc. should work fine now. Jindrich Thank you. :-) I have successfully updated my system. The only problem I had was a2ps that requires tetex-fonts. After removing a2ps the update worked. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Saturday 29 August 2009 Stefan Grosse wrote: Just for the record: This was caused by LyX being (still) dependent on dvipdfm. Deleting LyX made an installation possible. This is one of those cases where rpm Suggests would be appropriate (when/if implemented). LyX does not depend in any way of dvipdfm, it will use it if it is available (and only if the user ask explicitly to use dvipdfm) but it will work happily if it is not present. Cheers Stefan. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
On Wednesday 26 August 2009 Jindrich Novy wrote: Hi, first off, thanks many people who sent me RFE and bugfix proposals. I've tried to fix most of them in the current package set in the testing repository: rpm -i http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/texlive-release-2009-0.1.fc11.noarch. rpm Thanks, Jindrich Hi, I have tried to update and now most of the previous problems have been solved but there is a new type of problem that has appeared. I get lots of these: Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive- amsfonts-2009-3.0.14555.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-texconfig-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-texconfig-2009-13822.fc11.noarch (texlive) I send attached the full list that I get. -- José Abílio Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-dvipdfm-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-dvipdfm-2009-0.13.2d.14549.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-etex-2009-13530.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-metafont-2009-13822.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-geometry-2009-4.2.13293.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-babel-2009-3.8l.13530.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-mfware-2009-13822.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-texconfig-2009-13822.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-dvips = 2007-42.fc11 is needed by package texlive-utils-2007-42.fc11.i586 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-pdftex-2009-1.40.9.14549.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-ifluatex-2009-1.2.14365.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-glyphlist-2009-13293.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-ifluatex-2009-1.2.14365.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-texconfig-2009-13822.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-tetex-2009-3.0.14841.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-dvipdfmx-2009-14829.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-ifxetex-2009-0.5.13293.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-xdvi-2009-22.84.16.14545.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-hyperref-2009-6.78q.13530.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-tetex-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-amsfonts-2009-3.0.14555.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-psnfss-2009-9.2a.13822.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-amsrefs-2009-2.02.13530.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-tex-2009-13822.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-latex-2009-14246.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-luatex-2009-0.2.14210.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-plain-2009-3.141592653.14025.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-texlive.infra-2009-14857.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-etex-pkg-2009-2.0.13293.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-collection-latex-2009-14245.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive = 2009 is needed by package texlive-cm-2009-14055.fc11.noarch (texlive) Error: Missing Dependency: texlive-kpathsea-bin = 2009 is needed by package texlive-ifxetex-2009-0.5.13293.fc11.noarch (texlive)
Re: Make upstream release monitoring (the service formerly known as FEVer) opt-out?
On Friday 07 August 2009 09:56:03 Pierre-Yves wrote: It remembers me a website made by Remi[1] which list for all the package available, for all the branch what version are in the repo. It also provides comparison between upstream and repo for some packages such as the PECL, PEAR and R packages. We should warn Remi about the numbering in R packages where . and - are equivalent in releases. The practical consequence of this is that most of our packages are up to date instead of the brown warning shown in the table. :-) [1] http://rpms.famillecollet.com/rpmphp/ Regards, Pierre -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: KDE vs. GNOME on F10
On Friday 07 August 2009 14:05:25 Thomas Janssen wrote: And back to the topic, afaik the KDE 4.3 packages have indeed been tested (via kde-redhat/testing etc) before being thrown on the f10 f11 users. Indeed. Even the RCs up to 4.2.98 have been tested via the kde-redhat repo, bugs filed and fixed. I'm one of them who run always the latest and greatest from kde-redhat. I am one of those who test kde packages both from kde-redhat and from rawhide. In every case the packages appeared first in rawhide, later in unstable of kde-redhat and only later on updates-testing, by the time the packages are submitted to updates they have passed all those different levels of testing. Do not forget also the update to emacs 23.1 made recently. Before that I always tried the repos who had emacs compiled for the latest Fedora stable version. I was glad when I saw the latest emacs available for F-11. -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: TeX Live 2008 available for testing
On Saturday 27 June 2009 13:41:42 Jindrich Novy wrote: Good news everyone! I've invented a device that installs TeX Live 2008 on your Fedora! /futurama TeX Live 2008 is now packaged and available for testing. It is not in Fedora yet because it requires reviews of couple of packages. But you can test it before it happens. First of all I would like to thank for the amazing job you have done. Even if most of the work is automatically generated it is not an easy task by any measure. :-) With all that work coming for F12 it would be a bonus if we could come with a set of rules for packaging tex projects. Those guidelines could then go to FPC for approval. With the amount of packages coming now is the time to get this right. One of the issues discussed before but never set is the name space to be used. If I remember the rough consensus was to name packages as tex-packagename or even tex-latex-packagename. Even the packages retain the same name as they are now in your repo you could add a (virtual) Provides so that if later, for any reason, we change the tex distribution we don't need to change every involved package. What is your plan? To use the wiki Feature page as the place of contact for further actions or something else... Thanks, Jindrich Regards, -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: an update to automake-1.11?
On Wednesday 01 July 2009 18:22:52 Adam Jackson wrote: He can't, KDE doesn't support that yet. - ajax Neither does gnome apparently: :-) $ yum search sense-of-humor Loaded plugins: dellsysidplugin2, presto, refresh-packagekit Warning: No matches found for: sense-of-humor No Matches found In any case I would recommend the better form: yum install sense-of-humor --skip-broken as you never know what can be broken if you do that. ;-) -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: TeX Live 2008 available for testing
On Saturday 27 June 2009 13:41:42 Jindrich Novy wrote: Good news everyone! I've invented a device that installs TeX Live 2008 on your Fedora! /futurama TeX Live 2008 is now packaged and available for testing. It is not in Fedora yet because it requires reviews of couple of packages. But you can test it before it happens. If you want to give it a try, install this package: # rpm -i http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/texlive-release-2008-1.fc11.noarch.rp m then you can do: # yum install texlive if you don't have texlive already installed. While upgrading from older texlive release please remove all the texlive packages before the upgrade, especially be sure that the /usr/share/texmf directory is removed. This is because the famous directory - symlink upgrade RPM bug. The packaging follows upstream packaging metadata so basically you have the same package naming in upstream TeX Live. The fedora one is prefixed with the texlive-* prefix. Currently you can use metapackages to install TeX Live: texlive-scheme-basic texlive-scheme-context texlive-scheme-full texlive-scheme-gust texlive-scheme-gutenberg texlive-scheme-medium texlive-scheme-minimal texlive-scheme-omega texlive-scheme-tetex texlive-scheme-xml By default when you install TeX Live by yum install texlive the scheme-basic is pulled in. You can install collections as well, there are 84 of them, list is here: http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/collections You can install the individual packages as well, complete list is here: http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/pkgs For more information you can see the Feature page here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TeXLive I've put a lot of effort to reduce the total amount from ~4000 to the current ~1600 source RPMs that need to be reviewed and imported into Fedora. This is not an easy task but considering that all (except the main one) of them are automatically generated it could be possible. Note that it is in testing state so (many) bugs could occur. There are possible clashes with applications packaged separately (such as dvipdfmx, etc.) so we may want to discuss these conflicts with respective fedora package maintainers to fix them. In case you are a maintainer of such package please send me an email to jn...@redhat.com so that we can sort it out on the TeX Live side (packages maintained separately are preferred). Thanks, Jindrich This is what I get after yum update Error: Missing Dependency: tetex = 3.0 is needed by package jadetex-3.13-5.fc11.noarch (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tetex-latex = 3.0 is needed by package jadetex-3.13-5.fc11.noarch (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tetex is needed by package texinfo- tex-4.13a-2.fc11.i586 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tetex-dvips is needed by package docbook-utils- pdf-0.6.14-16.fc11.noarch (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: libkpathsea.so.4 is needed by package dvipdfm-0.13.2d-40.fc11.i586 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tetex-latex is needed by package a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.i586 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tetex-dvips is needed by package a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.i586 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: libkpathsea.so.4 is needed by package evince- dvi-2.26.2-1.fc11.i586 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tetex-latex is needed by package R- devel-2.9.0-2.fc11.i586 (installed) Error: Missing Dependency: tetex-fonts is needed by package a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.i586 (installed) A missing Provides? -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Agenda for the 2009-05-26 Packaging Committee meeting
On Wednesday 27 May 2009 07:00:07 Toshio Kuratomi wrote: Note that that would be horrible behaviour for also keeping a minimal packageset. It would be easy to add configuration options with the default being on. For keeping a minimum package set this configuration could be turned off. I don't like the proliferation of configuration options but this example seems to me that it deserves an exception to this rule. -Toshio -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Packaging Survey - May 2009
On Wednesday 27 May 2009 12:31:56 Rahul Sundaram wrote: Hi I did a quick survey from Fedora on what software Fedora users are using that is not available in the repo. Here are the results. If you find anything interesting, feel free to pick it up. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_Survey_May_2009 root is being reviewed (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451744) Rahul -- José Abílio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [Fedora-r-devel-list] Re: useR! 2008
On Friday 02 January 2009 23:45:32 Alex Lancaster wrote: Hi José, Just curious if you got any feedback at userR! from R developers regarding Fedora packaging (e.g. Bioconductor etc.) Nope. I met and talked with Martyn, Peter Dalgaard and Marc Schwartz that are also subscribers from r-sig-fed...@r-project.org. Alex -- José Abílio ___ Fedora-r-devel-list mailing list Fedora-r-devel-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-r-devel-list
Re: [Fedora-r-devel-list] Re: R-devel going away
On Friday 24 October 2008 08:43:19 Pierre-Yves wrote: Should that be included in R2spec or in a separate tool ? The former IMHO. -- José Abílio ___ Fedora-r-devel-list mailing list Fedora-r-devel-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-r-devel-list
Re: [Fedora-r-devel-list] Re: useR! 2008 status report
On Wednesday 20 August 2008 22:04:09 George N. White III wrote: One of the difficulties in discussing these issues is that no one person is likely to encounter the full range of environments that need to be supported. There are very different security and control problems for a server running R to produce offical statistics than for a student's personal workstation. Certainly security can be enhanced if we minimize the use of root to manage end-user apps. This is an issue with lots of gray shadings. If we place virtualization on the board we have another level. :-) This says we need to move to a multi-level packaging approach that supports packaged installs under user/group control without root privileges. Well this is easier said than done. :-) Although I agree that you right and that there are bigger fishes to fry, my interest was just to place Fedora and R in a context that allowed us to have more R packages in Fedora done and at the same time not forgetting the lessons that were learned from packaging other languages (specifically Perl and Python). -- José Abílio ___ Fedora-r-devel-list mailing list Fedora-r-devel-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-r-devel-list
Re: [Fedora-r-devel-list] useR! 2008 status report
On Tuesday 19 August 2008 18:38:33 Pierre-Yves wrote: If the solution proposed by spot does not work (or before it works) I think a simple: find ./source/ -name *.py -o -name *.c -o -name *.cp -o -name *.f -o -name *.F If it returns something then install the -devel... Actually we can develop that as it will be useful for R2spec as well. It would be interesting because the common problems are the same. :-) 3) If the steps above are not enough and the package depends on an external library you need to guarantee that you have installed the files necessary to compile the package. Do not forget that the -devel subpackages are required to be installed to compile and link with the external libraries. I went briefly through your presentation, nice :) I hope you had good time there. It was a nice conference, with an optimum number of participants (around 400). It was nice to meet there some people that I only knew from the mailing lists like some of the Debian guys. It was also interesting to notice that there are some issues related to the community growth that are being dealt in the same way both in Fedora and R. R-Forge for example is a project under the R Core umbrella where space and infrastructural tools are given to authors to develop their packages before they are place in CRAN. R-Forge is thus the analogue of fedorahosted. :-) Regards, Pierre -- José Abílio ___ Fedora-r-devel-list mailing list Fedora-r-devel-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-r-devel-list
[Fedora-r-devel-list] useR! 2008 status report
Hi all, after a busy week I am finally starting to get back to some kind of normality (no pun intended :-) ). At useR! 2008 I had Martin Plummer, Marc Schwartz and Peter Dalgaard in the audience. The talk went well and it was a fun to do. The room was small for the attendance and in my (biased) view it seemed that I had people coming on purpose for the talk. :-) After the session ended I had a friendly discussion with Martin and Marc regarding Fedora and R relationship. :-) Some of the topics covered were (in no particular order other than my notes). 1) The redundancy between the two mailing lists devoted to R and Fedora (this and SIG list). Actually at that time I forgot the SIG mailing list (my bad). I always keep forgetting about the different purpose of both lists. 2) Martin and Marc suggested one scenario that involved the removal of all R packages from Fedora where the only remaining installed package would be the R core package. Then using some kind of package, the better analogy that I found was a backend to PackageKit providing automatic installs from CRAN. My opinion (that I have also expressed back then) was that this would be a no go for Fedora for two reasons, first the packages dependency outside of CRAN would be hard to get right (think about packages like R-hdf5 that require linking with an external package). The second and probably the most important issue from our (Fedora) point of view would be the liability issue. We would be connecting to a repository that we have no control about, I tried to express the different reasons why this is not possible. 3) There are discussions at R about the next generation CRAN meta-information (improved DESCRIPTION format) and the opinions of distributions are welcome. 4) Is there a link in fedora bugzilla to connect upstream for R bugs reported to Fedora? I am not sure if this is possible with the new bugzilla but I suppose that there are not so many bugs like that reported at Fedora. 5) One problem usually reported in the R users mailing list is the installation procedure used to install R packages (not in Fedora) using the R interface. This problem has been reported again this weekend FWIW. Instead of providing R-devel in the R package as Martin and Marc have suggested I think that we could create a FAQ for R in Fedora. Something like: *** Draft to R - Fedora FAQ ** Q: I tried to install the following R package in Fedora but R failed with horrendous error messages, what should I do? A: Look to the content of the R package you are trying to install (link to CRAN). 1) Does it contains C or C++ files (.c or .cpp ending filenames)? If yes then install R-devel if it is not yet installed. [Instructions how to install R-devel using yum or packagekit] 2) Does it contains Fortran files (.f or .F ending filenames)? If yes then install gcc-gfortran if it is not yet installed. [Instructions how to install R-devel using yum or packagekit] 3) If the steps above are not enough and the package depends on an external library you need to guarantee that you have installed the files necessary to compile the package. Do not forget that the -devel subpackages are required to be installed to compile and link with the external libraries. ** This is my fable attempt to document some of the possible of the problems found by our users. :-) We could then expand the FAQ content to other topics like how to search Fedora R packages. The target of the FAQ would be naturally the users and not just the developers. Comments are welcome to all the points above, -- José Abílio ___ Fedora-r-devel-list mailing list Fedora-r-devel-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-r-devel-list
