moonlight and the new covenant
Hi, according to Miguel [1], the moonlight covenant was updated and now allows for redistribution by third parties. Does it change anything wrt. its inclusion in Fedora? Julian [1] http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2009/Dec-17.html -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Improve the way rpm decides what is newer
W dniu 21.11.2009 02:02, Christian Iseli pisze: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:36:28 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Including Vendor in comparisons is just FAIL. Packages often move >> from Fedora to RPM Fusion as legal problems are found or from RPM >> Fusion to Fedora as legal problems are cleared, there's no one vendor >> which can have precedence. > > I don't follow your reasoning there. In the config file you define: > "Fedora Project" == "RPM Fusion" > and the comparison, being equal, then proceeds to VendorRelease, which > would be identical and then you end up in the same situation we are in > now: the version-release in RPM Fusion needs to be higher than the one > you removed from the Fedora repo. > -1 What you have now is a few (never had more than 10) packages from an earlier branch of the distro. Most of the times they work fine, so this is basically a non-issue. Hacking around with release super-epoch and vendors is only going to cause pain. Application upgrades are usually coded to cope with the older config files format and migrate them to older ones, this obviously won't work the other way round. Seriously guys, is there nothing better to do than hunting around f(x-1) packages? Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: odd file requires
W dniu 09.11.2009 17:58, Seth Vidal pisze: > Hey folks, > I put together this list for things I'd like to work on for f13. It's a > list of packages with a file-requires that falls outside of *bin/* and > /etc/* and then the provider(s) for those files. > > http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/non-primary-file-reqs-and-what-requires-them.txt > > > I've gone through some of them and I'm looking for where we can clean up > a few more. > > Take a look through, see if you see a package you're responsible for > and, if you can, figure out a way to not need the file-requires. > > this helps our users b/c if we don't need to get the filelists to > resolve the dependency then they don't use up the bandwidth. > > thanks, > -sv > I fixed gnome-chemistry-utils-mozplugin to require mozilla-filesystem Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Wodim trouble
W dniu 03.11.2009 11:37, Matěj Cepl pisze: > Dne 3.11.2009 05:22, Ankur Sinha napsal(a): >> I just wanted to know if wodim is usable (i mean without wasting dvds >> like its doing currently for me). From the discussion, I feel it's still >> buggy and therefore I'm going to shift to another program (maybe >> growisofs). > > Yes, wodim is perfect. Joerg is just spreading FUD. > > Matěj > Ok, putting the ad personam arguments aside, there are two important facts: - cdrecord is still under active development, but there might be a problem with distributability (Sun lawyers say there is not, but I guess RH would like to make their own legal review to be on the safe side) - cdrkit is in sort of maintenance mode, and it does not support UDF filesystem for DVD discs correctly, and the situation is unlikely to improve - libburn is also developed actively, but it lacks UDF support as well [1] So, while waiting for libburn to improve, we could either take over cdrkit development, or do a(nother) legal review of cdrecord. It seems that the latter should be simpler, given that it's a one-time effort. Julian [1] http://libburnia-project.org/ticket/106 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Wodim trouble
W dniu 03.11.2009 00:19, Tom "spot" Callaway pisze: > On 11/02/2009 03:47 PM, Denis Leroy wrote: >> On 11/02/2009 07:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: >>> That may be true, but since cdrecord is not shippable, it's a pretty >>> vacuous truth. >> >> Out of curiosity, was that just because of the GPL2-CDDL mix ? Or was >> there another reason ? Last I checked, only mkisofs is affected by that >> and the rest of cdrecord is pure CDDL. If we patched mkisofs away, would >> it be shippable ? > > That would be a significantly notable fork. If someone did remove all > the dependent GPLv2 code in the cdrecord source, I would probably be > willing to audit the package for possible inclusion, but I could not in > good conscience recommend that anyone maintain that forked code in > Fedora, as the upstream author has a long and storied history of > being... problematic. > > ~spot > opensuse are shipping cdrecord, maybe it would be worth checking what they changed, if at all? Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Wodim trouble
W dniu 02.11.2009 18:16, Michal Schmidt pisze: > Dne 2.11.2009 17:31, Kevin Kofler napsal: >> Ankur Sinha wrote: >>> "wodim is completely unmaintained since May 6th 2007, don't >>> expect to see any fixes anytime soon as long as Redhat >>> continues to distribute wodim instead of the original software." >>> >>> Can someone please clear this up? >> >> It's just the usual FUD from Jörg Schilling. Ignore it. >> >> The latest commit to cdrkit upstream was 3 weeks ago. > > Although you are technically right, the commits for the last two years > have been boring cleanups, typo fixes and warning silencers. They don't > seem to be fixing any actual bugs in CD/DVD burning. > > The last commit that did something which looks like a technical change > was indeed on 2007-05-06 ( > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debburn/cdrkit/trunk/wodim/?rev=767&sc=1 ). > > Look here for the log and read the commit messages: > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debburn/cdrkit/trunk/wodim/?op=log&rev=0&sc=0&isdir=1 > > > So wodim does not look like a well maintained project to me. > > Michal > I might be wrong, but I think it lacks UDF support. I was burning a DVD with insanely long filenames and I got bitten by that. Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
SciTech SIG members: EMBOSS is now packaged, comaintainership welcome, java skills helpful
Hi guys, the review process for EMBOSS was recently completed. A gcc bug (fixed but not pushed) prevents it from getting built for F-12 and rawhide, but other than that package is fine. Unfortunately, due to the fact that jemboss bundles a load of .jar files and seems to use some com.sun.net classes, it had to be disabled. I'm trying to get it in shape, but since I have no experience with java, I'm afraid that without help things will need to stay the way they are. So, if someone would like to help make jemboss use system-wide .jar files, as well as make it buildable with free software, please step up. Packaging jalview will probably be needed during this process. Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Thunderbird 3.0rc1
W dniu 18.10.2009 22:45, Mike Cloaked pisze: > Will a build of Thunderbird 3.0rc1 be pushed to updates-testing for F11 when > it > is released? > >>From MozillaWiki I note that the plan is: Start build: 3rd November (est 10th > Nov) so this will likely be around 3 weeks away. > > Thanks > What makes you think it won't? Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
orphaning goffice04 in fedora
Hi, given that F-9 went EOL and thus gchemutils requires the older goffice in none of the branches, I've decided to orphan it. Createrepo suggests that abiword is the only remaining user. I've CCed the maintainer and orphaned it in pkgdb. Regards, Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: rawhide report: 20090702 changes
Rahul Sundaram pisze: > On 07/02/2009 08:51 PM, David wrote: > >> I disagree that Fedora should be packaging books, both of these can >> easily be downloaded via web. >> Why package something that has no dependencies? > > We package hundreds of things that have no dependencies and can be > downloaded easily via web including fonts. That is not a argument. > > Rahul > I think the main point here should be what advantage does packaging books have. Are there any book readers that look into /usr/share/yourfavouritebook by default? If not, I think that's actually easier to open a file you have lying on your desktop or your docs dir (where your recently opened files most likely are) than to dig through the filesystem. Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Rawhide pulseaudio manager problem
Bastien Nocera pisze: > On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 00:03 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: >> Lennart Poettering pisze: >>> LOn Sat, 27.06.09 13:59, Paul (p...@all-the-johnsons.co.uk) wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Despite the packagekit updates, I've still not got any sound on my >>>> rawhide box. >>> Please file bug reports if you run into bugs. fedora-devel is not the >>> appropriate place to discuss bugs, especially not those in Rawhide. >>> >>>> When I've run from the command line >>>> >>>> pulseaudio --start or pulseaudio -D >>>> >>>> it returns E: main.c: Daemon startup failed >>> When you file that bug report, please include a dump of "pulseaudio -v" >>> >>>> When I run PulseAudio Manager, I'm seeing something which may explain >>>> things a bit (though it could just be the manager app being odd!) >>> paman is obsolete. Don't use it. >> What's the right way to configure pulseaudio now then? > > pavucontrol, or any similar front-ends. > > Lennart, if paman's dead, make pavucontrol obsolete it, and EOL it. > Ahh, OK. I confused paman with paprefs. Sorry for the noise. Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Rawhide pulseaudio manager problem
Lennart Poettering pisze: > LOn Sat, 27.06.09 13:59, Paul (p...@all-the-johnsons.co.uk) wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Despite the packagekit updates, I've still not got any sound on my >> rawhide box. > > Please file bug reports if you run into bugs. fedora-devel is not the > appropriate place to discuss bugs, especially not those in Rawhide. > >> When I've run from the command line >> >> pulseaudio --start or pulseaudio -D >> >> it returns E: main.c: Daemon startup failed > > When you file that bug report, please include a dump of "pulseaudio -v" > >> When I run PulseAudio Manager, I'm seeing something which may explain >> things a bit (though it could just be the manager app being odd!) > > paman is obsolete. Don't use it. What's the right way to configure pulseaudio now then? > > Lennart > Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Jeremy Katz pisze: > On Saturday, June 13 2009, Jussi Lehtola said: >> On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 11:12 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 07:04:12PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote: Hmm, I'd want netboot.img back, since I normally use a USB stick to start the network install (OK, there is the possibility of using livecd-iso-to-disk, but that's a lot more hassle than downloading a minimalistic img and running dd). >>> We have it, it's now called netinst.iso >> Yes but not netboot.img that could be dd'd straight away to a USB drive >> or whatnot; the iso needs livecd-iso-to-disk which a) is extra work and >> b) is only available on Fedora and Windows. [Also, the livecd tools need >> an own homepage so that users of other distros can get them.] > > We really need to finish the push in F12 to get liveusb-creator working > for all cases (including command line) so that we can kick the silly > shell script to the curb as liveusb-creator has its own homepage, etc. > > Also, I want to look a bit more at isohybrid to see if we can build iso > images that can just be dd'd, at least for the case of > boot.iso/netinst.iso What's the difference between these two by the way? > > Jeremy > Cheers, Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Interested in scanning?
Jesse Keating pisze: > On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 08:56 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: >> Perhaps we could target some specific scanners on the first attempt? >> We >> might be able to get some hardware donated to the effort. >> >> ~spot, who has several scanners of varying age and quality in a box >> > > I have a relatively new Canon Scanner, that has no current hope of > working on Linux. Boy I'd love to see that changed. > > I have an old Plustek OpticPro ST24, which is supposed to be supported by the genesys backend in the future (the progress has been stalled for a few years). Julian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Action requested: check dist tags and conditionals
Bill Nottingham pisze:
> (If you've never used a construct like "%if 0%{?fedora}" in your spec
> file, you can disregard this message.)
>
> Many packages in Fedora use release-based conditionals such as:
>
> ...
> %if 0%{?rhel}
> %endif
>
> %if 0%{?fedora} < 10
> %endif
>
> %{?fedora:%global _with_xfce --with-xfce}
> ...
>
> I'd just like to remind people of the following:
>
> - If you're using open ended conditionals such as:
> %if 0%{?fedora} > 9
> make sure you keep in mind what will happen if %{fedora} isn't defined,
> such as in the case of a derivative distribution.
>
> - If you're building for EPEL from a unified Fedora spec file, and have
> separate %{fedora} and %{rhel} sections, make sure they do the right
> things for any potential new releases, not just %{rhel} = 4 or %{rhel} = 5.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bill
>
> ___
> Fedora-devel-announce mailing list
> fedora-devel-annou...@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-announce
>
This is often used to tailor BuildRequires, I can't take responsibility
what a given release of a derivative distro does or doesn't include.
Julian
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches?
Paul Wouters pisze: > On Tue, 26 May 2009, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > >>> Find us a Company in Europe that is not based in the US that is willing >>> to fund with people and money as much as Red Hat is doing now. >>> >>> Oh, Europe won't help much, there are just as many silly laws there as >>> there are in the US. > > 1) Your packets will still flow through the US anyway. 2) The US claim > jurisdiction even outside their national borders and >reserve the right to prosecute "offenses against American interests" >according to US law, irrespective of where they take place. > > In other words, you could be extradited even if the offense would not > actually be an offense in your country. For example, Dutch people have > been extradited for selling drugs to US citizens in The Netherlands, > even though marihuana is legal. (well, "its complicated") Really? Big Brother is watching ;) > > Also, you could never set foot in the US again without getting arrested, > and most of us don't think those T-6 countries are worh that. > >> Is there a reason that an interested party (in a locale where such >> export is legal) couldn't just create a custom spin on their own (and >> using their own build system) to create a Fedora-T6 spin (or for >> trademark reasons, rebrand it)? I can see this being a perfectly good >> premise for setting up a SIG... > > respin what? remove the crypto? Try removing nss, openssl, gnutls and > kerberos and see what's left of your system. Not much :P > And who would want it? Surely not the T6 countries :P > > Paul > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
