Re: RFE: Never, ever steal focus.
On Wednesday 06 January 2010 10:07:58 am Adam Jackson wrote: On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 16:00 +0100, nodata wrote: I'd like to suggest an enhancement for Fedora 13: nothing should ever steal focus from the window I am typing in. If I am typing in a shell window, or in a word processor, or an e-mail, nothing should ever take keyboard focus away from that window. Clearly I'm missing something, otherwise we would have this, hence the posting to the list :) PGA. Here's the challenge. To reply to this mail, I hit control-shift-r in one evo window, and evo opened a new window for me to compose into. Get it? I typed into one window, and then started typing into another, and that's exactly what was desired. If the window manager suppressed focus changes on the basis of you were just typing into some other window, this must be a focus steal, then the new compose window would have mapped unfocused, and I'd have to have alt-tabbed to get to it. So if you can come up with an algorithm that can reliably classify focus change requests as stealing or not, then great. - ajax really the only time i have a big issue with it is when logging in for the first time. and the session is restored. kde is actually starting to get pretty good about managing things correctly. you get a popup that an app wants focus to unlock kwallet I really hate when im unlocking gnome keyring and something else steals focus. after your logged in things would only take focus if you started the app by some action of your own. Dennis 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: Major dns issues
On Monday 14 December 2009 10:16:30 am Seth Vidal wrote: On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 09:27:18AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: So I woke up today and we're still having dns issues on at least one of my hosts. Could everyone that has access please do a dig fedoraproject.org on all their hosts and tell me if any of them cannot resolve? Working from three US sites I have access to. -Toshio Not working from slicehost's nameservers. dig @67.207.128.4 fedoraproject.org ; DiG 9.3.6-P1-RedHat-9.3.6-4.P1.el5 @67.207.128.4 fedoraproject.org ; (1 server found) ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 9804 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;fedoraproject.org. IN A ;; Query time: 1 msec ;; SERVER: 67.207.128.4#53(67.207.128.4) ;; WHEN: Mon Dec 14 11:16:03 2009 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 35 -sv FWIW its working from home, my dedicated box and my box in .au two of those I run my own resolvers and not my isps. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
[RFC] unified i386/x86_64 install media.
I was thinking and thought id get an idea out there. rather than ship 2 dvds one for i386 and one for x86_64 we would ship one dvd that has the package set for both arches. they would likely only have the packages for a desktop install on them we would need to have both arches under 2.4GiB, you could choose your own adventure by enabling the everything repo. this way you could carry a usb key or dvd that you can plug into any intel based machine and be sure of having it installable. this would end the discussions of what arch to promote we have a single install media. syslinux would need to be able to detect the arch to install and likely also have a flag to force 32 bit we could easily implement the 64 bit kernel and 32 bit userland idea that was put forward a few releases ago. pungi will need to learn how to make the new iso. but i think it is achievable. I think we should also push the netinstall.iso along with kickstarting machines. we could make a single netinstall.iso for both arches as well. it would make it ~375MB iso. Dennis 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: [RFC] unified i386/x86_64 install media.
On Tuesday 24 November 2009 04:55:52 pm Jesse Keating wrote: On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 16:48 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote: On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 13:50 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: syslinux would need to be able to detect the arch to install and likely also have a flag to force 32 bit we could easily implement the 64 bit kernel and 32 bit userland idea that was put forward a few releases ago. pungi will need to learn how to make the new iso. but i think it is achievable. As I'm actually trying this on one of the laptops on my desk, I'd point out that this almost certainly requires yum changes to work well. yum gets its idea of arch from uname, which reports what the kernel is, not what the current glibc is. Not that it's not a good idea - it seems to work surprisingly well - but it's not turnkey yet. - ajax From what I understand, this isn't about delivering a 64bit kernel and a 32bit userland. That's a different ball of fun. This is about having one single piece of media that can serve as either a 32bit install media, or a 64bit install media, and which you get would depend on the syslinux menu item you boot, which would be driven by what arch CPU you have (or forced by the user). That shouldn't require any yum hackery at all. the goal for F-13 is to have unified media, for F-14 and beyond we could look at other options like having a 64 bit kernel and 32 bit userland. i should have stated that a bit more clearly Dennis 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: [RFC] unified i386/x86_64 install media.
On Tuesday 24 November 2009 07:31:47 pm Matthew Miller wrote: On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 06:17:08PM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: the goal for F-13 is to have unified media, for F-14 and beyond we could look at other options like having a 64 bit kernel and 32 bit userland. i should have stated that a bit more clearly So would this mean one disk with two repositories on it, or is everything mashed together all in one repository? To be worked out. we could drop multilib repos and use two on each x86_64 system, we could have a single mixed repo, or we could use what we use today and do some hardlinking. what we do on the dvd media need not be the same as what we do on the trees on the mirrors. i.e. the mirrors could be the same as today, but we have one repo on the media. Dennis 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: How the pkglist of the repo associated with build tag is generated
On Thursday 19 November 2009 07:28:52 pm peng chen wrote: for example,I have a target dist-test, it's detailed info as follow: Name Buildroot Destination -- dist-testdist-test-builddist-test I use command koji list-tagged dist-test,and found the package in the list of dist-test,but when generating the repo associated with the build tag 'dist-test-build',the package doesn't exist in the file 'pkglist'.This results in Missing Dependency Error or Init mock buildroot Error. I reslove the problem this way that tag the missing package with command koji call tagBuildBypass dist-test-build the missing package n-v-r ,and then regen-repo,It's OK! So, I wonder why and how the content of file 'pkglist' is written? Thanks, sincerely! does dist-test-build inherit from dist-test ? im guessing not koji list-tag-inheritance dist-f12-build dist-f12-build (86) ├─dist-f12-override (113) │ └─dist-f12-updates (105) │ └─dist-f12 (85) │└─dist-f11-updates (87) │ └─dist-f11 (62) │ └─dist-f10-updates (64) │ └─dist-f10 (45) │└─f9-cutoff (110) └─dist-f11-build (63) ├─dist-f11-override (89) └─dist-f10-build (46) ├─dist-f10-override (68) └─f9-build-cutoff (111) in fedoras koji koji add-tag-inheritance dist-test-build dist-test should set you up you may need to use --priority and specify one if you have other tags already inherited. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: No fuse module in Koji builds?
On Wednesday 18 November 2009 11:25:15 am Richard W.M. Jones wrote: A package I'm building has an (optional) test which does a local non-root fuse mount in order to run some tests. In Koji this gives the error: fuse: device not found, try 'modprobe fuse' first So I have a couple of questions about this: I think in RHEL 5.4 the fuse module was added to the kernel -- are the Koji builders now based on the RHEL 5.4 kernel? If they are or will be, will local non-root fuse mounts be permitted during builds? As far as I'm aware there are no security issues with doing this, although possibly there may be unexpected interactions with Koji/mock if a build doesn't properly umount fuse mountpoints. The builders are running RHEL 5.4, doing any kind of mount is not permitted during the build. network access is not allowed also. You will likely have weird incompatability issues if we do allow it. since the build hosts run EL-5 and the chroot could be something wildly different. its not a tested or supported thing. for one mock chroot only has a minimal /dev file system its not likely going to be something we will work on or allow, the same as calling rpm in the chroot is not allowed. Dennis 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
CVS branches for F-10 closed
Hi All, Since Fedora 12 was released yesterday new CVS branches for F-10 will not be allowed. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy/EOL list the policy in effect this means that F-10 is now in a maintenance only cycle, with EOL fast approaching, the EOL date was set to December 17th by FESCo (http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-11-06/fedora- meeting.2009-11-06-17.00.html). Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-devel-announce mailing list fedora-devel-annou...@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-announce-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: The tag mercurial-1_4-1_fc12 is already applied on a different branch
On Monday 16 November 2009 04:02:01 pm Neal Becker wrote: Seems I do this every time we have a new release. In F12: cvs tag -F -c mercurial-1_4-1_fc12 ERROR: The tag mercurial-1_4-1_fc12 is already applied on a different branch ERROR: You can not forcibly move tags between branches cvs tag: Pre-tag check failed cvs [tag aborted]: correct the above errors first! What are my choices to proceed? I already have built/are building 1.4.1 on F13 and F11. I don't want to have a different package number on F12. your only option is to bump and tag you can use either 1.4-2 or 1.4-1.1 but you can do cross branch tagging. so there is no way to tag 1.4-1 on the f-12 branch. Dennis 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: The tag mercurial-1_4-1_fc12 is already applied on a different branch
On Monday 16 November 2009 04:49:31 pm Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:26:39 -0600, Dennis wrote:
On Monday 16 November 2009 04:02:01 pm Neal Becker wrote:
Seems I do this every time we have a new release.
In F12:
cvs tag -F -c mercurial-1_4-1_fc12
ERROR: The tag mercurial-1_4-1_fc12 is already applied on a different
branch ERROR: You can not forcibly move tags between branches
cvs tag: Pre-tag check failed
cvs [tag aborted]: correct the above errors first!
What are my choices to proceed? I already have built/are building
1.4.1 on F13 and F11. I don't want to have a different package number
on F12.
your only option is to bump and tag you can use either 1.4-2 or 1.4-1.1
but
To be precise, avoid 1.4-1.1 as it would be higher than 1.4-1.fc13
No it won't I could have been cleaer 1.4-1%{?dist}.1 is what i meant. but i
assumed that the implementer would have done it as such.
Use 1.4-1%{?dist}.1 instead for F-12 if you don't want to bump to
1.4-2%{?dist} for both F-12 and devel.
I was intentionally leaving the %{?dist} macro out and putting it in the
changelog format. I assume that our packagers are smart enough to do the
right thing (tm)
Dennis
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: Signing RPMs
On Wednesday 11 November 2009 07:15:36 am Josh Boyer wrote: On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:24:50PM -0800, Jitesh Shah wrote: So, I picked up the sign_unsigned.py script from releng. I replaced the keys in there with our keys, tweaked some minor stuff here and there and managed to get it running. I use it as ./sign_unsigned.py --level level tag-name and it runs alright. I can see that the signatures are cached under the sigcache directory (but NOT embedded in the rpms themselves, which makes sense since the rpm can probably be a part of different tags and might be signed differently within each tag) So, I thought, well, mash would be the one which'll embed the keys in the rpms. So, I set strict_keys to True.. added my key to the keys list in my .mash file. mash has no problems with the rpms and it can verify the signatures alright. But, it still doesn't embed the signatures in the rpm (is it supposed to?). So, the created repository still has all rpms unsigned. What am I missing here? where to the rpms get signed actually? The sign_unsigned script should eventually do a koji API call to do 'write-signed-rpm' on the packages you are signing. That will assemble signed RPMs in koji itself, which mash will download and used. Fedora Rel-Eng doesn't use sign_unsigned anymore because we have a signing server setup now. However, it should still work. it still works. EPEL releng still uses it. you need to make sure to add -- write-rpms to you command. the signed rpms will then get written. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: cvs-import.sh problem
On Saturday 07 November 2009 09:18:08 am Jarosław Górny wrote: Hi, CVS branches for my first package were created couple of days ago. Today I've set up my account (I think correctly), did a successful checkout, but I can't import sources: code [jaros...@moonstone mpdscribble]$ ./common/cvs-import.sh -b F-11 -m Initial import (#477542) ../../mpdscribble-0.18.1-1.fc12.src.rpm Checking out module: 'mpdscribble' Unpacking source package: mpdscribble-0.18.1-1.fc12.src.rpm... L mpdscribble-0.18.1.tar.bz2 A mpdscribble.init.d A mpdscribble.spec Checking : mpdscribble-0.18.1.tar.bz2 on https://cvs.fedoraproject.org/repo/pkgs/upload.cgi... ERROR: could not check remote file status make: *** [upload] Błąd 255 ERROR: Uploading the source tarballs failed! /code Is it me doing sth. wrong (or not configured properly)? Please help me, thanks, you need to have your ssl cert in place to upload the tarball. run fedora- cert -n to get your cert and try again. Dennis 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: RFC: proposed macro deffinitions for F-13
On Wednesday 28 October 2009 01:41:34 am Alexander Boström wrote:
tis 2009-10-27 klockan 13:24 -0500 skrev Dennis Gilmore:
On Tuesday 27 October 2009 01:16:46 pm Adam Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 12:40 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Id like to get some feedback on the patches that i'm proposing for
F-13. quite a few packages that need to deal with differences between
32bit/64bit or multilib arches have defines for the appropriate
arches. sometimes incomplete since they don't include secondary
arches.
I wanted to get some feedback. and see if there are other cases we
should add.
+%multilib32 sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 sparc64 sparc64v ppc64 s390x
Remind me what the asymmetry is for here? Why is %{ix86} not in
%{multilib32} ?
[...]
it should be the attached patch. the initial one was based on what gcc
does in its spec. it treats %{ix86} as not being multilib.
+%multilib32 %{ix86} %{sparc32} ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 %{sparc64} ppc64 s390x
I thought the idea was: multilibXX is arches where libs go in libXX
thats only part of it. the other issue you hit is that alot of packages have
wrapper headers and the put the real headers in with -32 or -64 prefixes
so /usr/include/foo.h includes foo-32.h or foo-64.h depending on the arch your
building for. this is to make sure headers dont conflict on multilib arches.
Dennis
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: the mass rebuild and i586 rpms?
On Thursday 22 October 2009 07:29:49 pm Milos Jakubicek wrote: Hi, snip Not a primary arch package (should the package be blocked in the primary arch kojihub?) == prtconf silo xorg-x11-drv-sunffb There are much more of them! I don't know whether it is possible to block a package in a single Koji hub and if our infrastructure team is willing to go in this way -- Jesse? blocking a package on the primary hub will result in the package also being blocked on the secodnary arch hubs. since one of the things we want to do is keep the arches in sync. it will also mean that a packges doesnt get branched in cvs since the branching tools will think its no longer needed. Dennis 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: RFC: proposed macro deffinitions for F-13
On Tuesday 27 October 2009 12:45:10 pm Eric Sandeen wrote:
Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi All,
Id like to get some feedback on the patches that i'm proposing for F-13.
quite a few packages that need to deal with differences between
32bit/64bit or multilib arches have defines for the appropriate arches.
sometimes incomplete since they don't include secondary arches.
I wanted to get some feedback. and see if there are other cases we should
add.
Dennis
I have hacks like this in e2fsprogs.spec for example:
%ifarch %{multilib_arches}
mv -f %{buildroot}%{_includedir}/ext2fs/ext2_types.h \
%{buildroot}%{_includedir}/ext2fs/ext2_types-%{_arch}.h
install -p -m 644 %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_includedir}/ext2fs/ext2_types.h
%endif
Unless I'm doing a Bad Thing here, maybe some macros to facilitate this
type of header mangling for multiarch?
right now you need to define multilib_arches for that to work with my proposed
changes you could drop your defines and use
%ifarch %{multilib64} %{multilib32}
maybe we want to define a multilibarches macro also that way if/when we add a
new multilib arch. we make one changes and rebuild everything and we support
it. rather than changing potentially hundresd of spec files. of course they
will need to be changed to use the new macros.
Dennis
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: RFC: proposed macro deffinitions for F-13
On Tuesday 27 October 2009 01:16:46 pm Adam Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 12:40 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Id like to get some feedback on the patches that i'm proposing for F-13.
quite a few packages that need to deal with differences between
32bit/64bit or multilib arches have defines for the appropriate arches.
sometimes incomplete since they don't include secondary arches.
I wanted to get some feedback. and see if there are other cases we should
add.
+%multilib32 sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 sparc64 sparc64v ppc64 s390x
Remind me what the asymmetry is for here? Why is %{ix86} not in
%{multilib32} ?
In general I'd kind of prefer to see headers modified to use gcc's
predefines for __SIZEOF_LONG__ and friends instead, but I'll take what I
can get.
it should be the attached patch. the initial one was based on what gcc does
in its spec. it treats %{ix86} as not being multilib.
+%multilib32 %{ix86} %{sparc32} ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 %{sparc64} ppc64 s390x
--- redhat-rpm-config-9.0.3-orig/macros 2009-10-27 10:18:01.0 -0500
+++ redhat-rpm-config-9.0.3/macros 2009-10-27 12:14:24.0 -0500
@@ -277,3 +277,7 @@
%global __find_requires /bin/sh -c %{?__filter_req_cmd} %{__deploop R} %{?__filter_from_req} \
}
+#==
+# Set up multilib arch definitions
+%multilib32 sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 sparc64 sparc64v ppc64 s390x
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: RFC: proposed macro deffinitions for F-13
On Tuesday 27 October 2009 02:17:57 pm Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:40:14PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
+# arch macro for all supported 32 bit builds
+%32bitarches %{ix86} %{sparc32} %{arm} s390
+# arch macro for all supported 64 bit builds
+%64bitarches x86_64 %{sparc64} ia64 s390x %{alpha}
missing ppc and ppc64 respectively here, aren't you?
josh
indeed i am sorry this should be better
Dennis
--- rpm-4.7.1/macros.in.orig 2009-10-27 11:36:12.0 -0500
+++ rpm-4.7.1/macros.in 2009-10-27 14:29:23.0 -0500
@@ -1194,11 +1194,23 @@
#--
# arch macro for all supported Sparc processors
%sparc sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v sparc64 sparc64v
+# arch macro for all supported sparc32 bit builds
+%sparc32 sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v
+# arch macro for all supported sparc64 bit builds
+%sparc64 sparc64 sparc64v
#--
# arch macro for all supported Alpha processors
%alpha alpha alphaev56 alphaev6 alphaev67
+
+#--
+# arch macro for all supported 32 bit builds
+%32bitarches %{ix86} %{sparc32} %{arm} s390 ppc
+# arch macro for all supported 64 bit builds
+%64bitarches x86_64 %{sparc64} ia64 s390x %{alpha} ppc64
+
+
#
# Use in %install to generate locale specific file lists. For example,
#
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: RFC: proposed macro deffinitions for F-13
On Tuesday 27 October 2009 03:17:15 pm Jesse Keating wrote: On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 12:40 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: Id like to get some feedback on the patches that i'm proposing for F-13. quite a few packages that need to deal with differences between 32bit/64bit or multilib arches have defines for the appropriate arches. sometimes incomplete since they don't include secondary arches. I'm not really a fan of growing more macro goo, particularly if it's Fedora specific macro goo :/ the multilib ones were the only ones i intended to put in redhat-rpm-config though im just as happy to try and get it into rpm. the rest i had intended to get into rpm. Dennis 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: RFC: proposed macro deffinitions for F-13
On Tuesday 27 October 2009 03:48:13 pm Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Tuesday 27 October 2009, Adam Jackson wrote:
+%multilib32 sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 sparc64 sparc64v ppc64 s390x
Remind me what the asymmetry is for here? Why is %{ix86} not in
%{multilib32} ?
Hm, maybe a stupid question: in what sense are %{ix86} multilib in the
first place?
when you install %{ix86} packages on a x86_64 system. same for ppc and
%{sparc32} and s390.
Dennis
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: Suitability of Python for daemon processes
On Sunday 25 October 2009 06:26:49 pm Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: On 10/25/2009 11:51 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: With all my babbling I forgot to mention we do already run python daemons in Fedora Infrastructure. Func is one, TurboGears (though it's wrapped in mod_wsgi) and one that we wrote ourselves[1] is our mirrorlist server. It's the backend that powers: http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/mirrorlist?repo=fedora-11arch=i386 And koji.fedoraproject.org, no? koji is a mod_python app. it doesnt run as a daemon at all. but it it all python. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: old torrents
On Wednesday 21 October 2009 02:23:28 pm Seth Vidal wrote: Hi, I'm working on some torrent statistics an I noticed that we still have fedora8 and fedora9 on the torrent. Would anyone cry if we deleted them from the torrent? No tears here. have at it Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: the datails of Missing Dependency
On Monday 19 October 2009 09:05:44 pm xiao li wrote: This is the detailed information about Missing Dependency when I built the srpms.BuildrootError: could not init mock buildroot, mock exited with status 30; see root.log for more information.The attachment is the root.log.Please do me a favour.Thanks. you seem to be missing perl bash and a few other essential packages from the buildroot. make sure that they are available via koji latest-pkg tag name package name Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Emergency Change Freeze Request
We notcied that there was no apache logging on cvs1. this is because the selinux policy was preventing apache from writing log files. For now i have set selinux to permissive mode until we can fix the policy correctly. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Emergency Change Freeze Request
On Monday 19 October 2009 09:07:59 pm Seth Vidal wrote: On Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Dennis Gilmore wrote: We notcied that there was no apache logging on cvs1. this is because the selinux policy was preventing apache from writing log files. For now i have set selinux to permissive mode until we can fix the policy correctly. +1 out of curiosity how long has the no logging been going on? long enough that the log files that were there are gone. my guess is since Date: Mon Sep 21 08:43:31 2009 -0500 when enforcing mode was turned on. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Emergency Change Freeze Request
On Monday 19 October 2009 09:55:50 pm Luke Macken wrote: On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 08:06:08PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: We notcied that there was no apache logging on cvs1. this is because the selinux policy was preventing apache from writing log files. For now i have set selinux to permissive mode until we can fix the policy correctly. What were the specific SELinux denials? I don't see any AVCs on cvs1, nor have I seen any since we flipped it to enforcing mode. How did you come to this conclusion? the bunch of httpd messages i got while tailing /var/log/audit/audit.log however looking at it now it doesnt seem related to logging. doing a graceful of httpd after setting enforcing to permissive enabled logs to work again. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [PATCH] Add a module for lftp package
On Thursday 15 October 2009 05:59:47 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 22:48 +, Jesse Keating wrote:
+++ b/modules/lftp/manifests/init.pp
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+class sigul {
+
+package { lftp:
+ensure = installed,
+}
--
Mike pointed out that this is wrong. It now reads:
class lftp::package {
package { lftp:
ensure = installed,
}
+1
+1 also
Dennis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [PATCH] Add sigul and lftp packages to compose hosts
On Thursday 15 October 2009 06:00:07 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
---
manifests/servergroups/compose.pp |2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/manifests/servergroups/compose.pp
b/manifests/servergroups/compose.pp index b2cb3ab..49c78f4 100644
--- a/manifests/servergroups/compose.pp
+++ b/manifests/servergroups/compose.pp
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ class composer {
include rsync::server
include mock
include git::package
+include sigul::package
+include lftp::package
# Firewall Rules,
$tcpPorts = [ 80, 8887, , 8889 ]
+1
+1 also
Dennis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
rpms/mldonkey/devel mldonkey.spec,1.7,1.8
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/mldonkey/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv13899
Modified Files:
mldonkey.spec
Log Message:
exlcudearch sparc64 s390 s390x no ocaml
Index: mldonkey.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/mldonkey/devel/mldonkey.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.7
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -u -p -r1.7 -r1.8
--- mldonkey.spec 25 Jul 2009 14:37:22 - 1.7
+++ mldonkey.spec 22 Sep 2009 19:21:11 - 1.8
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: mldonkey
Version: 3.0.0
-Release: 2%{?dist}
+Release: 3%{?dist}
Summary: Client for several P2P networks
License: GPLv2+
Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2
@@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ BuildRequires:librsvg2-devel = 2.4.0
BuildRequires: bzip2-devel
BuildRequires: ncurses-devel
BuildRequires: file-devel
+ExcludeArch: sparc64 s390 s390x
+
Requires: logrotate
# for kill_mldonkey
Requires: perl(LWP::UserAgent)
@@ -319,6 +321,9 @@ fi
%changelog
+* Tue Sep 22 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 3.0.0-3
+- ExlcudeArch sparc64 s390 s390x since they dont have ocaml
+
* Sat Jul 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 3.0.0-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_12_Mass_Rebuild
___
Fedora-ocaml-list mailing list
Fedora-ocaml-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ocaml-list
Re: Fedora 4 security updates
On Tuesday 22 September 2009 09:28:42 am Naveen Dhulipudi wrote: Hi, Could anyone please let me know if there are any updates, security patch releases for fedora 4 instance.If yes, Please let me know how to get alerts for these updates through email and where to subscribe. Fedora 4 has been completely unsupported since August 2006. you really should upgrade to a supported release. currently fedora 10 and 11 dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Fedora-security-list mailing list Fedora-security-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-security-list
Re: [PATCH] Enabling confirm-edit again for smolt
On Tuesday 25 August 2009 01:06:56 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
This had gotten disabled during a conversion process of making
mediawiki-ConfirmEdit a package I think These files will enable the math
based captcha again
+1
---
modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/README | 22 ++
.../mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/files/ConfirmEdit.php| 222
modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/manifests/init.pp|
13 ++
modules/mediawiki/manifests/init.pp|2 +-
4 files changed, 258 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/README
create mode 100644 modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/files/ConfirmEdit.php
create mode 100644 modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/manifests/init.pp
diff --git a/modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/README
b/modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/README new file mode 100644
index 000..b4f281e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/README
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+=
+mediawiki-ConfirmEdit
+=
+
+---
+Usage
+---
+
+The ConfirmEdit extension enables a simple text Captcha that will probably
+catch most bots. It was designed largely by Brion Vibber. The FancyCaptcha
and +reCAPTCHA addons create more complex image captchas.
+
+Captchas are a way of combating automated edits, helping to ensure that
wiki +edits are being made by real humans rather than bots. This can be
particularly +useful for reducing the problem of wiki spam, but captchas
reduce accessibility +and cause inconvenience to human users. In addition,
it will not completely +spam-proof your wiki (nor will it protect it from
human spammers). You may wish +to use this in conjunction with other
anti-spam features. Remember to clean up +any spam which might slip through
the net (keep an eye on your 'recent changes' +page). Captcha's can also be
used to foil automated login attempts that try to +guess passwords.
+
diff --git a/modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/files/ConfirmEdit.php
b/modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/files/ConfirmEdit.php new file mode 100644
index 000..0c33bc9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/modules/mediawiki-ConfirmEdit/files/ConfirmEdit.php
@@ -0,0 +1,222 @@
+?php
+
+
+/**
+ * Experimental captcha plugin framework.
+ * Not intended as a real production captcha system; derived classes
+ * can extend the base to produce their fancy images in place of the
+ * text-based test output here.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2005-2007 Brion Vibber br...@wikimedia.org
+ * http://www.mediawiki.org/
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+ * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
+ * (at your option) any later version.
+ *
+ * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ *
+ * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
+ * with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
+ * 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.
+ * http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
+ *
+ * @addtogroup Extensions
+ */
+
+if ( !defined( 'MEDIAWIKI' ) ) {
+ exit;
+}
+
+global $wgExtensionFunctions, $wgGroupPermissions;
+
+$wgExtensionFunctions[] = 'confirmEditSetup';
+$wgExtensionCredits['other'][] = array(
+ 'name' = 'ConfirmEdit',
+ 'author' = 'Brion Vibber',
+ 'svn-date' = '$LastChangedDate: 2008-07-02 23:09:26 + (Wed, 02 Jul
2008) $', + 'svn-revision' = '$LastChangedRevision: 36959 $',
+ 'url' = 'http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ConfirmEdit',
+ 'description' = 'Simple captcha implementation',
+ 'descriptionmsg' = 'captcha-desc',
+);
+
+/**
+ * The 'skipcaptcha' permission key can be given out to
+ * let known-good users perform triggering actions without
+ * having to go through the captcha.
+ *
+ * By default, sysops and registered bot accounts will be
+ * able to skip, while others have to go through it.
+ */
+$wgGroupPermissions['*']['skipcaptcha'] = false;
+$wgGroupPermissions['user' ]['skipcaptcha'] = false;
+$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['skipcaptcha'] = false;
+$wgGroupPermissions['bot' ]['skipcaptcha'] = true; // registered
bots +$wgGroupPermissions['sysop']['skipcaptcha'] = true;
+$wgAvailableRights[] = 'skipcaptcha';
+
+/**
+ * List of IP ranges to allow to skip the captcha, similar to the group
setting: + * $wgGroupPermission[...]['skipcaptcha'] = true
+ *
+ * Specific IP addresses or CIDR-style ranges may be used,
+ * for instance:
+ * $wgCaptchaWhitelistIP = array('192.168.1.0/24', '10.1.0.0/16');
+ */
+$wgCaptchaWhitelistIP = false;
+
+global $wgCaptcha,
Re: [PATCH] shared session data
On Tuesday 25 August 2009 03:25:39 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
My smolt change requires shared session data
can I get 2 +1's
---
manifests/servergroups/appRhel.pp |9 +
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/manifests/servergroups/appRhel.pp
b/manifests/servergroups/appRhel.pp index c249973..aba5fdf 100644
--- a/manifests/servergroups/appRhel.pp
+++ b/manifests/servergroups/appRhel.pp
@@ -34,6 +34,15 @@ class appRhel {
wikipath = smolt-wiki,
}
include mediawiki-confirmedit::confirmEdit
+mount { /srv/web/sessiondata:
+device =
ntap-fedora1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/vol/fedora/app/sessiondata, +
fstype = nfs,
+ensure = mounted,
+options = defaults,ro,soft,intr,
+atboot = true,
+require = File[/srv/web/sessiondata]
+}
+
}
# Firewall rules
+1
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
[Change Request] koji theming
Id like to update the koji theming i need to install the rpms from http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1629426 and apply a small hotfix to kojiweb https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1628 the impact is minimal and easily reversed. all changes are upstream. Ill be publishing the hg repos on fedorapeople later today for the theming rpms. can i get 2 +1's please signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [PATCH] Temporary setting for galgoci
On Monday 24 August 2009 05:08:37 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
---
manifests/servergroups/proxy.pp |3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/manifests/servergroups/proxy.pp
b/manifests/servergroups/proxy.pp index bdea7b6..70bbcf4 100644
--- a/manifests/servergroups/proxy.pp
+++ b/manifests/servergroups/proxy.pp
@@ -741,7 +741,8 @@ class proxy {
# Firewall Rules, allow HTTP traffic through
$tcpPorts = [ 80, 443, 873, 8080 ]
$udpPorts = []
-$custom = []
+$custom = ['-A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT',
+'-A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --sport 80 -j DROP']
iptables { /etc/sysconfig/iptables:
content = template(system/iptables-template.conf.erb),
+1
Dennis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/EL-4 perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,1.1,1.2
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/EL-4
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19753
Modified Files:
perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
Obsoletes the older perl-Network-IPv4Addr module
Index: perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/EL-4/perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 6 May 2007 15:47:46 - 1.1
+++ perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 24 Aug 2009 20:05:33 - 1.2
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Net-IPv4Addr
Version:0.10
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Release:3%{?dist}
Summary:Perl extension for manipulating IPv4 addresses
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{ve
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker), perl(Test::More)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
+Obsoletes: perl-Network-IPv4Addr 0.10-1
%description
Net::IPv4Addr provides functions for parsing IPv4 addresses both in traditional
@@ -53,6 +54,10 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%changelog
+* Mon Aug 24 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.10-3
+- Obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
+- no provides as code needs changing to use the new version
+
* Sat May 05 2007 Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal foolish[AT]guezz.net - 0.10-2
- Add missing build dependencies
- Fix License
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/EL-5 perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,1.1,1.2
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv20224
Modified Files:
perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
Obsolets perl-Network-IPv4Addr
Index: perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/EL-5/perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 6 May 2007 15:50:05 - 1.1
+++ perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 24 Aug 2009 20:06:49 - 1.2
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Net-IPv4Addr
Version:0.10
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Release:3%{?dist}
Summary:Perl extension for manipulating IPv4 addresses
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{ve
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker), perl(Test::More)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
+Obsoletes: perl-Network-IPv4Addr 0.10-1
%description
Net::IPv4Addr provides functions for parsing IPv4 addresses both in traditional
@@ -53,6 +54,10 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%changelog
+* Mon Aug 24 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.10-3
+- Obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
+- no provides as code needs changing to use the new version
+
* Sat May 05 2007 Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal foolish[AT]guezz.net - 0.10-2
- Add missing build dependencies
- Fix License
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/F-10 perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,1.2,1.3
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv20806
Modified Files:
perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
Index: perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/F-10/perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.2 -r1.3
--- perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 6 Mar 2008 14:58:30 - 1.2
+++ perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 24 Aug 2009 20:08:52 - 1.3
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Net-IPv4Addr
Version:0.10
-Release:3%{?dist}
+Release:4%{?dist}
Summary:Perl extension for manipulating IPv4 addresses
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{ve
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker), perl(Test::More)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
+Obsoletes: perl-Network-IPv4Addr 0.10-1
%description
Net::IPv4Addr provides functions for parsing IPv4 addresses both in traditional
@@ -53,6 +54,10 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%changelog
+* Mon Aug 24 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.10-4
+- Obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
+- no provides as code needs changing to use the new version
+
* Thu Mar 06 2008 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com - 0.10-3
- rebuild for new perl
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/F-11 perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,1.3,1.4
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv21289
Modified Files:
perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
* Mon Aug 24 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.10-3
- Obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
- no provides as code needs changing to use the new version
Index: perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/F-11/perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.3 -r1.4
--- perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 26 Feb 2009 23:10:59 - 1.3
+++ perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 24 Aug 2009 20:10:11 - 1.4
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Net-IPv4Addr
Version:0.10
-Release:4%{?dist}
+Release:5%{?dist}
Summary:Perl extension for manipulating IPv4 addresses
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{ve
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker), perl(Test::More)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
+Obsoletes: perl-Network-IPv4Addr 0.10-1
%description
Net::IPv4Addr provides functions for parsing IPv4 addresses both in traditional
@@ -53,6 +54,10 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%changelog
+* Mon Aug 24 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.10-5
+- Obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
+- no provides as code needs changing to use the new version
+
* Thu Feb 26 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 0.10-4
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/devel perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,1.4,1.5
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv21668
Modified Files:
perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
* Mon Aug 24 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.10-3
- Obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
- no provides as code needs changing to use the new version
Index: perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-IPv4Addr/devel/perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -p -r1.4 -r1.5
--- perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 26 Jul 2009 13:41:51 - 1.4
+++ perl-Net-IPv4Addr.spec 24 Aug 2009 20:11:31 - 1.5
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Net-IPv4Addr
Version:0.10
-Release:5%{?dist}
+Release:6%{?dist}
Summary:Perl extension for manipulating IPv4 addresses
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{ve
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker), perl(Test::More)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
+Obsoletes: perl-Network-IPv4Addr 0.10-1
%description
Net::IPv4Addr provides functions for parsing IPv4 addresses both in traditional
@@ -53,6 +54,10 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%changelog
+* Mon Aug 24 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.10-6
+- Obsoletes perl-Network-IPv4Addr
+- no provides as code needs changing to use the new version
+
* Sun Jul 26 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 0.10-5
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_12_Mass_Rebuild
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
Re: changing tabs to spaces in pager.py
My opinion is have at it. Fixing things is always welcome. If you can't commit a fix prepare a patch. Its a great way to be involved and start to help. Darren VanBuren onekop...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Aug 22, 2009, at 10:04 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: On Sat, 22 Aug 2009, Darren VanBuren wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I know that some of you dislike tabs, and when I was adding myself to pager.py, I found there were tabs in the HTML portion as opposed to spaces, and tmz pointed out that several other lines are indented with tabs. I know it's pretty standard for us to use spaces for indentation, but I wanted to check whether it's okay to change pager.py further than adding myself (which ricky approved of on IRC earlier today). This is correct, although at the moment unwritten. We prefer 4 spaces to a tab character. Or as Seth says Tabs are a lie. -Mike So what's your opinion on me changing it? Darren VanBuren onekop...@gmail.com http://theoks.net/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkqQJawACgkQBkMMSWb0YpYSJQCg4Ye64+aD7gHwsUWli2q9BCWR gg4AoJ1xFzGxF033bopaekxLcpPepj90 =euRS -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list -- Dennis Gilmore___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
[Change Request]
id like to make the following changes impact will be minimal /buildgroups is the only active service on buildsys.pfp.o where plague used to run. its only needed for mock building using epel targets so the increaded load will be insignificant. the change will be trasnparent to end users. the content is in place on /mnt/koji so its available to either hub. as well as kojipkgs i think it makes more sense to have buildsys be a cname to koji.fp.o rather than kojipkgs.fp.o diff --git a/configs/web/applications/kojiweb.conf.erb b/configs/web/applications/kojiweb.conf.erb index f6b35d4..cf4a868 100644 --- a/configs/web/applications/kojiweb.conf.erb +++ b/configs/web/applications/kojiweb.conf.erb @@ -88,4 +88,11 @@ Alias /static-repos /mnt/koji/static-repos/ Options Indexes FollowSymLinks /Directory +Alias /buildgroups /mnt/koji/buildgroups/ + +Directory /mnt/koji/buildgroups/ +Options Indexes FollowSymLinks +/Directory + + RewriteRule ^/packages(.+) http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages$1 [R=301,L] diff --git a/modules/bind/files/master/fedoraproject.org b/modules/bind/files/master/fedoraproject.org index 4b30336..93bc55b 100644 --- a/modules/bind/files/master/fedoraproject.org +++ b/modules/bind/files/master/fedoraproject.org @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ $TTL 3600 @INSOA ns1.fedoraproject.org. hostmaster.fedoraproject.org. ( -2009081201 ; Serial +2009081901 ; Serial 8H ; refresh 2H ; retry 4W ; expire @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ bodhi IN CNAME admin bu1 IN A 128.197.185.45 bugzIN CNAME wildcard bugz.stgIN CNAME admin.stg.fedoraproject.org. -buildsysIN CNAME serverbeach1.fedoraproject.org. +buildsysIN CNAME koji.fedoraproject.org. bzr IN CNAME git certmaster IN CNAME puppet capp1 INA 172.17.255.29 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [Change Request]
On Wednesday 19 August 2009 06:19:06 pm Jesse Keating wrote: On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 16:44 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: Both changes look of little impact from infrastructure side. Provisional +1 unless a release engineer says OH MY ZOD, didnt you think about Kryptonite? I don't know of any release engineering item that relies on buildsys. there is nothing. its only for buildsys-macros and buildsys-build packages for EL at this point. when RHEL5 goes away so can /buildgroups Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [Change Request] Update xz on the builders
On Wednesday 19 August 2009 08:36:21 pm Toshio Kuratomi wrote: A data corruption bug was found in the current xz package for certain files. The xz package was updated to a snapshot in Fedora and EPEL. We'd like to update the builders with the new xz to make sure we aren't producing packages with corrupted payloads. The corruption bug report is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517806 which includes confirmation that it fixes the bug and jnovy's recommendation to update the buildsystem. The EPEL-5 update is here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xz-4.999.8-0.10.beta.20090817git.el 5 Can I get two +1's for this? -Toshio +1 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: IPv6 for Fedora services?
On Monday 17 August 2009 09:33:15 am Matt Domsch wrote: Do we know if native IPv6 connectivity is available in any of our colo sites, or if we would need to use some form of tunnel? We would have to use tunnels. one or two of our sites may offer ipv6 but AFIAK the bulk do not. Dennis --Original Message-- From: Mike McGrath Sender: fedora-infrastructure-list-boun...@redhat.com To: Fedora Infrastructure ReplyTo: Fedora Infrastructure Subject: Re: IPv6 for Fedora services? Sent: Aug 17, 2009 10:01 AM On Mon, 17 Aug 2009, Jeff Garzik wrote: Is there any IPv6 plan for *.fedoraproject.org ? There is currently no plan. -Mike ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com www.dell.com/linux ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
[Proposal] have feature submitted before feature freeze
I have put forward for FESCo to consider this week a proposal to have feature proposals submitted and approved in advance of feature freeze. the proposal can be seen at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/234 there will be no shortening of development time. the idea is to have feature submission in well before feature freeze so that we can try and make sure all succeed. I think that Kevin Kofler's comments are fairly true in the ticket. the changes in the F-12 cycle have probably not been fully understood. but i still think it will be very valuable to us to make this change. I would like to get some feedback and improvements. Dennis 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: rawhide report: 20090729 changes
On Wednesday 29 July 2009 05:30:57 pm Quentin Armitage wrote: The report shows there is a new version of rpm, version rpm-4.7.1-2.fc11.i586. The previous version, announced in the rawhide report 20090722 was rpm-4.7.1.1.fc12.i686. This update appears to be going the wrong way, and it seems strange for an f12 version to be replaced by an f11 version. I noticed this because a yum update updated my rpm from 4.7.1.1.fc12.i686 to 4.7.1.2.fc11.i586. Are there other packages that are getting onto the Rawhide updates that are from earlier versions of Fedora, and inadvertently superseding the (later) Rawhide versions? it was done on purpose this is because the newer rpm version build in rawhide has a dependency on the new glibc. which needs the newer rpm with xz compression. we wanted to make sure that people would be able to update there systems so we tagged in the newer one from F-11 that provides xz support but doesnt need the newer glibc. Dennis 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
bash_history on x86-5
I just deleted my bas_history on x86-5 i typed my password on accident Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: koji buildroot inconsistencies? chain-build does not fix...
On Tuesday 21 July 2009 02:16:07 pm Ian Weller wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 03:13:15PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: How to fix this paradox? Just bump the release, recommit and retag. ummm no you need to wait for a new repo you can do a koji wait repo then your chain build for the remain two packages. Dennis 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: Mock issue with ifarch BuildRequires
Em Domingo 12 Julho 2009, às 06:38:31 pm, Gianluca Sforna escreveu:
I am trying to run the tests included in the BuildBot package during
the RPM build, and one of the tests requires darcs, which is built in
Fedora ExclusiveArch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc alpha.
Now, I'm adding to buildbot's spec[1] file an ifarch like:
%ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc alpha
# darcs ExclusiveArchs
BuildRequires: darcs
%endif
but it seems darcs is never installed in the buildroot [2]
am I just doing something stupid or there's a bug somewhere?
[1]
http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/buildbot/devel/buildbot.spec?view=
log [2]
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1470380name=root.log
What arech are you building the srpm on? if its not one of the ifarch'd
arches it wont be in the BR's for the srpm. thats part of why we create the
sroms on th ebuild arch in koji.
Dennis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Fedora 11 / EPEL 5 MD5 Issue
On Thursday 16 July 2009 09:51:32 am Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 16:32, Rick L. Vinyard, Jr.rviny...@cs.nmsu.edu wrote: I've built the following package on Fedora 10 and 11 in mock without any problems. http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/libMini-9.0.3-2.fc11.src.rpm However, when I try and build for EPEL 5 using mock on a F11 machine I get the following in root.log: DEBUG util.py:256: error: unpacking of archive failed on file /builddir/build/SOURCES/MINI-9.0.3.zip;4a5f3532: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch Any suggestions? I did the following two days ago (all on a F11 host) : - rebuild the F11 srpm in a F10 mock chroot - rebuild the F10 srpm in a EL5 mock chroot F11 and F10 rpm versions are compatible, and so are F10 and EL5. Totally suboptimal, but it works, and I didn't have time to search more thoroughly for a better solution :) just for this type of thing i added a new script to fedora-packager rpmbuild- md5 it creates rpms/srpms with the old style hashes. its a simple bash script that is a wrapper around rpmbuild with the defines for old style hashes. the fedora-packager with it is in updates-testing. Dennis 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: Fedora 11 / EPEL 5 MD5 Issue
On Thursday 16 July 2009 12:07:42 pm Doug Warner wrote: On 07/16/2009 12:42 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: On Thursday 16 July 2009 09:51:32 am Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 16:32, Rick L. Vinyard, Jr.rviny...@cs.nmsu.edu wrote: I've built the following package on Fedora 10 and 11 in mock without any problems. http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/libMini-9.0.3-2.fc11.src.rpm However, when I try and build for EPEL 5 using mock on a F11 machine I get the following in root.log: DEBUG util.py:256: error: unpacking of archive failed on file /builddir/build/SOURCES/MINI-9.0.3.zip;4a5f3532: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch Any suggestions? I did the following two days ago (all on a F11 host) : - rebuild the F11 srpm in a F10 mock chroot - rebuild the F10 srpm in a EL5 mock chroot F11 and F10 rpm versions are compatible, and so are F10 and EL5. Totally suboptimal, but it works, and I didn't have time to search more thoroughly for a better solution :) just for this type of thing i added a new script to fedora-packager rpmbuild- md5 it creates rpms/srpms with the old style hashes. its a simple bash script that is a wrapper around rpmbuild with the defines for old style hashes. the fedora-packager with it is in updates-testing. Would it be possible to update the mock configs with these settings as well? -Doug It is nothing to do with what is in the mock configs. the issue is that if you create a srpm on F-11 or rawhide then it uses internal hashing that is not understood by anything previous. F-10 uses md5 but understands the new style also. inside the mock chroot they use what is the default for that release. Dennis 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: fedora-cvs flag could not be set
On Wednesday 15 July 2009 09:31:31 am Miroslav Suchý wrote: I just wanted to set fedora-cvs flag to ? in my bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491331 But it is grey (i.e disabled) and I could not change it. I can edit: fedora‑review fedora_requires_release_note needinfo but not fedora-cvs We recently removed the automatic @rh permissions for fedora flag setting a side effect of how acls sync to bugzilla caused every redhat person in fedorabugs lo lose there flag access. ive just run a manual process to add the permissions back. if anyone else thinks they should have access to the flags and doesn't. please apply for access to fedorabugs in fas Dennis 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: mailing list pgp signatures...
On Friday 10 July 2009 05:47:52 pm Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: g wrote: one of reasons that i use a pgp sig is that it maintains my idenity and prevents someone from trying to send an email as me, which has happened on this very list. How does it maintain your identity when we can not verify that you signed the message. Without having your public key, all we know is that someone signed the message. So, your signing your messages sent to the mailing list does nothing except cause problems for others. David, one way to solve the problem is to write a filter rule that sends g's messages directly to trash. Mikkel Last time this came up i set up a filter for the user that was posting with signed emails with an unposted key after i polietly asked the user to post the key and it was rudely refused to do so to send the users email to /dev/null Not posting your gpg key and irritating people who can help you is a quick way to make sure that you wont get any help. Please be nice to everyone and post to a public keyserver your gpg key if you intend to sign email. its a common courtesy. Yes it does not allow us to verify that the email was from you since we dont trust your key. all it does is allows us to verify that they key matches what is posted. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: noarch subpackages
On Wednesday 08 July 2009 08:59:43 am Rick L. Vinyard, Jr. wrote: What is the effect on non-Fedora and older distributions (pre F10) if I mark a subpackage (such as documentation) with BuildArch: noarch? the package will attempt to build as noarch only. you cant to it for F-9 and since F-9 is EOL in two days dont. for EL-4 and EL-5 you could probably if the BuildArch out Dennis 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: Building packages for EPEL
On Saturday 04 July 2009 03:23:59 am Gregory Hosler wrote: SmootherFrOgZ wrote: On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Gregory Hoslerghos...@redhat.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dennis Gilmore wrote: EPEL is now using koji to build instead of plague. please make sure that you update th common directory in your checkout to pick up the needed changes to submit builds. I was able to do builds for EL-4/EL-5 using koji. thanks a lot! Bodhi support will come early next week to issue updates. Please let us know as and when make update will be available. Until then, what is the alternative? http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates ? make update goes to bodhi as well as http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates; which is bodhi UI. epel-releng will be taking care of the updates for now. So if I understand things ... once I have I clean make build I can either use bodhi, or drop an email to epel-rel...@lists.fedoraproject.org ? (I'm more inclined to use the web interface, but I just want to clarify the alternatives :-) Dropping an email to epel-releng is not an option. you need to either create a sn update via make update or https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ you should file a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/newticket making sure to select the epel component if you need something tagged into the override tags so you can build against it. Dennis 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: Getting MD5 sum mismatch errors unpacking rawhide on FC9
On Wednesday 01 July 2009 03:43:31 pm Philip A. Prindeville wrote: I have an FC9 (updated) x86_64 install, and I just tried to pull down proftpd.src from rawhide-source. I'm seeing the following: [phil...@builder SPECS]$ rpm -vv -i /tmp/proftpd-1.3.2-2.fc11.src.rpm D: == /tmp/proftpd-1.3.2-2.fc11.src.rpm D: Expected size: 2471936 = lead(96)+sigs(1284)+pad(4)+data(2470552) D: Actual size: 2471936 D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Packages rdonly mode=0x0 D: locked db index /var/lib/rpm/Packages D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Pubkeys rdonly mode=0x0 warning: /tmp/proftpd-1.3.2-2.fc11.src.rpm: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 signature: NOKEY, key ID d22e77f2 D: added source package [0] D: found 1 source and 0 binary packages D: Expected size: 2471936 = lead(96)+sigs(1284)+pad(4)+data(2470552) D: Actual size: 2471936 D: InstallSourcePackage: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 signature: NOKEY, key ID d22e77f2 proftpd-1.3.2-2.fc11 D: == Directories not explicitly included in package: D: 0 /home/philipp/rpmbuild/SOURCES/ D: 1 /home/philipp/rpmbuild/SPECS/ D: == warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root D: undo 100664 1 ( 0, 0) 2457498 /home/philipp/rpmbuild/SOURCES/proftpd-1.3.2.tar.bz2;4a4bc949 GZDIO: 301 reads, 2465792 total bytes in 0.008182 secs error: unpacking of archive failed on file /home/philipp/rpmbuild/SOURCES/proftpd-1.3.2.tar.bz2;4a4bc949: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Pubkeys D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Packages D: May free Score board((nil)) [phil...@builder SPECS]$ What am I missing here? rpm in F-11 and newer uses a sha256sum and mot md5sum the rpm is incompatible. you would need to get the rpm from F-10 updates to install it Dennis 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: Travelling
On Sunday 21 June 2009 11:35:24 am Toshio Kuratomi wrote: I'm going to be going to Brazil for FISL and a FUDCon this week. I'm not sure what my Internet situation is going to be but if anything comes up send me a message and I'll work on it once I get the message. -Toshio I will be there also. Internet access should be ok. but there will be periods that we are disconnected. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
rpms/ocaml/F-11 ocaml.spec,1.52,1.53
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/ocaml/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17563
Modified Files:
ocaml.spec
Log Message:
we build 32 bit sparc sparcv9 change ExclusiveArch to suit
Index: ocaml.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/ocaml/F-11/ocaml.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.52
retrieving revision 1.53
diff -u -p -r1.52 -r1.53
--- ocaml.spec 2 Jun 2009 07:49:45 - 1.52
+++ ocaml.spec 18 Jun 2009 15:33:24 - 1.53
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
Name: ocaml
Version:3.11.0
-Release:3%{?dist}
+Release:4%{?dist}
Summary:Objective Caml compiler and programming environment
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ Requires: gcc
Requires: ncurses-devel
Requires: gdbm-devel
Provides: ocaml(compiler) = %{version}
-ExclusiveArch: alpha armv4l %{ix86} ia64 x86_64 ppc sparc ppc64
+ExclusiveArch: alpha armv4l %{ix86} ia64 x86_64 ppc sparcv9 ppc64
%define _use_internal_dependency_generator 0
%define __find_requires %{SOURCE4} -c -f %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/ocamlobjinfo
@@ -444,6 +444,9 @@ fi
%changelog
+* Thu Jun 18 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 3.11.0-4
+- we build 32 bit sparc sparcv9
+
* Tue Jun 2 2009 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com - 3.11.0-3
- Move dllgraphics.so into runtime package (RHBZ#468506).
___
Fedora-ocaml-list mailing list
Fedora-ocaml-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ocaml-list
rpms/ocaml-facile/F-11 ocaml-facile.spec,1.8,1.9
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/ocaml-facile/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv31876
Modified Files:
ocaml-facile.spec
Log Message:
ExcludeArch sparc64 no ocaml there
Index: ocaml-facile.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/ocaml-facile/F-11/ocaml-facile.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.8
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -p -r1.8 -r1.9
--- ocaml-facile.spec 26 Feb 2009 07:03:40 - 1.8
+++ ocaml-facile.spec 19 Jun 2009 11:00:47 - 1.9
@@ -6,10 +6,11 @@
# no ocaml (#438562)
ExcludeArch: ppc64
%endif
+ExcludeArch: sparc64
Name: ocaml-facile
Version: 1.1
-Release: 8%{?dist}
+Release: 8%{?dist}.1
Summary: OCaml library for constraint programming
Summary(fr): Librairie OCaml de programmation par contraintes
@@ -112,6 +113,9 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%{_libdir}/ocaml/facile/*.mli
%changelog
+* Fri Jun 19 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 1.1-8.1
+-ExcludeArch sparc64 no ocaml there
+
* Wed Feb 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 1.1-8
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
___
Fedora-ocaml-list mailing list
Fedora-ocaml-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ocaml-list
Re: Changing the default 32-bit x86 arch for Fedora 12 (#2)
On Wednesday 17 June 2009 05:00:38 pm Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 01:52:26PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: - Build all packages for i686 (this requires cmov) This cuts out AMD Geode ... and for what ... P4 2.4Ghz Athlon 3400+Core2Duo E6850 Atom N270 march=i686/ -1.1% +2.0% +0.9% +0.6% mtune=generic march=i586/ +0.3% -0.3% -0.2% +1.3% mtune=atom march=i686/ -1.5% +1.2% +0.5% +1.7% mtune=atom This just doesn't look worthwhile at all. My proposal is that we actually start to 'downgrade' x86, start compiling for baseline i386, and try to support people running Fedora on really old hardware, through projects like the Minimal Platform feature. Sounds like a perfect target as a secondary arch. there is no reason why we cant support the older hardware as a community based effort of those interested in it. the primary arches are never going to satisfy everyone's itch but we leave the door open to do it through initiatives like secondary arches. The hardest part and the thing thats slowed things down so far is bootstrapping a new arch. its much much simpler for a x86 based arch as there is a baseline already bootstrapped. Dennis 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: Changing the default 32-bit x86 arch for Fedora 12
On Monday 15 June 2009 03:31:17 pm Jon Ciesla wrote: Seth Vidal wrote: On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Jon Ciesla wrote: BTW are those new VIA netbooks SSE2-capable? Additionally, what will this do to RHEL? I can't imagine RHEL customers being too happy about this for RHEL7(?), and if i386 would still be in RHEL, it would worry me that it would only be a secondary arch in Fedora. . . This is not relevant for fedora's decisions. -sv I'm not sure I understand why not. Are you saying that if RedHat decided that RHEL7 was to support Sparc , there'd be no interest in making that a primary arch? considering RHEL ships on ia64 and s390x which only one of them is a secondary arch. it would likely remain a secondary arch. Realistically the one arch i see being promoted to primary would be arm. Dennis 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: Bad cvs commit
On Monday 15 June 2009 07:30:13 am Xavier Lamien wrote: We currently having a bad commit into cvs pkgs dir : http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/?root=pkgs against the package openscada. Actually, this dir has write access due to group membership on packager group. If an cvsadmin can have a look and fix this, that would be great. ive removed the extra directories. packages access is needed to ensure all users can commit. access is not controlled via the filesystem but via the acls setup in cvs. Ill look over them today. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: rpm -qa or yum list installed sans version numbers?
On Saturday 13 June 2009 04:55:59 pm Scott Beamer wrote:
I'm trying to accomplish either.
I've done it before but I forgot how.
I previously was able to find this information via a Google search but
today I've come up empty.
If you know how, please share. :)
Thanks.
Scott
rpm -qa --qf=%{name}\n
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: [PATCH] Add proxy1.stg to staging separation rules.
On Tuesday 09 June 2009 04:24:01 pm Ricky Zhou wrote: --- configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb b/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb index 0b33ff0..45bb9ee 100644 --- a/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb +++ b/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ -A INPUT -s 10.8.34.114 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A INPUT -s 10.8.34.99 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A INPUT -s 10.8.34.116 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited +-A INPUT -s 10.8.34.83 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited % end % # SSH why are youremoving the three hosts to add 1? if you were just adding a host would you not have a single + line? not 3 - lines and one + -1 for now Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [PATCH] Add proxy1.stg to staging separation rules.
On Tuesday 09 June 2009 04:49:05 pm Ricky Zhou wrote: On 2009-06-09 04:43:46 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: On Tuesday 09 June 2009 04:24:01 pm Ricky Zhou wrote: --- configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb b/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb index 0b33ff0..45bb9ee 100644 --- a/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb +++ b/configs/system/iptables-template.conf.erb @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ -A INPUT -s 10.8.34.114 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A INPUT -s 10.8.34.99 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A INPUT -s 10.8.34.116 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited +-A INPUT -s 10.8.34.83 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited % end % # SSH why are youremoving the three hosts to add 1? if you were just adding a host would you not have a single + line? not 3 - lines and one + -1 for now Those aren't removals, they're dashes that were already part of the lines :-) Thanks, Ricky indeed going back now i see it. stupid computers, and there stupid owners. sorry for the noise, nothing to see here. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Reminder: no new Fedora 9 CVS branches
Hi All, As Fedora 11 is released on Tuesday June 9th there will be no new CVS branches allowed for F-9 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy/EOL lists the policy in effect. This means that F-9 is now in a maintenance only cycle, with EOL fast approaching, the exact EOL date will be set at the FESCo meeting this week. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-devel-announce mailing list fedora-devel-annou...@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-announce-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [PATCH] Re-enable rawhide compose.
On Sunday 07 June 2009 10:41:33 pm Nigel Jones wrote: +1 +1 - Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com wrote: Massive rawhide for start of F12 finally finished. Also increase the number of random chars for mktemp and ensure it worked before continuing. --- configs/build/rawhide |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/configs/build/rawhide b/configs/build/rawhide index eab9097..4a90bb3 100644 --- a/configs/build/rawhide +++ b/configs/build/rawhide @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ # rawhide compose mailto=jkeat...@fedoraproject.org -#15 6 * * * masher TMPDIR=`mktemp -d /tmp/rawhide.X`; cd $TMPDIR; git clone -n git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/releng; cd releng; git checkout -b rawhide-stable; LANG=en_US.UTF-8 ./scripts/buildrawhide $(date +\%Y\%m\%d); sudo -u ftpsync /usr/local/bin/update-fullfilelist fedora +15 6 * * * masher TMPDIR=`mktemp -d /tmp/rawhide.XX` cd $TMPDIR; git clone -n git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/releng; cd releng; git checkout -b rawhide-stable; LANG=en_US.UTF-8 ./scripts/buildrawhide $(date +\%Y\%m\%d); sudo -u ftpsync /usr/local/bin/update-fullfilelist fedora -- 1.5.5.6 ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [PATCH] Updated new staging hosts in ssh_known_keys
On Friday 05 June 2009 12:42:41 pm Mike McGrath wrote: Can I get 2 +1's --- modules/ssh/files/ssh_known_hosts |5 +++-- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/modules/ssh/files/ssh_known_hosts b/modules/ssh/files/ssh_known_hosts index d99fbc8..5ab5a25 100644 --- a/modules/ssh/files/ssh_known_hosts +++ b/modules/ssh/files/ssh_known_hosts @@ -5,7 +5,8 @@ app4,10.8.34.48 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEA0cbc0AhUL0vAhKZz7QrPNeJ/o8y1 app5,192.168.1.13 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAywNK0LXCaimjLd094G72QVFGGrNA6IdUtVaO5RGXMt0eQeK 3o59jaSdgIwz1aDw7jbvP8Iu28kQj9du/RkGh9RGOY2kn2wwHru3D58pyXK23KdWyZwlvkSwz8vE BySzSghXbh4Jiglzr6wdSzkLNwio6xD8GqnJX9iO+dyWjQ3E/v1RQo42kX62GcaUob3jFi49Yhox u064oupuq5PL5qZvfDH6QMWhW7rxQj+a7by5YgBU6UAGwND46arxhag7x3t+9PghKTx725dr+hw8 XhGoW3MrKnElh6Pj97B0qPOVcXAoveZUeaPTmvBeusR97Uoulpc5Q0Ctovj99xVvEtQ== app6,192.168.1.24 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAzfWOx94ZhtetSGGE543cyMvdnP6jLtAgma3HbSZdX3/NaGN 6lvIdbPwiaR78FH3XTiZHnzujgGZJ+wybfaYHsxkNOHiEhgYGdlLYzGVppQHLzUDoGE9fYCj3EVB 1Y5JXfgaFCVMFEWe7uTVHWsSgB9iUzkuLWjfTL7+J/BNyCfWPv50Gnh6YELwjHuTtRX8Wl+Gbj4A At/J0aWqAgima940+9oEPxnk5QzXOkVym0EXeNoBNTEEU/SlvNEy/u85wE+/xfsa6WgqtZI/KlM4 LXveRkZcH5Zwn0aK7W7j9uzs1KTHxnjfb3pA4FcfHW1zxtliaM4EHvKyNpFzViASWQQ== bapp1,10.8.34.124 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAvuD479APThoqX12HxbXfN80C4J3aN7+2X/oVF+un5tIG21D wRfPuJu/9uJKJM72X9zGAI9/DGVLyRPtzQOoBWA75N2NQjR2RKTJc2Jcl4/HVr98UN9bAVqgGU50 OpONsgbncP4yadRLEkeLFYA6Bn5p/PhIrJ1TSYT0Vr9RcLy0GINqor3aMAICRYlRUrsWeCBnue7X RAsvWg5O7DX3bVf9Rwu4HQpIpvDzzXDvX33DWJUbN7Q8Lgb+1cyUsYh37eMeo79evj4VeMpOykDM L4TGcmjkbF4hkt5kJJwrQSjaqVMtWeB6bDDX5zbYhuuCwCoYGA6WeDJJpv8M1d79I0Q== -app1.stg,10.8.34.113 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAxYavmpopcIbcLS8m3hcqLt9UBsmHH5M9kJ6/j+dzJ2VlSN+ 204xfafIBo1iHspppK8ctkN1899V7JyCnIqOYDWQd5Q98Xbum8fn5oaRjHL+AlbAFAh8zH1nxr0h gDRVZCahqIFJeWospzXaEbmCBG52VZJkp3vlA5endOUjFML/YkJpoXfjND3+rL4ZweaeW202OH7t ixQV8uGGQTlbzvAt2zpeO3D0ATKES9efMCH+DUOKk7Tvrpr2oqiiqkPMZBzOyhsfhLXKcxrnKluj 1v1/ZtqOeyP8QK1lvZ9MohLRor/y3v9D3ci0ifwPVCK2egL2hz2/PDtdQ5tvbAblVLw== +app1.stg,10.8.34.113 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEA3q1llw6x3Iuoym0SHEZnMYG87/g+zF49rnxPwnd7En1Kcu0 aIACw8DxmgDpToiOYPwPNDGWyPEsnyGNVC5slxGnlmsLQP3BZ8ZCgAhQNLg5+QyGNjgzDRHLaUH8 e+g9Av4oz17Sudw/kfv+ZcU/YRw8nfkQBZMtoORZF6x+D1fuME/HtcVFkS/GQNjUsea/iU30gypF O2b0r6VR/A4xQ6Nbvr11zsx+5R0/lWNbk1ODAVyBTXFbk2VxF3g/MYV7S+9R2ggoWZsNWsvgCam0 /dGruMG1vIGiql8XIfIX1IeBizVDZJOY4lWVM0HpndZypSPQwt1ZW9YNtek+EYTLv8Q== +app2.stg,10.8.34.114 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAol7fqrP+11Wb142bCLZ2YWfW3JQTCKeJSTwvN06V+KjMTb4 abi9t7JnVCcJKUrEt94rVIE/fNfbUMxTpSNX0wuE38aFavfMuYUZ2Fvp47UOESVNZLSC3VvpoCQm QA1+7HmuPwwvRsFFrtjGnQdF/h04Gu7E7ucdMnxVuVRIdEOuCkUU8cDpYmyIa7dbrYh2XZHw+Ry6 rIt+szZcQqxJ0b/cOHPkQDgX7JaGGXRX0M3qI+/MYGdtrJVDE29G9Cu/sIP0mHfgY+bwKbomg8Dr +MNc2rpDnvsxjVnTVPle8IxnDRGAZQl9FxbiEwtw8iYwpeTct06ZHTuBMhncJqcanrQ== asterisk1,192.168.1.34 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEA9K8imSdywSbQv9twrVRUA9zVtUeDQAa6sTXK+y0zz3Ct7L+ 6YtyonprgXA42JcRdg5WiKsmcTDC9T2GSc4GvyKqXvmaZN5V7Ry608vHDWyv639Y8r9IjMbSIEGb Su3Q8WpbxYYgqQ5PE8pWRi7Qu3/hTNU49y+sQ5qPHjZ7Y/0QHMnQDkn1xWdaUdq8ahkkDAECIUU1 5Cmj7ClRO01V+T+sP0VitsCaa3T2RfDsmxEtnCr9e0dG9jovalfO1aEvzpstClOzYoxLvr32hxm1 qHMr5wxmSUc1ymLL6Llil1oTJ8WyCimGlZFMSU0HkRohbzPGdV3YfOp+AKj6CEI67IQ== asterisk2,192.168.1.36 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEA2+kJvYuTDFEkKVAiohgA0G1m5InxoVdqaHqkl9NWQIDsebL Ee0wvfGEs83APEEqUNOL+TarC9B5vR0XowhGiekuHkSXYD0U/T+GGLOk9PCqsWEYCkeNPED38cGp EkO5tmM5rNy4Ol0CMQ7t7lFJCTZtgKc/C5IBPiuouDw4Sfxag3Yj2P8IPRQ49zY73p/NqyTvc3mg fxnJB7gqzh91bsE7DINuhD82dryYVrXrqlT1DVR++B7HdiWX44kAQE0l6BD4VcszfBJ5Mg+dGP/z 7swiIbRTgQ4ZiOefyiHwC6iLoEs17Hq35CJOUpZLYo26wDrp9UBIlti78ZrtZVbeCVw== backup1,10.8.34.219 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAwYSCsVH8hFlBsGDYw1FzsQEA98EwU25gJMhzyNir8QkWTPz oaZ5ncD0PY1jRAWc4ye8fCzzgsre8knwqyDrCEz3LLJkSEspELsuBNT7F5c4XsON5uS57W7Nufr5 pf18ePXUbztLVdHhzx5xIuRXpW3UrI8qcxTeYnfsh4LMaofCDer60KvFQ/9oUHAV//pIiUc8hKKS nkjjdha12mBrTuTXfg5sslLReugcyv3zYQNrQmG/B1hwI1gMcf3gHUccJ+Cm648pErnSh26Tl1rz is5p/ipSehM68eIsfRdz2vMwEY4jeA++yJ+JiqpPgzrd1IoGo1oAH61fPUVz+lLYahw== @@ -46,7 +47,7 @@ ppc7,10.8.34.230 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEA0CLk4k56ZKw+bDUd7cmSbrG5aes ppc8,10.8.34.231 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAqPy1UptflYSQQB7lrFlp5YY+KY1jJTLmNEB5mMI0lfqlrtI pOLdh45VcAZCWtUNG1DifDsO66Zdv10syo/8X98nP0MLd2yLnpZdA9I4GflSO/CAqRGNNqRI7pXQ r7J/JpiMBJV16qF6WCn2QXsDj+nX7nrVVCKqyontkksrypdqqS2S9c9kTCDihyZ6gBM0oyTFx1By qPlMzleMcsGX2xaoEcjmrQXIEjrLLuB7zU+e5mhq0io0JtZXTfdb5pWu/hGHwvIt7qUOjl+y5DeU dRQ1/kceIbnZHP9Fz59g/BOS8kSlZj1Fpy6Ybc+6R+hwfCWiMnHjz6FkYRtxPa0ARFw== ppc9,10.8.34.232 ssh-rsa B3NzaC1yc2EBIwAAAQEAx3efirQRHCKYgZSEbxti7NekcalP5gECICqx/bBYsLm8zgF 7n5mzd/vrGBz/XKffAo48nPRQM06tB4begynFwuussDVw+wtMO7mAO0DPcHcD2qrDXg0qJt9voHI 1JO2aUue5qo8N2KSCP/geVsTH5qjsRDu+ZYkmYt+0/G/Rz3Usvn90+WkyI++s68enSEl9bVw5G9w ydweUXhPuJMIaD+z/+LDfUSv8CyZJWebDCd+BJY0p5yavULtA2ptcDR852roHy+84K2PBYmnTSdy
Re: Change Request backup1
On Friday 05 June 2009 12:44:27 pm Mike McGrath wrote: We've got a tech on site that needs to take backup1 down to install an SAS adapter and new tape drive. You may remember this was requested before, we didn't have the right cable / card on site so the request was approved but the change wasn't made. 2+1's? +1 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [PATCH] the new package name is perl-DateManip
On Friday 05 June 2009 02:23:41 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
I should explain this better, I want to change it because it's causing
some issues in staging, but it will cause this package to get updated on
bapp1. Should be low risk.
-Mike
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Mike McGrath wrote:
---
manifests/services/maps.pp |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/manifests/services/maps.pp b/manifests/services/maps.pp
index 72d498c..f4d2934 100644
--- a/manifests/services/maps.pp
+++ b/manifests/services/maps.pp
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ class maps {
package { python-basemap:
ensure = present
}
-package { perl-Date-Manip:
+package { perl-DateManip:
ensure = present
}
}
--
1.5.5.6
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
+1
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Action requested: check dist tags and conditionals
On Thursday 04 June 2009 05:01:49 pm Peter Robinson wrote:
Can someone suggest how I should do this? I'm not sure who put this in
my spec file!
# for eggs
%if 0%{?fedora} = 8
BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel
%else
BuildRequires: python-setuptools
%endif
Is it safe to drop the conditional now and always expect
python-setup-devel to be there?
If you're not building for EPEL 4/5, yes.
Do EPEL pick up the fedora = 8 conditional?
Peter
epel defines a %{rhel} macro to 4 or 5 when rhel6 comes whenever that is
hopefully it will have defined in redhat-release the macros defineing %{rhel} =
6
probably a better way to do the above example is
%if 0%{?fedora} = 8 || 0%{?rhel} = 5
BuildRequires: python-setuptools
%else
BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel
%endif
that way if the macros are not defined the newer package is required not the
older way.
Dennis
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: [PATCH] Added hosted-content group to secondary1
On Thursday 04 June 2009 02:05:12 pm Mike McGrath wrote:
---
.../nodes/secondary1.fedora.phx.redhat.com.pp |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/manifests/nodes/secondary1.fedora.phx.redhat.com.pp
b/manifests/nodes/secondary1.fedora.phx.redhat.com.pp index
0b98229..04701bf 100644
--- a/manifests/nodes/secondary1.fedora.phx.redhat.com.pp
+++ b/manifests/nodes/secondary1.fedora.phx.redhat.com.pp
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
node secondary1{
-$groups='sysadmin-main,sysadmin-noc,alt-sugar,alt-k12linux,altvideos'
+
$groups='sysadmin-main,sysadmin-noc,alt-sugar,alt-k12linux,altvideos,hosted
-content' include global
include fas::fas
include secondaryMirror
+1
Dennis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: mock and sha256 rpms
On Thursday 28 May 2009 10:49:57 am Mike McLean wrote: If you use mock for building, then you may be in the position of having the main system rpm use sha256 checksums (e.g. on F11) but create chroots that contain an older rpm that does not. If you create a source rpm using the newer rpm and pass it to mock to build in a chroot with an older rpm, you will get an error like the following: DEBUG util.py:256: error: unpacking of archive failed on file /builddir/build/SOURCES/INIT.2008-02-02.tgz;4a1e5c21: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch DEBUG util.py:319: Child returncode was: 1 I think the simplest way to work around this is to have mock pass --nomd5 to rpm when installing the srpm in the chroot. Of course, this is dropping an integrity check, so could possibly add a check outside the chroot to verify this data. Granted, I'm not sure what the best way to do that is. Thoughts? Concerns? -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list Makefile.common has # to make srpms on F-11 and newer for older releases use old hashes # F-10's rpm supports both styles F-9 is the only current release # outside of rhel that needs old hasnes ifeq ($(DISTVAR),rhel) RPM_DEFINES := $(RPM_DEFINES) \ --define _source_filedigest_algorithm md5 \ --define _binary_filedigest_algorithm md5 endif ifeq ($(DISTVAL),9) RPM_DEFINES := $(RPM_DEFINES) \ --define _source_filedigest_algorithm md5 \ --define _binary_filedigest_algorithm md5 endif this will allow you to create useable srpms with make srpm for scratch building Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Change Freeze
On Wednesday 27 May 2009 04:38:13 pm Mike McGrath wrote: I'd like to clean up some old plague cruft on ppc2 (which has started throwing storage warnings) rm -rf /mnt/build/builder_work/* +1's? +1 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Change Request - Stop puppet on releng2 for the night.
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 20:30:55 Jesse Keating wrote: I want to start the rawhide compose early, since I'm done tagging/signing things for today, so that it will finish maybe in time for me to compose out pre-RCs from it for more intensive testing tomorrow. To do this, I need to modify the cron job that kicks off rawhide on releng2, and stop the puppet service from updating that cron job for the evening. I'll turn on puppet again in my morning. +1 from me signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Fedora 3, 4 and 6 - Remote Upgrade Advice?
On Thursday 02 April 2009 09:20:32 am Mark Haney wrote: Gabriel - IP Guys wrote: Dear All, Thank you for reading my message. I have to upgrade three linux boxes, that are FC3,4 and 6. Now, the problem that I have is that these machines have other services running on them, and I do not want to break anything. All three servers are in two collocation facilities, and I believe that the safest method, is to move all services off from the machines, and also remove all software to make the machines as stock as possible. I then plan to run yum upgrade a few times until I'm up to date with the repo, and then follow that with a yum upgrade - rinse, and repeat until I'm at FC8 - I'll wait until 11 is in beta before I move forward to FC9. I would appreciate any help or comments that you have. I'm not sure I would do 'yum upgrade'. But, with the systems being remote I don't know what other options there are on systems that old. I've got several systems I've upgraded (via media) from FC2 up to F9 without trouble. you can setup grub with the initrd and kernel image from the installer. you will need to pass all the arguments that you need on the boot line to get to the point that you can connect via vnc. including password since you are going over the internet. then you could do an install using install media. I have done this in the past. you only get one shot at the install. especially if you do a clean install. Dennis -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Konqueror uses Adobe Reader rather than Okular...
On Thursday 02 April 2009 10:13:36 am Linuxguy123 wrote: Yesterday I installed Adobe Reader because I needed to fill out an interactive PDF form. Today when I view a PDF in Konqueror it is using Adobe Reader rather than Okular. I want Konqueror to use Okular, not Adobe Reader. If I open a PDF in Dolphin, it uses Okular. How do I set Konqueror to use Okular rather than Adobe Reader ? Thanks Last i tried okular allowed me to fill in pdf forms. Dennis -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
More auth options
So doing a liitle looking around I cane across some options that look interesting, the following options would mean you need to physically have something to login. yubikey http://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey/ It would require a pam module and for us to setup a server for managing keys. it looks to be fairly low cost. it would implement a 2 facter authentication. etoken http://www.aladdin.com/etoken/devices/pro-usb.aspx it moves the public key from your hard drive to something you physically need to have ubikey is max USD$25 where the etoken is probably at least USD$30. I would think that with yubikey we could work out a deal with them to get a discount in return for us being a case study/prominent user of there product. all of the software for yubikey AFAICT is open source. some of it would require packaging. Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Pycon people
On Thursday 26 March 2009 11:29:54 pm Seth Vidal wrote: On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgr...@redhat.com wrote: Just a heads up, many of the Infrastructure Team members (including myself) will be at pycon (http://us.pycon.org/) so our online availability will be scarce. Who are the backups in case of emergency. I can probably work out some time off if you need it. I'm here and around and I get the pages. Im here also Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: hosts for rawhide build chroots - different rpm versions?
On Sunday 22 March 2009 05:02:41 am Axel Thimm wrote: Hi, AFAIK the build hosts are RHEL5 (or maybe F10 by now?). At any rate the rpm used in rawhide is quite different than the ones from the hosts, how has this been solved in the build hosts? Has the hosting OS upgraded its rpm to be compatible to all hosted chroots? Or is the rpm within the chroot used? I'm asking in a double context: First I'd like to understand if smart can properly handle chroots of rawhide/F11 on F10/RHEL5 hosts. Anders Björklund (in the Cc, please keep him there on replies) has put a great deal of effort to have smart working on F10 and F11, and a smart version for managing F11 and later chroots on F10 or earlier would be great. And second I'd like to know how to setup a build environment for F11 for getting some ATrpms packages out. we are running a version of rpm 4.6.0 on rhel5. This is only so mock can populate chroots with rpms with stronger hashes rhel5's rpm doesnt support. All srpm creation now takes place in chroots so features of the target rpm are always available. rpm in F-10 updates is compatible with the new rpm features. but rpm from F-9 and RHEL4 and 5 can not handle the new rpm at all. you cannot make chroots on them with rawhide rpms. you could use koji on F-10/rawhide or F-9/RHEL5 by replacing the hosts rpm to build your packages. Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Redhat up2date rpms to date
On Sunday 22 March 2009 08:04:20 pm Paul Ward wrote: Hi, I am looking for an easy way to update over 20 servers via up2date. As it will take me several days to update all the servers is their an easy way to add them to a rhn channel that will not accept any newer packages as of a date and time I choose, as I worry that a new package or even kernel maybe released in the middle of my updating / downloading rpms to the servers. I am going to use # up2date -du to start off with, however this could still cause a problem for me. It sounds like you are using RHEL and RHN. all you need to do is schedule the update in the web interface and all machines will get updated on there next checkin. You will have all boxes updated in a matter of hours. Dennis -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: [Change Request] Add redirect from /legal/trademarks/guidelines to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines.
+1 Ricky Zhou ri...@fedoraproject.org wrote: As requested by Paul at https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1269. I tested this on staging, so this should be relatively safe. --- configs/web/fedoraproject.org/modRewrite.conf |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/configs/web/fedoraproject.org/modRewrite.conf b/configs/web/fedoraproject.org/modRewrite.conf index ad12573..037cd35 100644 --- a/configs/web/fedoraproject.org/modRewrite.conf +++ b/configs/web/fedoraproject.org/modRewrite.conf @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ RewriteRule ^/docs/(.*) http://docs.fedoraproject.org/$1 [R=301,L] RewriteRule ^/Download/(.*) http://rhold.fedoraproject.org/Download/$1 [R=301,L] RewriteRule ^/download/(.*) http://rhold.fedoraproject.org/Download/$1 [R=301,L] RewriteRule ^/extras/(.*) http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/extras/$1 [R=302,L] +RewriteRule ^/([^/]+/)?legal/trademarks/guidelines$ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines [R=301,L] # RedirectMatch ^/wiki/Releases/7 http://fedoraproject.org/static-tmp/7 # RedirectMatch ^/wiki/$ http://fedoraproject.org/static-tmp/ # RedirectMatch ^/wiki/FedoraMain$ http://fedoraproject.org/static-tmp/ -- 1.5.5.6 ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9. Please excuse my brevity.___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Change request
On Tuesday 10 March 2009 01:11:28 pm Mike McGrath wrote: I'd like to upgrade transifex on app1. this will not impact the live transifex install. Just the new one on app1. +1 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: change request
On Tuesday 10 March 2009 05:53:04 pm Mike McGrath wrote: for translate website: diff --git a/configs/web/translate.fedoraproject.org.conf b/configs/web/translate.fedoraproject.org.conf index 7bcb9c5..407b799 100644 --- a/configs/web/translate.fedoraproject.org.conf +++ b/configs/web/translate.fedoraproject.org.conf @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ RewriteEngine On RewriteRule ^/submit(.*) https://translate.fedoraproject.org/submit$1 [R=301,L] + RewriteRule ^/tx(.*) https://translate.fedoraproject.org/tx$1 [R=301,L] include conf.d/translate.fedoraproject.org/*.conf @@ -21,6 +22,7 @@ RewriteEngine On RewriteRule ^/submit(.*) https://translate.fedoraproject.org/submit$1 [R=301,L] + RewriteRule ^/tx(.*) https://translate.fedoraproject.org/tx$1 [R=301,L] include conf.d/translate.fedoraproject.org/*.conf ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list +1 Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: kojira repo generation
On Thursday 26 February 2009 11:51:14 am Thomas Hatch wrote: I keep having problems with it telling me the system is locked until I run a restart, but service kojid status keeps returning the same error ; The URL for the xmlrpc server server=http://sunlight.pp.bcinfra.net/kojihub user=koji.bcinfra.net do you have this same user defined elsewhere? only one session per uer can be active. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: error syncing from secondary
On Thursday 26 February 2009 09:41:38 am Adrian Reber wrote: rsyncing from secondary I get following error: rsync: send_files failed to open /releases/test/9-Beta/Fedora/source/SRPMS/.kernel-2.6.27.12-78.2.9.fc9.src .rpm.U3tJXy (in fedora-secondary): Permission denied (13) Adrian Fixed thanks Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: error syncing from secondary
On Thursday 26 February 2009 03:04:19 pm Mike McGrath wrote: On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Dennis Gilmore wrote: On Thursday 26 February 2009 09:41:38 am Adrian Reber wrote: rsyncing from secondary I get following error: rsync: send_files failed to open /releases/test/9-Beta/Fedora/source/SRPMS/.kernel-2.6.27.12-78.2.9.fc9 .src .rpm.U3tJXy (in fedora-secondary): Permission denied (13) Adrian Fixed thanks I wonder how these keep popping up. interupted rsyncs I need to fully automate the process Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: attribute errors when koji login
On Wednesday 25 February 2009 05:24:45 am 陈鲍孜 wrote: Mike Bonnet wrote: What version of Koji are you using? That error has been fixed in Koji git for a while, and is available in the latest release, Koji 1.3.1. You'll need to run it on CentOS 5. I'm using those koji-1.2.6-1.el5.noarch.rpm koji-utils-1.2.6-1.el5.noarch.rpm koji-builder-1.2.6-1.el5.noarch.rpm koji-web-1.2.6-1.el5.noarch.rpm koji-hub-1.2.6-1.el5.noarch.rpm from EPEL repository on CentOS 5.2. Maybe I should try a newer one. 1.3.1 is in EPEL testing. I would recommend that you use it instead. Dennis -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Outage Notification - Koji, plague 2009-02-21 15:00 UTC
Dennis Gilmore wrote: Xavier Lamien wrote: 2009/2/14 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us: There will be an outage starting at 2009-02-21 15:00 UTC, which will last approximately 48 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2009-02-21 15:00 UTC' Affected Services: Buildsystem (koji and plague) Unaffected Services: CVS / Source Control Database DNS Fedora Hosted Fedora People Fedora Talk Mail Mirror System Torrent Translation Services Websites Ticket Link: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1187 Reason for Outage: Maintenance of /mnt/koji filesystem, koji DB Maintainence Upgrade koji to support EPEL, noarch subpackages, srpm's built in a chroot. along with lots of bug fixes. Contact Information: Please join #fedora-admin in irc.freenode.net or respond to this email to track the status of this outage. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list Just a heads-up The outage is still going This is still ongoing. A final Done email will be sent when you can submit builds again. Thanks for your paitence. Dennis This has been completed and building is back to normal. please report any odd failures. there has been a very large change in koji. noarch subpackages are now supported, which needs srpms to be built in a chroot. the last of F-11's features that needed koji chanes are now ready to deploy. Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Outage Notification - Koji, plague 2009-02-21 15:00 UTC
On Friday 13 February 2009 09:54:58 pm Dennis Gilmore wrote: There will be an outage starting at 2009-02-21 15:00 UTC, which will last approximately 48 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2009-02-21 15:00 UTC' Affected Services: Buildsystem (koji and plague) Unaffected Services: CVS / Source Control Database DNS Fedora Hosted Fedora People Fedora Talk Mail Mirror System Torrent Translation Services Websites Ticket Link: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1187 Reason for Outage: Maintenance of /mnt/koji filesystem, koji DB Maintainence Upgrade koji to support EPEL, noarch subpackages, srpm's built in a chroot. along with lots of bug fixes. Contact Information: Please join #fedora-admin in irc.freenode.net or respond to this email to track the status of this outage. Just a reminder that koji and plague will both be down for the entirety of this weekend. Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Outage Notification - Koji, plague 2009-02-21 15:00 UTC
On Friday 13 February 2009 09:54:58 pm Dennis Gilmore wrote: There will be an outage starting at 2009-02-21 15:00 UTC, which will last approximately 48 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2009-02-21 15:00 UTC' Affected Services: Buildsystem (koji and plague) Unaffected Services: CVS / Source Control Database DNS Fedora Hosted Fedora People Fedora Talk Mail Mirror System Torrent Translation Services Websites Ticket Link: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1187 Reason for Outage: Maintenance of /mnt/koji filesystem, koji DB Maintainence Upgrade koji to support EPEL, noarch subpackages, srpm's built in a chroot. along with lots of bug fixes. Contact Information: Please join #fedora-admin in irc.freenode.net or respond to this email to track the status of this outage. Just a reminder that koji and plague will both be down for the entirety of this weekend. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: rpmbuild question - follow on to gcc issues
On Tuesday 10 February 2009 09:52:14 am Steve wrote: I downloaded a src rpm, built it using rpmbuild and the spec file and ran it. So far, so good. Now I want to modify the source to add some debugging statements. The problem is that the src rpm contains a number of patches and one of the patches is to the file I want to modify. Now when I rpmbuild, the patching fails because the source file it is trying to patch doesn't look the same. What is the Fedora way of dealing with this situation? Let me know if this needs to be moved to the devel list. do a rpmbuild -bp specfile then you can can go into the prepared source and make you patch toapply in the spec. I almost have a new fedora-packager update ready which will allow anonmous checkouts of fedora packages from cvs you can grab the script from https://fedorahosted.org/fedora- packager/browser/src/fedora-cvs.py it requires you have PyOpenSSL and cvs installed Dennis -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: problems of running koji on CentOS with EPEL packages
On Wednesday 04 February 2009 09:29:54 pm 陈鲍孜 wrote: Hello, I was trying to distribute koji with the rpms from EPEL on CentOS following the instructions of ServerHowTo. It seems I've made some mistakes that it's said kojid dead but subsys locked while I was checking kojid status after having it started successfully. what do you get when you run /usr/sbin/kojid -f -c /etc/kojid/kojid.conf BTW, I was a little confused about how to run a koji environment with the ServerHowTo wiki, due to the relationship of those configurations. which part was confusing? the howto doesn't really say where to run each piece because each pieces can be run on separate and multiple boxes. for instance fedora runs 2 hubs. multiple builders, a single db box and a single box for serving up the packages. Dennis -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/F-9 perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec,1.1,1.2
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/F-9
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv18616
Modified Files:
perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
- fix up source0 url
Index: perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/F-9/perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 05:11:32 - 1.1
+++ perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 15:48:29 - 1.2
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
Summary: Network-IPv4Addr Perl module
Name: perl-Network-IPv4Addr
Version: 0.05
-Release: 12%{?dist}
+Release: 13%{?dist}
License: GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Network-IPv4Addr/
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
BuildArch: noarch
-Source0: Network-IPv4Addr-0.05.tar.gz
+Source0:
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/F/FR/FRAJULAC/Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}.tar.gz
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
%setup -q -n Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}
%build
-%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%install
@@ -49,6 +49,10 @@
%{_mandir}/man3/*.3*
%changelog
+* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
+- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
+- fix up source0 url
+
* Wed Jan 28 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-12
- clean up spec file
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/F-10 perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec,1.1,1.2
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19363
Modified Files:
perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
- fix up source0 url
Index: perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/F-10/perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 05:14:09 - 1.1
+++ perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 15:52:24 - 1.2
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
Summary: Network-IPv4Addr Perl module
Name: perl-Network-IPv4Addr
Version: 0.05
-Release: 12%{?dist}
+Release: 13%{?dist}
License: GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Network-IPv4Addr/
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
BuildArch: noarch
-Source0: Network-IPv4Addr-0.05.tar.gz
+Source0:
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/F/FR/FRAJULAC/Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}.tar.gz
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
%setup -q -n Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}
%build
-%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%install
@@ -49,6 +49,10 @@
%{_mandir}/man3/*.3*
%changelog
+* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
+- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
+- fix up source0 url
+
* Wed Jan 28 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-12
- clean up spec file
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/devel perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec, 1.1, 1.2
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv27017
Modified Files:
perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
- fix up source0 url
Index: perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file:
/cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/devel/perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 05:16:04 - 1.1
+++ perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 16:41:49 - 1.2
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
Summary: Network-IPv4Addr Perl module
Name: perl-Network-IPv4Addr
Version: 0.05
-Release: 12%{?dist}
+Release: 13%{?dist}
License: GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Network-IPv4Addr/
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
BuildArch: noarch
-Source0: Network-IPv4Addr-0.05.tar.gz
+Source0:
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/F/FR/FRAJULAC/Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}.tar.gz
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
%setup -q -n Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}
%build
-%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%install
@@ -49,6 +49,10 @@
%{_mandir}/man3/*.3*
%changelog
+* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
+- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
+- fix up source0 url
+
* Wed Jan 28 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-12
- clean up spec file
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/EL-5 perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec,1.1,1.2
Author: ausil
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv24973
Modified Files:
perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
Log Message:
* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
- fix up source0 url
Index: perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Network-IPv4Addr/EL-5/perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 05:07:39 - 1.1
+++ perl-Network-IPv4Addr.spec 29 Jan 2009 19:32:37 - 1.2
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
Summary: Network-IPv4Addr Perl module
Name: perl-Network-IPv4Addr
Version: 0.05
-Release: 12%{?dist}
+Release: 13%{?dist}
License: GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Network-IPv4Addr/
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
BuildArch: noarch
-Source0: Network-IPv4Addr-0.05.tar.gz
+Source0:
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/F/FR/FRAJULAC/Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}.tar.gz
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
%setup -q -n Network-IPv4Addr-%{version}
%build
-%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%install
@@ -49,6 +49,10 @@
%{_mandir}/man3/*.3*
%changelog
+* Thu Jan 29 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-13
+- remove OPTIMIZE for cleanliness sake
+- fix up source0 url
+
* Wed Jan 28 2009 Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us - 0.05-12
- clean up spec file
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
Re: change request: python-hashlib install on fedorapeople.org and new yum
On Wednesday 28 January 2009 02:42:35 pm seth vidal wrote: in order to stop the rss feed generator from kvetching I'd like to install the new python-hashlib and new yum pkgs (from rhel 5.3) on fedorapeople. Can I get a couple of +1's? Amen, umm +1 :) Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: koji and package dependencies
On Thursday 08 January 2009 09:48:35 am Doug Reiland wrote: Is this list the right place to ask koji releated questions? If so: I am playing with koji by setting up a local build system. I have am able to do some examples like build the bash package. I am now attempting to setup a large collection of packages and wondering about package dependencies and ordering. How do you prepare a koji-builder system or is that taken care of? For example, if package X requires program foo to build, do I need to be aware of this and make sure foo is on koji-builder system. you need to have either built/imported all packages that you need to build against. and they need to be available via inheritance to the build tag. Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: rsync errors on fedora-secondary
On Thursday 25 December 2008 01:56:45 am Adrian Reber wrote: I get following rsync errors on syncing fedora-secondary on the last few runs: rsync: send_files failed to open /development/sparc/os/images/.initrd.img.pupy3y (in fedora-secondary): Permission denied (13) rsync: send_files failed to open /releases/9/Everything/source/SRPMS/.supertuxkart-0.4-1.fc9.src.rpm.omf19j (in fedora-secondary): Permission denied (13) rsync: send_files failed to open /releases/test/9-Beta/Fedora/source/SRPMS/.geronimo-specs-1.0-1.M2.2jpp.12 .src.rpm.quHnuo (in fedora-secondary): Permission denied (13) Maybe someone can delete those files. Thanks! Adrian Fixed, thanks for the heads up Dennis ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: OT: Comcast permanent block on port 25
On Friday 19 December 2008 11:17:10 am Phil Meyer wrote: Comcast, in their infinite wisdom, has begun to block all inbound port 25 connections at my location. AFAIK at least in the area i'm in they have always blocked port 25. While it sucks its certainly common practice amongst ISP's all over the world. Dennis -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
