Re: What to do with release number on new EL-5 branch
Hi,
There is nothing wrong with starting at 9-5.
Using the disttag can make it clearer that a package comes from epel as
opposed to someone installing the Fedora package onto an EL-5 system and
expecting it to work.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag
-Toshio
Er, I am not saying don't use dist, just that starting at 5%{?dist} instead
of 1%{?dist} is completely fine.
Thanks for the advice; I'll leave it as 9-5%{?dist}.
(Sorry for any confusion - I wasn't going to remove %{?dist}.)
Rich
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Help needed with fedora-security-guide-en-US-1.0-16.fc12
Hi Eric,
I'm having problems with a Publican package (the Security Guide). Below you
will see the latest build error from Koji. I'm not familiar with the error
and I can't find anything listed on the wiki pages that I'm used to finding
solutions to packaging errors.
The SPEC file can be seen at
http://sparks.fedorapeople.org/Packages/security-guide/fedora-security-guide-en-US.spec.
I'd appreciate any suggestions.
I just looked at your spec file in CVS (it's newer than the one you
provided a link to):
http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/fedora-security-guide-en-US/devel/fedora-security-guide-en-US.spec?revision=1.4view=markup
You have this in the %install section:
desktop-file-install %{?vendoropt}
--dir=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications %{name}.desktop
but you have this in the %files section:
%{_datadir}/applications/%{?vendor}%{name}.desktop
That %{?vendor} causes Fedora Project to be inserted into the
filename, resulting in these errors in build.log:
Processing files: fedora-security-guide-en-US-1.0-16.fc12.noarch
error: Two files on one line: /usr/share/applications/Fedora
error: File must begin with /: Projectfedora-security-guide-en-US.desktop
Looks like you need to remove %{?vendor}.
Regards,
Rich
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
What to do with release number on new EL-5 branch
Hi, I've just had an EL-5 branch created for my disktype[1] package. The new branch is a copy of the devel branch, so the NVR is currently disktype-9-5. Should I build the package as-is (so the first EPEL version is 9-5), or clear the changelog and start from 9-1 again for the EL-5 branch? I looked on a few pages[2][3][4] for information on this, but couldn't see anything. Thanks, Rich [1]: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/disktype [2]: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_CVS_FAQ_for_package_maintainers [3]: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure [4]: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: What I HATE about F11
Hi, To be honest, I like the Ubuntu way of adding a sudoers entry for the first user that gets created. Then suggest it as a feature for F12 That is actually a very good idea. Ubuntu has an admin group, and users in that group can use sudo due to this line in sudoers: %admin ALL=(ALL) ALL I might suggest this as a feature unless anyone else wants to (or thinks I shouldn't) ? Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: What I HATE about F11
# grep -n wheel /etc/sudoers 81:## Allows people in group wheel to run all commands 82:# %wheel ALL=(ALL) ALL 85:# %wheel ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL All you have to do is uncomment one line ;) That's exactly what I do, followed by: $ usermod -a -G wheel rich But wouldn't it be nice if this line was uncommented by default, and firstboot added the first user to this group automatically? Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: What I HATE about F11
We have the wheel group which would fit the bill. Yeah, I always uncomment the %wheel line in sudoers and then add myself to that group. Hmmm, having looked at the Features guidelines I'm not sure if this warrants a feature page or not. It would only involve a change to the default sudoers file, and a change to firstboot to add the first user to the wheel group. Can someone from FESCo help out here? Should I make a feature page for this or not? Thanks, Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: What I HATE about F11
The way it is done right now, you have a system that might give too few permissions to some users. If that causes a problem, you'll notice it, and you can correct it in a very simple way (uncomment one line and add a user to a group). However, if we change the default, you have a system that may be giving too much permissions to some users depending on your taste. And the worse part is that you (as an admin) might not even know it ! I think uncommenting the line by default would be OK as on the two F11 systems I have the only user in the wheel group is root. I had to manually add myself to wheel to get extra permissions. If you install the system, you know the root password, so you can use su to get a root prompt anyway. So I suppose it comes down to whether we should be adding users to the wheel group by default. I guess it could be a checkbox in firstboot... Allow this user to perform administrative tasks or something. Then administrators could choose whether or not to add the user to wheel. IMHO, stricter by default in such a case is better. It's easier to add permissions, open holes when you need them, rather than having to chase some opened-by-default holes you don't even know about. I agree, but if this were an option in firstboot I think it would be obvious. Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: What I HATE about F11
I didn't say the wheel group was a nonsense or a problem. I was responding to Richard who wanted the line to be uncommented (harmless per se) AND the first user to be added to the wheel group by default. I've since changed my mind :-) For example, a « add to the wheel group » checkbox in system-config-users and firstboot could be great. That's a good idea. Not sure it would be a good idea to have it checked and hidden by default. Agreed. Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: What I HATE about F11
Who says the first created user is root-equivalent? It wouldn't be root-equivalent. You have to explicitly use sudo, and enter your password when you do use it. It's not the same as a root prompt. In any case, I like Mathieu Bridon's idea of having a firstboot option. Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Strange /etc/fedora-release and smolt help
Can anyone with F11 installed look at what is in their /etc/fedora-release and tell me which one you have, and how you installed? Also what version of fedora-release you have. $ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 11 (Leonidas) Installed this morning using x86_64 DVD. $ rpm -q fedora-release fedora-release-11-1.noarch Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Orphaned eclipse-pydev
Isn't that this application with ads in it? Mmm, not aware of any... Not sure what you meant. If you use the evaluation version of Pydev Extensions (a different plugin to Pydev), it reminds you every so often to buy the full version. See: http://fabioz.com/pydev/ The basic Pydev doesn't have these popups. Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
