Re: Yet again: Current package status updated (package maintainers please read!)
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: On 20.10.2008 02:03, Stewart Adam wrote: Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | nvidia-96xx-kmod | Not found in nonfree-devel s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | nvidia-96xx-kmod | Not found in nonfree-F-9 s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | nvidia-legacy-kmod | Not found in nonfree-devel s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | nvidia-legacy-kmod | Not found in nonfree-F-9 s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-96xx | Not found in nonfree-devel s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-96xx | Not found in nonfree-F-9 s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-legacy | Not found in nonfree-devel s.adam_[AT]_diffingo.com | xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-legacy | Not found in nonfree-F-9 Software provided by upstream does not work on F9 and rawhide I'm going to import these anyways soon so that users who have downgraded Xorg can still have access to the drivers. I strongly vote for not doing this -- Users that did such crazy things can just as easy grab the drivers from the F-8 branch. And if nvidia doesn't fix the drivers until F8 is EOL then a private repo is the way better place for crazy things like this. Having those drivers somewhere in the repo just gives them the impression that it might work -- which it does not. +1, +100 even. Regards, Hans
[Bug 34] Review request: xmltv - A set of utilities to manage your TV viewing
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34 NicolasChauvet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||33 Blocks|2 |4 --- Comment #7 from NicolasChauvet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-20 10:07:15 --- Package CVS request == Package Name: xmltv Short Description: A set of utilities to manage your TV viewing Owners: kwizart Branch: devel F-9 F-8 EL-5 InitialCC: -- License tag: free -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 2] Tracker: New packages awaiting review.
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2 NicolasChauvet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|34 | -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 4] Tracker: Accepted packages.
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4 NicolasChauvet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||34 -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 34] Review request: xmltv - A set of utilities to manage your TV viewing
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34 Xavier Lamien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|33 | --- Comment #8 from Xavier Lamien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-20 10:45:21 --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug.
Re: updated yabause and lxdream specs
Xavier Lamien pisze: > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hans de Goede pisze: >>> Julian Sikorski wrote: Hi, I have noticed that the lxdream and yabause packages are not packaging the latest version of these emulators. Since in case of console emus you basically always want latest and greatest, I took some time to update the specs. Did not test them a lot, but they at least compile and run. >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Note I'm not the maintainer of these, still I'm going to ask this: >>> Maybe you want to co-maintain these ? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Hans >> My interest in emulation of these consoles is rather occasional. So, >> yes, I could update these emus up to the their latest versions from time >> to time, but I'm not sure I could give these packages a lot more love >> than that ;). So, Xavier, are you interested in such kind of help? >> > > you have now commit access to those packages. > Feel free to update them. > > Thanks, > I assume that means yes ;) BTW, it seems that there is a problem with commit mailing system. cvs seems to only email the primary maintainer (in case of lxdream, it emailed you but not me). Similar issue is present with sdlmame, sdlmess and qmc2, I suppose (and yabause as well, I guess). Julian
Re: updated yabause and lxdream specs
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hans de Goede pisze: >> Julian Sikorski wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have noticed that the lxdream and yabause packages are not packaging >>> the latest version of these emulators. Since in case of console emus you >>> basically always want latest and greatest, I took some time to update >>> the specs. Did not test them a lot, but they at least compile and run. >>> >> >> Thanks! >> >> Note I'm not the maintainer of these, still I'm going to ask this: >> Maybe you want to co-maintain these ? >> >> Regards, >> >> Hans > My interest in emulation of these consoles is rather occasional. So, > yes, I could update these emus up to the their latest versions from time > to time, but I'm not sure I could give these packages a lot more love > than that ;). So, Xavier, are you interested in such kind of help? > you have now commit access to those packages. Feel free to update them. Thanks, -- Xavier.t Lamien -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XavierLamien GPG-Key ID: F3903DEB Fingerprint: 0F2A 7A17 0F1B 82EE FCBF 1F51 76B7 A28D F390 3DEB
Re: updated yabause and lxdream specs
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Xavier Lamien pisze: >> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Hans de Goede pisze: Julian Sikorski wrote: > Hi, > > I have noticed that the lxdream and yabause packages are not packaging > the latest version of these emulators. Since in case of console emus you > basically always want latest and greatest, I took some time to update > the specs. Did not test them a lot, but they at least compile and run. > Thanks! Note I'm not the maintainer of these, still I'm going to ask this: Maybe you want to co-maintain these ? Regards, Hans >>> My interest in emulation of these consoles is rather occasional. So, >>> yes, I could update these emus up to the their latest versions from time >>> to time, but I'm not sure I could give these packages a lot more love >>> than that ;). So, Xavier, are you interested in such kind of help? >>> >> >> you have now commit access to those packages. >> Feel free to update them. >> >> Thanks, >> > I assume that means yes ;) yeah BTW, it seems that there is a problem with > commit mailing system. cvs seems to only email the primary maintainer > (in case of lxdream, it emailed you but not me). Similar issue is > present with sdlmame, sdlmess and qmc2, I suppose (and yabause as well, > I guess). ok, i'll have a look -- Xavier.t Lamien -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XavierLamien GPG-Key ID: F3903DEB Fingerprint: 0F2A 7A17 0F1B 82EE FCBF 1F51 76B7 A28D F390 3DEB
Re: updated yabause and lxdream specs
Hans de Goede pisze: > Julian Sikorski wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have noticed that the lxdream and yabause packages are not packaging >> the latest version of these emulators. Since in case of console emus you >> basically always want latest and greatest, I took some time to update >> the specs. Did not test them a lot, but they at least compile and run. >> > > Thanks! > > Note I'm not the maintainer of these, still I'm going to ask this: > Maybe you want to co-maintain these ? > > Regards, > > Hans My interest in emulation of these consoles is rather occasional. So, yes, I could update these emus up to the their latest versions from time to time, but I'm not sure I could give these packages a lot more love than that ;). So, Xavier, are you interested in such kind of help? Julian
Re: Yet again: Current package status updated (package maintainers please read!)
Thorsten Leemhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > freshrpms acx100-firmware-1.9.8.b-1.noarch > freshrpms acx111-firmware-1.2.1.34-1.noarch > freshrpms dkms-tiacx-0.4.7-3.noarch > -> outdated/doesn't build; get dropped This is a hardware driver, are you sure this should be dropped? People might need it. On the other hand, I don't personally have that hardware, so I don't really care. I guess if someone needs it, they'll speak up, and hopefully also step up to maintain it. > freshrpms gocr-gtk-0.44-1.fc7.x86_64 > -> is in Fedora The GTK+ frontend is actually not built in Fedora. (Only the command-line gocr is.) But if it's actually useful, it should be built in the Fedora package. That sounds like something to take up with the Fedora GOCR maintainer. Kevin Kofler
Re: Yet again: Current package status updated (package maintainers please read!)
On 20.10.2008 18:14, Kevin Kofler wrote: Thorsten Leemhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: freshrpms acx100-firmware-1.9.8.b-1.noarch freshrpms acx111-firmware-1.2.1.34-1.noarch freshrpms dkms-tiacx-0.4.7-3.noarch -> outdated/doesn't build; get dropped This is a hardware driver, are you sure this should be dropped? Well, the situation around the driver is a huge mess. Looking at the changelog will tell you that it's a mess since quite some time already: http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/dkms-tiacx/dkms-tiacx.spec I tried to quickly compile that version, the one that's in freshrpms and the one from http://gitorious.org/projects/acx-mac80211/repos/mainline against the latest F9 kernel -- none of them compiled :-/ If somebody knows a version that working right now and that looks like it's going to be properly maintained for the near future please let me know, then we can consider to create kmod packages -- but we at least also need to have someone that can also test if the modules work. CU knurd
Testing with SELinux enabled
Hi, While running Fedora with rpmfusion packages enabled, I have been running into a series of SELinux policy issues which all result from changes in policy in rawhide and basically fall into the same category. It would be useful if rpmfusion packagers run with SELinux enabled or atleast in permissive mode and report these issues to http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-selinux-list Dan Walsh is usually very quick to resolve reported issues either in Bugzilla or to this mailing list. Even if you don't personally use SELinux, it is still enabled by default for Fedora (and RHEL which rpmfusion supports) and it would be good to give them a smoother experience out of the box. Thanks. Rahul
[Bug 2] Tracker: New packages awaiting review.
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2 Christopher D. Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||83 -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 83] New: Review request: barry - BlackBerry(tm) Desktop for Linux
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83 Summary: Review request: barry - BlackBerry(tm) Desktop for Linux Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All URL: http://cid- f723c571e9e6d51f.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Public?vi ew=details OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 URL to SPEC file & RPMs: http://cid-f723c571e9e6d51f.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Public?view=details Description: Barry is a desktop toolset for managing your BlackBerry(tm) device. (BlackBerry is a registered trademark of Research in Motion Limited.) I don't think this can be included in Fedora because RIM uses closed source applications for their phones. Output from rpmlint: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/* libbarry0.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libbarry.so 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. I'm ignoring this warning because I believe the purpose of libbarry0 is to create this shared library for the other applications. This is my first RPM Fusion package as well as the first set of RPMs I've ever built. Hence, I also need a sponsor. Thanks. Chris -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 83] Review request: barry - BlackBerry(tm) Desktop for Linux
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Kofler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-21 02:55:27 --- > I don't think this can be included in Fedora because RIM uses closed source > applications for their phones. Uh, no, we have tools for syncing to iPods, Palm Pilots and other closed-source devices in Fedora. The 2 important points are: * Do the packages themselves contain any closed-source stuff themselves? If so, they have to go to rpmfusion nonfree. * Do they infringe on any US software patents? If so, they have to go to rpmfusion (nonfree if the first point is also true, free otherwise). If none of these are the case, the packages should go into Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 83] Review request: barry - BlackBerry(tm) Desktop for Linux
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83 Christopher D. Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC|[EMAIL PROTECTED]| --- Comment #2 from Christopher D. Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-21 03:57:48 --- > The 2 important points are: > * Do the packages themselves contain any closed-source stuff themselves? If > so, they have to go to rpmfusion nonfree. > * Do they infringe on any US software patents? If so, they have to go to > rpmfusion (nonfree if the first point is also true, free otherwise). > If none of these are the case, the packages should go into Fedora. Hi Kevin. Thanks for your reply. I'm honestly not 100% sure about either of these questions. Looking at the developer's page for this program, http://www.netdirect.ca/software/packages/barry/, it's under the GPLv2. This leads me to believe there's no closed-source stuff in the package. As for infringing on US software patents, I'm not sure. Since I'm not 100% sure about either of these, how can I find out for sure? If it is the case that it can be included in Fedora, what's the process to do that. Do you have a link you could give me? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
