Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-12 Thread Dennis Gilmore
On Thursday, June 11, 2015 01:38:31 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
 On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 11:24 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
  On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:55:47 -0500
  
  Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
   On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:27:18 -0600,
   
 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:01:04 -0500

Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
 That change also caused problems installing stuff with generic
 release that depend on lvm2. For example you can't build a
 generic
 live image that will have anaconda on it for live installs.

Is there a bug? I'm not sure how that happened from this
change...
   
   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1224561
  
  Ah, nifty. ;(
  
 I think the idea was to have product (edition) dependent
 presets,
 but I don't think the implementation was done well.

No, the idea was to move presets from systemd that didn't want to
have to change them to fedora-release that makes more sense and
is
controlled by more Fedoray folks who can make changes as needed.
   
   fedora-release seems to be getting more complicated. This makes it
   hard for generic-release to stay caught up as a separate package. I
   would like to see generic-release merged into the fedora-release
   source rpm so that it is easier to keep in sync, if that is
   possible
   to do while still solving the trademark problem it is meant to
   solve.
  
  I'm not sure it is, but hopefully we can come up with something.
  
  Perhaps a easier way to merge changes from the fedora-generic one or
  something.
 
 It really *can't* be included in the same source RPM, because remixes
 wouldn't be able to ship the source, then.
 
 However, there's something to be said for including them together in
 the same upstream project and generating separate tarballs from the
 same source.
generic-release is intended to be a template for people making fedora remixes. 
it is not meant to have everything that is in fedora-release or to even really 
be used, the people making the remix should fork it and make the changes they 
desire. I have added the base presets to generic-release and removed all the 
product sub packages.

Dennis

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-12 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 19:46:53 -0500
Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote:

 I upgraded fedora-release and can now run an upgrade of my system but
 it still never gets a systemd upgrade past systemd-219-13.  Is that
 the latest rawhide version?

No. 

220 has been out a while now. ;( 

Can you try doing: 

dnf update --best

and see if there's some dep somehow keeping it from showing you the
systemd-220 builds?

kevin


pgp_dWoH2X9jO.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-12 Thread Bruno Wolff III

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 13:38:31 -0400,
 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:


It really *can't* be included in the same source RPM, because remixes
wouldn't be able to ship the source, then.


Has that been checked by legal? Having a trademarked image in a source file 
is different from displaying the trademarked image on a desktop or 
splash screen by default.

--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Bruno Wolff III

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:27:18 -0600,
 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:01:04 -0500
Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:


That change also caused problems installing stuff with generic
release that depend on lvm2. For example you can't build a generic
live image that will have anaconda on it for live installs.


Is there a bug? I'm not sure how that happened from this change...


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1224561


I think the idea was to have product (edition) dependent presets, but
I don't think the implementation was done well.


No, the idea was to move presets from systemd that didn't want to have
to change them to fedora-release that makes more sense and is
controlled by more Fedoray folks who can make changes as needed.


fedora-release seems to be getting more complicated. This makes it hard for 
generic-release to stay caught up as a separate package. I would like to 
see generic-release merged into the fedora-release source rpm so that it 
is easier to keep in sync, if that is possible to do while still solving 
the trademark problem it is meant to solve.

--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:55:47 -0500
Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:

 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:27:18 -0600,
   Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
 On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:01:04 -0500
 Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
 
  That change also caused problems installing stuff with generic
  release that depend on lvm2. For example you can't build a generic
  live image that will have anaconda on it for live installs.
 
 Is there a bug? I'm not sure how that happened from this change...
 
 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1224561

Ah, nifty. ;( 

  I think the idea was to have product (edition) dependent presets,
  but I don't think the implementation was done well.
 
 No, the idea was to move presets from systemd that didn't want to
 have to change them to fedora-release that makes more sense and is
 controlled by more Fedoray folks who can make changes as needed.
 
 fedora-release seems to be getting more complicated. This makes it
 hard for generic-release to stay caught up as a separate package. I
 would like to see generic-release merged into the fedora-release
 source rpm so that it is easier to keep in sync, if that is possible
 to do while still solving the trademark problem it is meant to solve.

I'm not sure it is, but hopefully we can come up with something. 

Perhaps a easier way to merge changes from the fedora-generic one or
something. 

kevin


pgpSfrU6HkkGX.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 11:24 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
 On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:55:47 -0500
 Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
 
  On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:27:18 -0600,
Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
   On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:01:04 -0500
   Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
   
That change also caused problems installing stuff with generic
release that depend on lvm2. For example you can't build a 
generic
live image that will have anaconda on it for live installs.
   
   Is there a bug? I'm not sure how that happened from this 
   change...
  
  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1224561
 
 Ah, nifty. ;( 
 
I think the idea was to have product (edition) dependent 
presets,
but I don't think the implementation was done well.
   
   No, the idea was to move presets from systemd that didn't want to
   have to change them to fedora-release that makes more sense and 
   is
   controlled by more Fedoray folks who can make changes as needed.
  
  fedora-release seems to be getting more complicated. This makes it
  hard for generic-release to stay caught up as a separate package. I
  would like to see generic-release merged into the fedora-release
  source rpm so that it is easier to keep in sync, if that is 
  possible
  to do while still solving the trademark problem it is meant to 
  solve.
 
 I'm not sure it is, but hopefully we can come up with something. 
 
 Perhaps a easier way to merge changes from the fedora-generic one or
 something. 
 


It really *can't* be included in the same source RPM, because remixes
wouldn't be able to ship the source, then.

However, there's something to be said for including them together in
the same upstream project and generating separate tarballs from the
same source.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 13:38:31 -0400
Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:

 It really *can't* be included in the same source RPM, because remixes
 wouldn't be able to ship the source, then.
 
 However, there's something to be said for including them together in
 the same upstream project and generating separate tarballs from the
 same source.

And/or perhaps conditionalize the spec file so the same one largely
works for both packages?

kevin


pgphnVyc9f1m_.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 11:45 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
 On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 13:38:31 -0400
 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:
 
  It really *can't* be included in the same source RPM, because 
  remixes
  wouldn't be able to ship the source, then.
  
  However, there's something to be said for including them together 
  in
  the same upstream project and generating separate tarballs from the
  same source.
 
 And/or perhaps conditionalize the spec file so the same one largely
 works for both packages?
 

Well, probably has to be a template spec that we generate a different
copy for each package, otherwise we'd still be distributing potentially
trademarked content in the spec file.

But yeah, I'm sure we can design it so that most edits could be made in
a single place. Does someone want to file a
ticket?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Kevin Martin
On 06/10/2015 10:51 PM, Kevin Martin wrote:
 On 05/22/2015 10:52 PM, Kevin Martin wrote:
 On 05/22/2015 04:53 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
 On Fri, 22 May 2015 16:50:19 -0500
 kevin martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote:

 ...snip...


 Looks like somebody decided to move the 90-default.preset from
 systemd to the fedora-release package without changing the systemd
 package to reflect that and pushing out a new package (as discussed
 about a year ago).

 This was fixed in 
 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=638190

 (systemd-219-14)

 It should have been in the rawhide compose, but you can get it from
 koji if not. 

 (Or just get systemd-220, but it has some selinux issues going on)

 kevin



 Thanks for the info.

 Kevin

 Tried getting the koji build but there were too many dependency issues to 
 install it and I'm still not getting a Rawhide version
 that can be installed.  Still getting:
 
 Error: Transaction check error:
   file /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default.preset from install of 
 fedora-release-23-0.13.noarch conflicts with file from
 package systemd-219-13.fc23.x86_64
 
 Error Summary
 -
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Kevin
 
I upgraded fedora-release and can now run an upgrade of my system but it still 
never gets a systemd upgrade past systemd-219-13.  Is
that the latest rawhide version?

Thanks

Kevin
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:51:11 -0500
Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote:

 Tried getting the koji build but there were too many dependency
 issues to install it and I'm still not getting a Rawhide version that
 can be installed.  Still getting:
 
 Error: Transaction check error:
   file /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default.preset from install
 of fedora-release-23-0.13.noarch conflicts with file from package
 systemd-219-13.fc23.x86_64
 
 Error Summary
 -

You will need to update systemd as well / first?

Why do you have such an old version?

kevin



pgpd14qPH0Ty9.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-11 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:01:04 -0500
Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:

  Looks like somebody decided to move the 90-default.preset from
  systemd to the fedora-release package without changing the
  systemd package to reflect that and pushing out a new package
  (as discussed about a year ago).
 
 That change also caused problems installing stuff with generic
 release that depend on lvm2. For example you can't build a generic
 live image that will have anaconda on it for live installs.

Is there a bug? I'm not sure how that happened from this change... 

 I think the idea was to have product (edition) dependent presets, but
 I don't think the implementation was done well.

No, the idea was to move presets from systemd that didn't want to have
to change them to fedora-release that makes more sense and is
controlled by more Fedoray folks who can make changes as needed. 

kevin



pgpmgw7dPL9gs.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-06-10 Thread Kevin Martin
On 05/22/2015 10:52 PM, Kevin Martin wrote:
 On 05/22/2015 04:53 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
 On Fri, 22 May 2015 16:50:19 -0500
 kevin martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote:

 ...snip...


 Looks like somebody decided to move the 90-default.preset from
 systemd to the fedora-release package without changing the systemd
 package to reflect that and pushing out a new package (as discussed
 about a year ago).

 This was fixed in 
 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=638190

 (systemd-219-14)

 It should have been in the rawhide compose, but you can get it from
 koji if not. 

 (Or just get systemd-220, but it has some selinux issues going on)

 kevin



 Thanks for the info.
 
 Kevin
 
Tried getting the koji build but there were too many dependency issues to 
install it and I'm still not getting a Rawhide version
that can be installed.  Still getting:

Error: Transaction check error:
  file /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default.preset from install of 
fedora-release-23-0.13.noarch conflicts with file from
package systemd-219-13.fc23.x86_64

Error Summary
-


Regards,

Kevin
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-05-22 Thread kevin martin
Specifically:

Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates' from '
http://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/mirrorlist?repo=free-fedora-updates-released-rawhidearch=x86_64':
Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: No URLs in mirrorlist, disabling.
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree' from '
http://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/mirrorlist?repo=nonfree-fedora-rawhidearch=x86_64':
Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: No URLs in mirrorlist, disabling.
Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree-updates' from '
http://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/mirrorlist?repo=nonfree-fedora-updates-released-rawhidearch=x86_64':
Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: No URLs in mirrorlist, disabling.
Last metadata expiration check performed 1:41:07 ago on Fri May 22 15:05:31
2015.
Dependencies resolved.

 Package  Arch   Version  Repository
Size

Upgrading:
 device-mapperx86_64 1.02.97-1.fc23   rawhide
248 k
 device-mapper-event  x86_64 1.02.97-1.fc23   rawhide
193 k
 device-mapper-event-libs x86_64 1.02.97-1.fc23   rawhide
195 k
 device-mapper-libs   x86_64 1.02.97-1.fc23   rawhide
308 k
 fedora-release   noarch 23-0.13  rawhide
 15 k
 fedora-release-servernoarch 23-0.13  rawhide
 12 k
 lvm2 x86_64 2.02.120-1.fc23  rawhide
988 k
 lvm2-libsx86_64 2.02.120-1.fc23  rawhide
868 k

Transaction Summary

Upgrade  8 Packages

Total download size: 2.8 M
Is this ok [y/N]: Downloading Packages:

Total   465 kB/s | 2.3 MB 00:05

Delta RPMs reduced 2.8 MB of updates to 2.3 MB (15.1% saved)
Running transaction check
Transaction check succeeded.
Running transaction test
Error: Transaction check error:
  file /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default.preset from install of
fedora-release-23-0.13.noarch conflicts with file from package
systemd-219-13.fc23.x86_64

Error Summary
-


Looks like somebody decided to move the 90-default.preset from systemd to
the fedora-release package without changing the systemd package to reflect
that and pushing out a new package (as discussed about a year ago).

Kevin

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 4:06 PM, kevin martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote:

 Just an FYI, the latest rawhide update gives an error about 
 usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default.preset
 conflicting between the .13 version of fedora-release and systemd.

 Regards,

 Kevin

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: conflict between latest fedora-release and systemd (rawhide)

2015-05-22 Thread Kevin Fenzi
On Fri, 22 May 2015 16:50:19 -0500
kevin martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote:

...snip...

 
 Looks like somebody decided to move the 90-default.preset from
 systemd to the fedora-release package without changing the systemd
 package to reflect that and pushing out a new package (as discussed
 about a year ago).

This was fixed in 
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=638190

(systemd-219-14)

It should have been in the rawhide compose, but you can get it from
koji if not. 

(Or just get systemd-220, but it has some selinux issues going on)

kevin


pgp1KAqsLxy7n.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test