Hello,
I am trying to get the XDG_SESSION_COOKIE value on SSH connection, but I get
an empty value, Why do I get empty value? Is it an authorization issue?
Thank you
salu2...
masch...
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 06:51 +0100, Iain Arnell wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > Why would it pain you to say it? There's nothing honourable about NIH
> > syndrome.
>
> Don't get me wrong. I don't mind that we didn't create it. The pain is
> simply that we do
On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Why would it pain you to say it? There's nothing honourable about NIH
> syndrome.
Don't get me wrong. I don't mind that we didn't create it. The pain is
simply that we don't have it. I would see no shame in retiring koji
and running OBS f
On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 05:41 +0100, Iain Arnell wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> >
> > is there a simple build system for personal repos available? E.g. give
> > it an srpm and then it will build it for several mock configs, ask to
> > sign the rpms, move them to typical
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Till Maas wrote:
>
> is there a simple build system for personal repos available? E.g. give
> it an srpm and then it will build it for several mock configs, ask to
> sign the rpms, move them to typical repositories and ask to sign the
> repository?
Much as it pains
On 02/05/2010 09:46 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> If the situation doesn't change any time soon, we IMHO should consider
> disabling abrt until the issues are fixed.
Agreed.
However, I went one step further: I removed ABRT from my systems, not
because of issues I would have with it as a Fedora
We held the first blocker bug review of the Fedora 13 cycle today. A
mere tiddler at an hour and a half long! We reviewed all open Alpha
blocker bugs and also did a quick sweep through Beta and Final bugs to
see if any should be promoted. Thanks to all who attended. The summary
of the meeting can b
On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 15:21 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > I don't understand much about utmp and wtmp, but if appropriate they
> > could be specifically excepted from the policy. Ditto the ConsoleKit
> > history. What's the rationale for these being world-readable?
>
> Unix used to be a multiuse
Paul Howarth wrote:
> Wouldn't this problem be avoided if the SRPM was built in a buildroot
> containing all of the buildreqs (like the binary RPMs are)?
>
> It would be an extra step in the build process, but not a big extra step.
>
> 1. Build SRPM in minimal buildroot to determine buildreqs (as
I wrote:
> I'll also note that I'm in FESCo and that I'll definitely vote for
> approving this FPC guideline, as I don't see why we should block it. Valid
> reasons have been given for why this is bad and Nicolas's counterarguments
> just boil down to laziness.
PS: This was already discussed in th
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le Jeu 4 février 2010 10:26, Till Maas a écrit :
>> Why can't the following be used?
>> %{?_font_pkg:%_font_pkg -f %{fontconf}.conf AccanthisADFStd-*.otf}
>
> In theory in can. In practice that will increase the number of human
> mistakes since it is not a human-friendly s
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> This was Kevin Kofler's statement, rather than the FPC (or any FPC
> members). You're welcome to bring it up and we can discuss it. However, I
> think this is a case that does fall under what we want to fix by this
> Guideline. You are correct that FESCo also has to appro
What's wrong with ABRT? ALl the backtraces I get are unusable again. If
Thunar crashes, not even Thunar-debuginfo gets installed.
abrt 1.0 worked here, then came 1.0.2 which was broken. 1.0.3 was
working again, but got superseded be 1.0.4 only a few of days later.
This means that most of the time
On 02/05/2010 03:27 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Jonathan is actually talking about xerces-c rather htan xerces-j.
>
Yes, this affects xerces-c and xerces-c-devel, for F-13.
Jonathan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 12:15:41AM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> * flac123 -- Command-line program for playing FLAC audio files
Taken.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 03:07:40PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> Jonathan Robie wrote:
> > I have built Xerces 3.0.1 for Rawhide. Xerces 3.0.1. was released in
> > February, 2009.
> >
> > I think it should replace Xerces 2.8, which was released in August,
> > 2007. Do any packages require Xerc
On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 15:39 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 15:14 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > - Declaring "Read from system logs containing any information about user
> > activities" to be a privileged action, means that who(1) and last(1)
> > break, since utmp and wtmp are
Jonathan Robie wrote:
> I have built Xerces 3.0.1 for Rawhide. Xerces 3.0.1. was released in
> February, 2009.
>
> I think it should replace Xerces 2.8, which was released in August,
> 2007. Do any packages require Xerces 2.8? Is there anyone who can not
> build against the new 3.0.1 packages?
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:42:20 -0500, Adam wrote:
> > cdparanoia 547682
> > liboggz 556070
>
> Fixed in rawhide.
cdparanoia's ticket has been reopened automatically as the problem
is still reproducible.
Feel free to refer to
http://
I have built Xerces 3.0.1 for Rawhide. Xerces 3.0.1. was released in
February, 2009.
I think it should replace Xerces 2.8, which was released in August,
2007. Do any packages require Xerces 2.8? Is there anyone who can not
build against the new 3.0.1 packages?
Jonathan
--
devel mailing li
Hiyas,
is there a simple build system for personal repos available? E.g. give
it an srpm and then it will build it for several mock configs, ask to
sign the rpms, move them to typical repositories and ask to sign the
repository?
Regards
Till
pgpmWVFpOEP6O.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
deve
Author: lkundrak
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv25138
Modified Files:
perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec
Added Files:
perl-Net-Amazon-EC2-0.14-oldxmlsimple.patch
Log Message:
* Fri Feb 05 2010 Lubomir Rintel - 0.14-1
On 05/02/10 15:56, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 10:13:52AM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 08:59:52AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:29:18PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
SRPM Buildtime macros https://fedoraproject.org/wi
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 10:13:52AM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 08:59:52AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:29:18PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > > SRPM Buildtime macros
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SRPM_Buildtime_macros
> >
>
hi,
i want to compile moztools on ubuntu.
i just need ldapsearch. this file is located at /usr/lib/mozldap/ldapsearch and
is from rpm mozldap-tools
what source code and requirements do i need to compile it on ubuntu/debian?
regards,
abosch
ps: im not on devel list, please cc me
--
389-devel
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Nicolas's argument is that rpm does not automatically detect when he wants
> to end his %description and therefore he should be excluded from the
> requirement.
Would it make sense to have %end available to terminate spec file
sections like
Compose started at Fri Feb 5 08:15:08 UTC 2010
Broken deps for i386
--
PySolFC-cardsets-1.1-5.2.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1
PySolFC-music-4.40-5.noarch requires PySolFC = 0:1.1
blahtexml-0.6-5.fc12.i686 requires l
I've had to do mock builds as well on packages in Fedora to see how
things build vs. some new version of a build related tool.
Along with chwang, we used the scripts at this location :
http://rgrunber.fedorapeople.org/mockbuild-tools/
They're pretty basic, but work well for our needs.
--
Rolan
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 08:59:52AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:29:18PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > SRPM Buildtime macros https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SRPM_Buildtime_macros
>
> Did we consider fixing the bug in RPM/the packaging system instead of
> pushing
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 06:26:39AM +0100, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
>
> Hi there.
>
> I would like to rebuild all the binaries of the current versions
> of Fedora 12 packages (that is, only the latest update of each
> package). The reason I would like to do that is to extensively
> test an experime
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:29:18PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> SRPM Buildtime macros https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SRPM_Buildtime_macros
Did we consider fixing the bug in RPM/the packaging system instead of
pushing more work on packagers?
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 11:26:22PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> No, my argument is that the problem this tries to protect against is
> purely cosmetic, and is cosmetic in an area which has little practical
> importance. That makes it very low in my priority scale. Nevertheless I
> would support
On Thursday 04 February 2010 20:18:53 Rex Dieter wrote:
> heads up for folks using rawhide/kde with nepomuk on their boxes,
> virtuoso-6.1.0 landed today, and it's data format is different than in the
> 5.x series.
>
> What this means, is that if you upgrade, your old nepomuk data will not be
> us
33 matches
Mail list logo
