Am 26.01.2012 08:06, schrieb Aleksandar Kurtakov:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Reindl Harald"
>> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 7:15:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: UsrMove feature breaking "yum upgrade" upgrades fromolder
>> releases to F17?
>>
>> A
Hi, hope that also could help
Has package builder we also build kBuid
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=7356
, after use kBuid compile with gcc 4.7 I got this error on building
virtuaBox
/usr/bin/kmk_sed: file
/builddir/build/BUILD/VirtualBox-4.1.8_OSE/src/VBox/Runtime/c
- Original Message -
> From: "Reindl Harald"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 7:15:51 AM
> Subject: Re: UsrMove feature breaking "yum upgrade" upgrades from older
> releases to F17?
>
>
>
> Am 26.01.2012 05:02, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> > O
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:46:42PM -0500, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 01/25/2012 10:01 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
> >
> > It's pretty simple, really. Basically, if we don't keep the kernel on at
> > least a somewhat recent release the amount o
Am 26.01.2012 05:02, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> On 01/26/2012 09:23 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> i see really nothing wrong in demanding not break things randomly without
>> VERY good reasons and in this context it does relly not matter
>> if opensource /paid / whatever
>
> Nobody breaks things
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 04:53:33AM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 26.01.2012 04:48, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> > On 01/26/2012 08:36 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 26.01.2012 03:57, schrieb Mathieu Bridon:
> >
> >>> And realize that Fedora is a community project with no guarante
On 01/26/2012 09:23 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> i see really nothing wrong in demanding not break things randomly without
> VERY good reasons and in this context it does relly not matter
> if opensource /paid / whatever
Nobody breaks things randomly. Sometimes changes have unintentional
side effe
Am 26.01.2012 04:48, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> On 01/26/2012 08:36 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 26.01.2012 03:57, schrieb Mathieu Bridon:
>
>>> And realize that Fedora is a community project with no guarantee
>>> whatsoever.
>>
>> and that is a valueable argument for breaking things
>> w
On 01/26/2012 08:36 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 26.01.2012 03:57, schrieb Mathieu Bridon:
>>
>> And realize that Fedora is a community project with no guarantee
>> whatsoever.
>
> and that is a valueable argument for breaking things
> without really good reasons?
The problem isn't the po
On 01/25/2012 10:01 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
>
> It's pretty simple, really. Basically, if we don't keep the kernel on at
> least a somewhat recent release the amount of work required to support
> that release grows beyond what we can realisti
Am 26.01.2012 03:57, schrieb Mathieu Bridon:
> On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 03:22 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>> Am 26.01.2012 03:03, schrieb Greg:
>>> On 26/01/2012 12:46 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
i made several HUNDRED of dist-upgrades with yum since FC3 and
upgrade via DVD/Preupgrade is s
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
> I can understand exceptions for Firefox (but you don't want to switch
> to the enterprise slow release right?), and Wine, but...
>
> I've read it several times and I don't quite understand the major
> kernel version bumps. 3.2.1 just got rel
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 03:22 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 26.01.2012 03:03, schrieb Greg:
> > On 26/01/2012 12:46 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >> i made several HUNDRED of dist-upgrades with yum since FC3 and
> >> upgrade via DVD/Preupgrade is simply UNACEPPTABLE
> >
> > i don't have any proble
On 01/26/2012 07:47 AM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
> I can understand exceptions for Firefox (but you don't want to switch
> to the enterprise slow release right?), and Wine, but...
>
> I've read it several times and I don't quite understand the major
> kernel version bumps. 3.2.1 just got released to
Am 26.01.2012 03:03, schrieb Greg:
> On 26/01/2012 12:46 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> i made several HUNDRED of dist-upgrades with yum since FC3 and
>> upgrade via DVD/Preupgrade is simply UNACEPPTABLE
>
> i don't have any problems downloading a DvD, or a LiveCD
for one simple desktop, but realiz
I can understand exceptions for Firefox (but you don't want to switch
to the enterprise slow release right?), and Wine, but...
I've read it several times and I don't quite understand the major
kernel version bumps. 3.2.1 just got released to Fedora 16, yet it
started with 3.1.0.
Don't get me wro
On 26/01/2012 12:46 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
i made several HUNDRED of dist-upgrades with yum since FC3 and
upgrade via DVD/Preupgrade is simply UNACEPPTABLE
i don't have any problems downloading a DvD, or a LiveCD
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.o
On 01/26/2012 06:52 AM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
> Oh, then I guess I would like to see LibreOffice be a rolling
> component. I guess one of the questions is why rolling for these:
> Linux Kernel
> Firefox (forced by upstream policies)
> Wine
>
> and not for others?
You answered your own question re
Am 25.01.2012 23:48, schrieb Peter Robinson:
> So I saw a rpm update and a number of other builds today when dealing
> with various packaging bits. Checking the update [1] and reading the
> attached bug [2] I was a little shocked to find that "yum upgrade"
> between releases would be explicitly b
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:48:27PM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> So I saw a rpm update and a number of other builds today when dealing
> with various packaging bits. Checking the update [1] and reading the
> attached bug [2] I was a little shocked to find that "yum upgrade"
> between
Oh, then I guess I would like to see LibreOffice be a rolling
component. I guess one of the questions is why rolling for these:
Linux Kernel
Firefox (forced by upstream policies)
Wine
and not for others?
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:50 AM, David Tardon wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 05:32:27P
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 21:37:36 -0200
Henrique Junior wrote:
> I would like to see Fedora following the path of rolling release.
> openSUSE is doing a great job with the Tumbleweed, still keeping the
> same old system of releases and letting users choose whether or not
> using roling release.
> Part
I don't know if you're aware of this or not, but a user managed to
port Ubuntu's Unity to OpenSUSE 12.1 as you can see here:
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:GNOME_Ayatana
And also I've been told this desktop is available for
ArchLinux now as well... As for this facts I was wondering
how feasible
2012/1/25 Björn Persson :
> Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>> What's wrong with preupgrade?
>
> Preupgrade makes no effort to verify the authenticity of the new release it
> downloads, so it's only usable for throw-away boxes where you don't care too
> much if you get a backdoor or two installed togeth
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> What's wrong with preupgrade?
Preupgrade makes no effort to verify the authenticity of the new release it
downloads, so it's only usable for throw-away boxes where you don't care too
much if you get a backdoor or two installed together with your new Fedora
release.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 13:33:49 -0600,
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >Personally I'd rather see the effort go into making it easier to update
> >between Fedora releases. That provides a way to remain fairly current without
> >starting from scratch and allowing you to cho
Hi.
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:33:49 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote
> What's wrong with preupgrade?
Every other release doubles the space needed in /boot for it to
work?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi All,
So I saw a rpm update and a number of other builds today when dealing
with various packaging bits. Checking the update [1] and reading the
attached bug [2] I was a little shocked to find that "yum upgrade"
between releases would be explicitly broken due to this feature.
Yes, I know that i
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/35
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/35/0001-Trac-Ticket-35-Log-not-clear-enough-on-schema-errors.patch
Thanks to Rich for his review. The new patch logs the lineno of the
corrupted entry in the input ldif file.
Comment:
Improved the error m
Le mercredi 25 janvier 2012 18:30:57, Scott Tsai a écrit :
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:28:48 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> > Alain Portal wrote:
> >> Kicad doesn't build with gcc-4.7 and I don't understand anything with
> >> c++.
> >> Can somebody help me?
> >>
> >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/ko
On 1/25/12 8:47 AM, Tom Callaway wrote:
> On 01/24/2012 11:56 PM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>> I've filed a few defects against different issues with clamav not installing
>> correctly, missing files, and having the wrong permissions that precludes
>> interactions with collaborating software such
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Personally I'd rather see the effort go into making it easier to update
between Fedora releases. That provides a way to remain fairly current without
starting from scratch and allowing you to choose the timing of when you want
to deal with disruption.
What's wrong with pr
Personally I'd rather see the effort go into making it easier to update
between Fedora releases. That provides a way to remain fairly current without
starting from scratch and allowing you to choose the timing of when you want
to deal with disruption.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraprojec
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/35
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/35/0001-Trac-Ticket-35-Log-not-clear-enough-on-schema-errors.patch
Comment:
Fix description: Cryptic error message:
dse - parsing dse entry [attributeTypes]
is now replaced with:
dse - Parsing ent
On 01/25/2012 09:47 PM, Matej Cepl wrote:
On 25.1.2012 15:32, Richard Shaw wrote:
The summary from the spec file says:
Summary:Jabber client based on Qt
which is much better, but the extended description could be more clear.
Is this package both a IM client and a collection of plugins?
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:30:57 +, Scott Tsai wrote:
> Alain, once the boost-polygon / gcc-4.7 bug in RHBZ 784654 is fixed you
> can pull the packaging changes from https://www.gitorious.org/fedora-
> packages/kicad/
In case you want to update kicad to the latest bzr revision, I've
uploaded:
ht
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Nathanael Noblet wrote:
> So far I've seen lots of discussion about can we do it, but no proposal nor
> any real set of why it would be better. Does it reduce packaging work? Does
> it do X Y Z? Why would I *want* a rolling release?
So far I'm not thrilled with w
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:28:48 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Alain Portal wrote:
>> Kicad doesn't build with gcc-4.7 and I don't understand anything with
>> c++.
>> Can somebody help me?
>>
>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3730441
>> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/deve
James Antill (ja...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> . Doing "install @core" is actually smaller, and less packages than the
> above² 8. Which makes me assume something is missing from @core.
The kernel; it's brought in by anaconda for a minimal *install*, but not
explicitly mentioned because it's not
Hey,
I'm going to build new libarchive in rawhide, bumping the soname. I'll
also rebuild packages which depend on libarchive, see below.
Affected packages are:
$ repoquery --whatrequires libarchive
PackageKit-0:0.7.2-2.fc17.x86_64
PackageKit-command-not-found-0:0.7.2-2.fc17.x86_64
PackageKit-deb
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-GStreamer:
e2d51158f3c671c0e4c11a82c9171b2b GStreamer-0.16.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784248
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 25.1.2012 15:32, Richard Shaw wrote:
The summary from the spec file says:
Summary:Jabber client based on Qt
which is much better, but the extended description could be more clear.
Is this package both a IM client and a collection of plugins?
Also, what's the difference from psi-non
commit 13b66f822a3d6604f2734ee7a32d1d91af482cb2
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Wed Jan 25 16:34:28 2012 +0100
Enable tests at build time
perl-GStreamer.spec | 10 ++
test.patch | 19 ---
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl
commit 2090f284c05eded0f0e998197ddbb89855884718
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Wed Jan 25 16:17:34 2012 +0100
0.16 bump
.gitignore |1 +
.rpmlint|2 ++
perl-GStreamer.spec | 34 +++---
sources |2 +-
4 files changed, 19
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 08:54 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) said:
> > Great idea, I would also love to see a clear out of the packages that
> > aren't core/part of particular categories. MTAs in minimal would be
> > one that comes to mind but there's lots of o
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784247
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
commit df73019ec400ab00559ef4003e80edffa0ea3244
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Wed Jan 25 15:37:04 2012 +0100
1.43 bump
.gitignore |1 +
perl-DBD-Mock.spec | 42 +++---
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 24 deletion
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-DBD-Mock:
e7a43b6d20a5ab7f4f469e2dcc5ddc4e DBD-Mock-1.43.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/lis
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:36 AM, Ivan Romanov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I opened review request for my psi-plus package.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 . But nobody want to take
> it. I am looking somebody who will do this review. Review exchange is
> possible.
It would be a good
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 01/25/2012 03:48 AM, drago01 wrote:
>
>>
>> Exactly releases have the advantage of being a well tested set of
>> updates where you have a window to decide whether you want to update
>> yet or not.
>> So I don't see what a rolling release
commit c00da1fd0ae965337d144392a7f0ce58850ca14d
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Wed Jan 25 13:52:14 2012 +0100
Do not export dependency on private module DateTimeX::Easy::DateParse
perl-DateTimeX-Easy.spec |8 +++-
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Da
On 01/25/2012 03:48 AM, drago01 wrote:
>
> Exactly releases have the advantage of being a well tested set of
> updates where you have a window to decide whether you want to update
> yet or not.
> So I don't see what a rolling release gains really. If you always want
> to run the latest and greate
Hello.
I opened review request for my psi-plus package.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 . But nobody want to
take it. I am looking somebody who will do this review. Review exchange
is possible.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.
Some parts of the rsyslog source code were relicensed from 'GPLv3+' to
'ASL 2.0' in version 5.8.7.
http://blog.gerhards.net/2012/01/rsyslog-licensing-update.html
Tomas
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 25/01/12 11:01, Swapnil Bhartiya wrote:
I don't think Fedora is for 'consumers'. Due to the policy to not
include many non-free components and missing apps from main repos, I
don't consider it a consumer OS. I tried it myself and also tried to put
it on average user's PCs but it refuse to wo
2012/1/25 Jos Vos :
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:01:07PM +0100, Swapnil Bhartiya wrote:
>
>> I don't think Fedora is for 'consumers'. Due to the policy to not
>> include many non-free components and missing apps from main repos, I
>> don't consider it a consumer OS. I tried it myself and also tried
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:01:07PM +0100, Swapnil Bhartiya wrote:
> I don't think Fedora is for 'consumers'. Due to the policy to not
> include many non-free components and missing apps from main repos, I
> don't consider it a consumer OS. I tried it myself and also tried to put
> it on average
On 01/25/2012 11:57 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:22:37 +0100, MP (Michał) wrote:
Hi,
Microsoft has changed the way of prerelease version naming
Alpha -> Developer Preview
Beta -> Consumer Preview
Release Candidate -> Enterprise (or Business) Preview
I don't think Fed
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:22:37 +0100, MP (Michał) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Microsoft has changed the way of prerelease version naming
> Alpha -> Developer Preview
> Beta -> Consumer Preview
> Release Candidate -> Enterprise (or Business) Preview
The name is irrelevant. Its definition just needs to be clea
2012/1/25 Jos Vos :
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:22:37AM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>
>> Microsoft has changed the way of prerelease version naming
>> Alpha -> Developer Preview
>> Beta -> Consumer Preview
>> Release Candidate -> Enterprise (or Business) Preview
>>
>> http://www.neowin.net/new
2012/1/25 Michał Piotrowski :
> Hi,
>
> Microsoft has changed the way of prerelease version naming
> Alpha -> Developer Preview
> Beta -> Consumer Preview
> Release Candidate -> Enterprise (or Business) Preview
>
> http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-beta-may-be-called-the-consumer-preview
>
> It
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:22:37AM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Microsoft has changed the way of prerelease version naming
> Alpha -> Developer Preview
> Beta -> Consumer Preview
> Release Candidate -> Enterprise (or Business) Preview
>
> http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-beta-may-be-call
Hi,
Microsoft has changed the way of prerelease version naming
Alpha -> Developer Preview
Beta -> Consumer Preview
Release Candidate -> Enterprise (or Business) Preview
http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-beta-may-be-called-the-consumer-preview
It seems to me that this is a very good change for
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:49 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
>> It's worth noting that the following already appear to "rolling" components:
>
>> LibreOffice
>
> Not true.
Oh David already said that ... should probably read the whole thread
before rep
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
> It's worth noting that the following already appear to "rolling" components:
> LibreOffice
Not true.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 01/24/2012 04:53 PM, mike cloaked wrote:
>> Having looked at the way releasing packages and versions in linux has
>> been moving in a number of distributions it is interesting that there
>> are several that now have a rolling-release mode
Dne 25.1.2012 00:52, Rex Dieter napsal(a):
Mo Morsi wrote:
On 01/24/2012 04:50 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
Hi,
since we finally got our Ruby 1.9.3 feature page [1] approved, we are
starting rebuild for Ruby 1.9.3. Everyone who owns a package that depends
on Ruby or Rubygems should rebuild it in
68 matches
Mail list logo
