Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 15.02.2012 17:45, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Thomas Woerner has been working on a more user friendly firewall > solution for Fedora so firewall solution is in a bit of state of flux in > Fedora at this point in time and explains why things are a

Re: Apple will use LLVM

On 02/16/2012 10:08 AM, Genes MailLists wrote: > Not to mention that the kernel devs use gcc to compile the kernel - > and it most certainly puts a lot of pressure on the compiler. I suspect > unless linus drops gcc as well, we'll at a minimum need to keep it to > build the kernel itself. Not

Re: Apple will use LLVM

On 02/15/2012 10:38 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > We're already building at least one package (hfsplus-tools) with llvm > because it relies on non-standard C extensions that gcc doesn't support, > and I believe the current software rasteriser in mesa depends on it. In > terms of it being the gen

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120213 changes

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 20:16 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > But sure, if you spin your own boot.iso and it happens to work well, > by > all means, use it. Nothing will explode. :) I just built one because don't found any, in next test I will use one from Testings , of course, to help on tests.

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120213 changes

On Thu, 2012-02-16 at 04:00 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 18:07 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 19:36 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120213 changes

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 18:07 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 19:36 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 10:33 +, Branched Report wrote: > > > > Hi, > > on http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/i386/os/images/ > > we got boot.iso > > on http://

Re: Apple will use LLVM

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 01:22:51AM +0100, jonathan wrote: > Apple move step by step to LLVM and stop to use gcc. The latest apple > IDE (Xcode) will not ship gcc but llvm. > https://developer.apple.com/technologies/tools/whats-new.html > > It will be great to know if llvm is ready to do same for s

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 07:23:24PM -0500, Steve Clark wrote: > On 02/15/2012 05:19 PM, mike cloaked wrote: > >I use bash completion all the time every single day - I guess I have > >become a corner case! > > > No you haven't. All the developers I have worked with since the early > nineties use it

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 15 February 2012 17:23, Steve Clark wrote: > On 02/15/2012 05:19 PM, mike cloaked wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 18:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: > > On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/16/2012 07:46 AM, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote: > > Right. And thanks to this thread I just learned what "broke" bash > completion for me after fresh install of F16: 'rpm -e bash-completion' > fixed bash for me :-) As a quick note; you should probably use yum remove instead of rpm -e becaus

Re: Apple will use LLVM

On 2/15/12 7:22 PM, jonathan wrote: Apple move step by step to LLVM and stop to use gcc. The latest apple IDE (Xcode) will not ship gcc but llvm. https://developer.apple.com/technologies/tools/whats-new.html It will be great to know if llvm is ready to do same for several important linux package

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

On 02/16/2012 02:06 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 02/15/2012 11:09 PM, Emanuel Rietveld wrote: >>> >> >> I propose the following script in /etc/init.d/iptables > > I propose you file a BUG against IPTABLES and put your proposal into > that bug report then wait and see what Thomas has to

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 15/02/12 01:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 18:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: It might be a shocking revelation to you but not ever

Re: ceph in Rawhide and F17 broken?

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 21:59 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > In F17 and Rawhide, I'm getting this error in root.log: > > DEBUG util.py:257: Error: Package: ceph-0.37-2.fc17.x86_64 (build) > DEBUG util.py:257: Requires: libtcmalloc.so.0()(64bit) Well, the problem isn't ceph itself e

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

On 02/15/2012 11:09 PM, Emanuel Rietveld wrote: I propose the following script in /etc/init.d/iptables I propose you file a BUG against IPTABLES and put your proposal into that bug report then wait and see what Thomas has to say. JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ht

Re: Apple will use LLVM

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:22 PM, jonathan wrote: > Apple move step by step to LLVM and stop to use gcc. The latest apple > IDE (Xcode) will not ship gcc but llvm. > https://developer.apple.com/technologies/tools/whats-new.html > > It will be great to know if llvm is ready to do same for several >

Re: ceph in Rawhide and F17 broken?

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 16:44 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 21:59 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > In F17 and Rawhide, I'm getting this error in root.log: > > > > DEBUG util.py:257: Error: Package: ceph-0.37-2.fc17.x86_64 (build) > > DEBUG util.py:257: Requir

Re: F17 bootloader error(s)

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 17:24 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Feb 15, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Mike Chambers wrote: > > > When trying to do test install against F17Alpha TC2, during partition > > layout, I get error below... > > > > "you have not created a bootloader stage1 target device" > > anaconda-1

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

On Wednesday, February 15, 2012, 7:15:13 PM, Reindl wrote: > Am 16.02.2012 00:48, schrieb Al Dunsmuir: >> On Wednesday, February 15, 2012, 6:12:44 PM, Reindl wrote: >>> this will not work since if a systemd-unit is present >>> systemd no longer is interested in anything from >>> /etc/init.d/ >> >>

ceph in Rawhide and F17 broken?

Richard W.M. Jones redhat.com> writes: > In F17 and Rawhide, I'm getting this error in root.log: > > DEBUG util.py:257: Error: Package: ceph-0.37-2.fc17.x86_64 (build) > DEBUG util.py:257: Requires: libtcmalloc.so.0()(64bit) This causes 17 Alpha RC2 to fail repoclosure, so it won't

Re: F17 bootloader error(s)

On Feb 15, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Mike Chambers wrote: > When trying to do test install against F17Alpha TC2, during partition > layout, I get error below... > > "you have not created a bootloader stage1 target device" anaconda-17.8-1.fc17.src.rpm pyanaconda/storage/__init__.py line 1250

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 05:19 PM, mike cloaked wrote: On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 18:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:

Apple will use LLVM

Apple move step by step to LLVM and stop to use gcc. The latest apple IDE (Xcode) will not ship gcc but llvm. https://developer.apple.com/technologies/tools/whats-new.html It will be great to know if llvm is ready to do same for several important linux package. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

Am 16.02.2012 00:48, schrieb Al Dunsmuir: > On Wednesday, February 15, 2012, 6:12:44 PM, Reindl wrote: >> this will not work since if a systemd-unit is present >> systemd no longer is interested in anything from >> /etc/init.d/ > >> so there is no solution except patch systemd if iptables.servic

Re: F17 bootloader error

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 11:41 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: > When trying to do test install against F17Alpha TC2, during partition > layout, I get error below... > > "you have not created a bootloader stage1 target device" > > I have F16 installed on here, and even reformatted the disks to GPT > bef

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

On Wednesday, February 15, 2012, 6:12:44 PM, Reindl wrote: > this will not work since if a systemd-unit is present > systemd no longer is interested in anything from > /etc/init.d/ > so there is no solution except patch systemd if iptables.service is > called which will not happen because it would

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

this will not work since if a systemd-unit is present systemd no longer is interested in anything from /etc/init.d/ so there is no solution except patch systemd if iptables.service is called which will not happen because it would be unmaintainable ober the long and doing it for iptables would brin

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

On 02/15/2012 03:45 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> >> >> The service iptables save command is documented in a number of places >> and has been recommended to users for years. See, for example, the >> security guide: >> http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/16/html/Security_Guide/sect-S

Review swaps

Hi all, still require a few takers required for swaps. Ports from CCRMA and latest additions to the new LV2 audio stack. All very small packages CCRMA 788718 clalsadrv - An ALSA driver C++ library (most of the following depend on this one) 789255 ebumeter - Loudness measurement according to

[Test-Announce] Fedora 17 Alpha Release Candidate 2 (RC2) Available Now!

**IMPORTANT**: 17 Alpha RC1 was never officially announced - see https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test-announce/2012-February/000371.html . I will post delta ISOs for both RC1->RC2 and TC2->RC2. As per the Fedora 17 schedule [1], Fedora 17 Alpha Release Candidate 2 (RC2) is now available

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

Martin Langhoff wrote: > Miroslav -- you haven't seen this work because the tasks are not all > yet in. But the "stateless" feature handles a lot of it already. If you revert /usr to a snapshot without touching the rpmdb (in /var/lib/rpm), your system will be in a very inconsistent state.

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 18:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: >> > On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: >> >> On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: >> > >> >>> >> >>> It might be a

ceph in Rawhide and F17 broken?

In F17 and Rawhide, I'm getting this error in root.log: DEBUG util.py:257: Error: Package: ceph-0.37-2.fc17.x86_64 (build) DEBUG util.py:257: Requires: libtcmalloc.so.0()(64bit) Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programm

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 18:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: > > On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: > >> On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: > > > >>> > >>> It might be a shocking revelation to you but not everybody uses or > >>> reli

[Test-Announce] Fedora 17 Alpha RC1 is not released. Definitely, absolutely not.

Some of you who are just too darn nosy for your own business may have noticed a directory called 17-Alpha.RC1/ here: http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/ Now, if you're some kind of trouble-making, commie, tin foil hatted conspiracist, you might even think that this might be Fedora 17 Alpha

[perl-Params-Coerce/el4: 13/13] Merge branch 'master' into el4

commit e2bb3f3f8018617291016c8493d6007b8cc5efa2 Merge: 0818571 0de31b1 Author: Paul Howarth Date: Wed Feb 15 19:36:21 2012 + Merge branch 'master' into el4 Conflicts: .gitignore .gitignore |2 +- perl-Params-Coerce.spec | 104

[perl-Params-Coerce/el4] (13 commits) ...Merge branch 'master' into el4

Summary of changes: b51bfac... new perl (*) b7986ca... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass (*) 56159d5... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_12_Mass (*) 15de7d0... Fix typo that causes a failure to update the common directo (*) 6e27e84... - rebuil

[perl-Params-Coerce] Created tag perl-Params-Coerce-0.14-11.fc17

The lightweight tag 'perl-Params-Coerce-0.14-11.fc17' was created pointing to: 0de31b1... Spec clean-up -- 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/listinfo/perl-dev

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 07:45:41PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > does not matter because bash is the default shell and > transitions have to be targeted for defaults and any > developer of core-components has to use system defaults > for his testings I'm sorry, it's clear at this point that you h

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

Am 15.02.2012 20:01, schrieb Genes MailLists: > On 02/15/2012 09:45 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > >> Experienced admins dont use service iptables blah anyway ( they use >> iptables commands directly ) so it hardly matters to them documentation >> should however be updated for those that a

[perl-Params-Coerce/f17] Spec clean-up

Summary of changes: 0de31b1... Spec clean-up (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- 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/mailm

[perl-Params-Coerce] Spec clean-up

commit 0de31b14fc7cb86fd0c48b9b4a0faa7e89aae4c5 Author: Paul Howarth Date: Wed Feb 15 19:15:38 2012 + Spec clean-up - Drop redundant perl and perl(ExtUtils::AutoInstall) buildreqs - BR: perl(Carp), perl(Scalar::Util) ≥ 1.11, perl(Test::More) - Use DESTDIR rather than PE

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

On 02/15/2012 09:45 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Experienced admins dont use service iptables blah anyway ( they use > iptables commands directly ) so it hardly matters to them documentation > should however be updated for those that actually use service iptables > blah to point this out s

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/16/2012 12:13 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > i SURELY have made a notice in one of many > bug-reports belonging to systemd last year I don't recall seeing it and I am cc'ed in all systemd bug reports and also, individual bugs require individual bug reports. Not merely a note in another bug repo

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 07:10 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: It might be a shocking revelation to you but not everybody uses or relies their world on bash autocompletion.

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

Am 15.02.2012 18:53, schrieb Tomasz Torcz: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:19:18PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> On 02/15/2012 10:48 PM, Chris Adams wrote: >>> Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram said: bash-completion is not a default package. >>> >>> Wrong since F16 - it is default in the Base

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

Am 15.02.2012 18:40, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: > On 02/15/2012 10:40 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> >> it is used by all professional users using mostly a terminal >> it should not installed as deafult because desktop users do >> not need it at all, but this does not change the fact that >> systemd

Re: F17 bootloader error

On Feb 15, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Mike Chambers wrote: > When trying to do test install against F17Alpha TC2, during partition > layout, I get error below... > > "you have not created a bootloader stage1 target device" > > I have F16 installed on here, and even reformatted the disks to GPT > before

Re: F-17 Branched report: 20120212 changes

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:14:29 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > the rawhide and branched composes logs can be found at: > > http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/rawhide/ > and > http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/branched/ Note those are really the locations for the last successful buil

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:19:18PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 02/15/2012 10:48 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > > Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram said: > >> bash-completion is not a default package. > > > > Wrong since F16 - it is default in the Base group in comps. > > Ah. didn't notice that.

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 10:48 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram said: >> bash-completion is not a default package. > > Wrong since F16 - it is default in the Base group in comps. Ah. didn't notice that. I haven't done a fresh installation since Fedora 11 or so. Regardless of th

F17 bootloader error

When trying to do test install against F17Alpha TC2, during partition layout, I get error below... "you have not created a bootloader stage1 target device" I have F16 installed on here, and even reformatted the disks to GPT before I installed F16. So using same partitions as installed like I alw

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 10:40 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > it is used by all professional users using mostly a terminal > it should not installed as deafult because desktop users do > not need it at all, but this does not change the fact that > systemd developers which i still call "professional users" > s

[Bug 789784] Provide native systemd service

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=789784 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram said: > bash-completion is not a default package. Wrong since F16 - it is default in the Base group in comps. -- Chris Adams Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- devel mail

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 15.02.2012 14:25, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: >> I haven't seen this work and I don't think such snaphots can be relied >> upon: /boot, /etc and /var are affected by installs as well Miroslav -- you haven't seen this work because the tasks ar

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: > On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: >> On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: > >>> >>> It might be a shocking revelation to you but not everybody uses or >>> relies their world on bash autocompletion. >>> >>> - Panu - >> What wor

[389-devel] please review ticket #111 - ability to control behavior of modifyTimestamp/modifiersNa

Revised fix based on Rich's comments https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/111 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/111/0001-Ticket-111-ability-to-control-behavior-of-modifyTime.patch Thanks, Mark -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: > On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: >> >> It might be a shocking revelation to you but not everybody uses or >> relies their world on bash autocompletion. >> >> - Panu - > What world are you living in? bash-completion is not a default p

Re: [fedora-java] Improvements Eclipse Installation

I am going to hold off on this as I have run into an issue where bundles installed using and update site don't work with bundles installed using rpm if there is a bundle conflict between the two. I am investigating. After looking into this I realized that we cannot move forward with the recon

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

Am 15.02.2012 15:45, schrieb "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": > Experienced admins dont use service iptables blah anyway ( they use iptables > commands directly ) so it hardly > matters to them documentation should however be updated for those that > actually use service iptables blah to point > this o

Re: service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

On 02/15/2012 01:15 PM, Emanuel Rietveld wrote: Currently, on Fedora 16, service iptables save prints the following: # service iptables save Redirecting to /bin/systemctl save iptables.service Unknown operation save The service iptables save command is documented in a number of places and has

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

Am 15.02.2012 14:25, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Martin Langhoff > wrote: >> You are wrong. The /usr move has a very clear impact in being able to >> snapshot your OS install partition. Add btrfs, yum hooks and the >> already-implemented "stateless" configuration a

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote: > You are wrong. The /usr move has a very clear impact in being able to > snapshot your OS install partition. Add btrfs, yum hooks and the > already-implemented "stateless" configuration and you have a really major > feature: a fully upgrade/

service iptables save, systemctl, and unhelpful error messages

Currently, on Fedora 16, service iptables save prints the following: # service iptables save Redirecting to /bin/systemctl save iptables.service Unknown operation save The service iptables save command is documented in a number of places and has been recommended to users for years. See, for ex

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

Am 15.02.2012 13:43, schrieb Martin Langhoff: > On Feb 15, 2012 6:16 AM, "Reindl Harald" > wrote: >> there is no single reason for a feature like /usrmove which >> in fact nobody NEEDS at all and definitly not now to press >> it into the next release with pressure

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On Feb 15, 2012 6:16 AM, "Reindl Harald" wrote: > there is no single reason for a feature like /usrmove which > in fact nobody NEEDS at all and definitly not now to press > it into the next release with pressure You are wrong. The /usr move has a very clear impact in being able to snapshot your O

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

Am 15.02.2012 12:24, schrieb Tomasz Torcz: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:16:07PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> there is no single reason for a feature like /usrmove which >> in fact nobody NEEDS at all and definitly not now to press >> it into the next release with pressure > > Well, I need u

[Bug 789975] perl-Hash-MultiValue-0.12 is available

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=789975 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added --

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 02/15/2012 11:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.02.2012 10:53, schrieb Brendan Jones: On 02/15/2012 10:47 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.02.2012 19:16, schrieb "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": On 02/14/2012 10:23 AM, Alfredo Ferrari wrote: Do the s

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:16:07PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > there is no single reason for a feature like /usrmove which > in fact nobody NEEDS at all and definitly not now to press > it into the next release with pressure Well, I need usrmove, because I have a strong need for clean syste

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 09:28 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:47 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 11:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Let me put it this way, then: Fedora is released on a six month cycle, > > > which is far faster than is usually

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

Am 15.02.2012 12:05, schrieb Harald Hoyer: > Am 15.02.2012 11:20 schrieb "Ralf Corsepius" >: >> Yes. We've forked f17 and you guys are still chasing elementary bugs. >> >> What do you expect Fedora users to think of this? It communicates a nice >> impression of the q

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On 15/02/12 10:18, Ralf Corsepius wrote: So? Should we drop all features that aren't bug free after feature freeze? Yes. We've forked f17 and you guys are still chasing elementary bugs. What do you expect Fedora users to think of this? It communicates a nice impression of the quality of your w

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

Am 15.02.2012 11:20 schrieb "Ralf Corsepius" : > Yes. We've forked f17 and you guys are still chasing elementary bugs. > > What do you expect Fedora users to think of this? It communicates a nice impression of the quality of your works. > > Better stop this non-sense now rofl... "nothing else is b

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 11:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.02.2012 10:53, schrieb Brendan Jones: On 02/15/2012 10:47 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.02.2012 19:16, schrieb "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": On 02/14/2012 10:23 AM, Alfredo Ferrari wrote: Do the systemd maintainers ever read bug reports BTW?

Re: Heads up: F17 Alpha RC1 arriving ahead of schedule

> > TC3: > > > > https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5083 > > > > this is two days ahead of schedule, but it's good to get going > > early! > > The compose should arrive some time today, Andre will no doubt > > announce > > it as usual. Thanks all. > > Ugh, we really want this one: > https:

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

Am 15.02.2012 11:25, schrieb drago01: >>> So? Should we drop all features that aren't bug free after feature freeze? >> >> Yes. We've forked f17 and you guys are still chasing elementary bugs. > > "elementary bugs" ? You got to be either kidding or trolling. > >> What do you expect Fedora users

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 02/15/2012 10:37 AM, drago01 wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Kevin Kofler >>  wrote: >>> >>> Lennart Poettering wrote: Because dropping these dirs from the search paths is merely an optimization, not a requir

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On 02/15/2012 10:37 AM, drago01 wrote: On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Lennart Poettering wrote: Because dropping these dirs from the search paths is merely an optimization, not a requirement. You call it an "optimization", I call it fixing a pessimization (performance r

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

Am 15.02.2012 10:53, schrieb Brendan Jones: > On 02/15/2012 10:47 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> >> Am 14.02.2012 19:16, schrieb "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": >>> On 02/14/2012 10:23 AM, Alfredo Ferrari wrote: Do the systemd maintainers ever read bug reports BTW? >>> >>> Why do you think oth

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

On 02/15/2012 10:47 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.02.2012 19:16, schrieb "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": On 02/14/2012 10:23 AM, Alfredo Ferrari wrote: Do the systemd maintainers ever read bug reports BTW? Why do you think otherwise? Not only read them but fix them as well. To give you some st

Re: /usrmove? -> about the future

Am 14.02.2012 19:16, schrieb "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": > On 02/14/2012 10:23 AM, Alfredo Ferrari wrote: >> >> Do the systemd maintainers ever read bug reports BTW? > > Why do you think otherwise? > > Not only read them but fix them as well. > > To give you some stats > > There are currently 96

Re: /usrmove and path ordering

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Lennart Poettering wrote: >> Because dropping these dirs from the search paths is merely an >> optimization, not a requirement. > > You call it an "optimization", I call it fixing a pessimization (performance > regression). > > And as the orig