Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

Thanks Brendan. My Fedora doesn't even use a GNOME desktop. I've happily used XFCE for years. And I make no secret that I care about servers more than desktops (you know, that part of the market where general purpose Linux has a huge footprint and stands a chance). I would hate to look back in f

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:12:03 -0400 (EDT) Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > - Original Message - > > From: "Richard W.M. Jones" > > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 > > 11:56:40 PM Subject: Re: F2

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 23:18 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 07/10/2013 10:12 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > As I said elsewhere in the thread, the criteria should be subsidiary to > > the primary arch designation. If we decide we want to take ARM as a > > primary arch in any form in which the cu

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:56:40 +0100 "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:17:47PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 08:28 -0400, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > > > I still have serious concerns regarding build times: > > > * arm - > > > https://arm.koji.fedor

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/10/2013 10:12 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: As I said elsewhere in the thread, the criteria should be subsidiary to the primary arch designation. If we decide we want to take ARM as a primary arch in any form in which the current release criteria don't apply, we should amend the release criter

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

- Original Message - > From: "Richard W.M. Jones" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 11:56:40 PM > Subject: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:17:47PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote: > >

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/10/2013 09:13 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: Fedora is an operating system that supports a range of desktop environments, defaulting to the GNOME desktop environment. An OS that supports headless servers but not desktop environments might be based on Fedora, but it wouldn't be Fedora. As such,

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/10/2013 01:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal >> doesnt yet have it. > > Only i?86/x86_64/ppc/ppc64/s390/s390x/sparc/sparc64/tilegx/tilepro > really have full st

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 20:12 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Jul 10, 2013 6:08 PM, "Brendan Conoboy" wrote: > > > > On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > >> > >> No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated > in > >> the preamble of all release criteria pages

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:43:36AM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > Stack protector is not a new requirement in Fedora. It's been part of > > the distribution for years. > > xterm has been part of the distribution for years also, but it's not a > release requirement. The assumption has always bee

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 18:08 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in > > the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better > > to state it. > > If we were only pro

Re: [Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

Dne 9.7.2013 17:52, Orion Poplawski napsal(a): On 07/09/2013 12:16 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 8.7.2013 12:00, nob...@fedoraproject.org napsal(a): ruby-mysql [devel] was orphaned by orion A Ruby interface to MySQL https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ruby-mysql Was this inten

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

> Stack protector is not a new requirement in Fedora. It's been part of > the distribution for years. xterm has been part of the distribution for years also, but it's not a release requirement. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:08:33PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > >No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in > >the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better > >to state it. > > If we were only

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 09:53:09PM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote: > But also guys, come on. We can't be having random new requirements > being added in a bike shedding exercise with the first this being > raised happening now. Stack protector is not a new requirement in Fedora. It's been part o

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Jul 10, 2013 6:08 PM, "Brendan Conoboy" wrote: > > On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> >> No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in >> the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better >> to state it. > > > If we were only proposi

Re: Who uses abi-compliance-checker?

On Qui, 2013-07-04 at 16:47 +0400, Andrey Ponomarenko wrote: > Starting with 1.6 version of pkgdiff if you compare debug packages > and > add --details option on the command line then the tool will > automatically run abi-dumper to dump ABI of old and new shared > objects > found in the packages

Orphaning desktopcouch

Hello, I've orphaned desktopcouch in pkdg, I haven't had in interest in quite a while and it could use some attention from more active maintenance. -- Jeff Ollie -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

That option simply preserves the global stack canary value between tasks during context switch. It's not really core to this. The core piece is userspace compiler tooling. I know the option exists and I thought/was lead to believe it works. But if Jakub has concerns I will add that to the feedba

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better to state it. If we were only proposing headless ARM servers for primary how would these criteria apply?

Re: More unhelpful update descriptions

On Wed, 03 Jul, 2013 at 04:35:58 GMT, Alex G. wrote: > We shouldn't be surprised that update descriptions are crap. They are > just an annoyance for a lot of us, especially since we've put all that > information in a bunch of other places. Where else would information like the information in this

Re: [Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

I'm not a currently approved packager, but I'd be interested in taking over bsd-mailx. I use it constantly on other platforms and it doesn't make sense to me to drop it. Matt On 2013-07-01, at 2:14 PM, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > Change in ownership over the last 168 hours > =

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

Hi, On Wednesday 10 July 2013 at 10:51:44, Xavier Bachelot wrote: > I took a look at kaffeine as found in F19 yesterday, and it is still > using xine-lib (and does rebuild fine against the xine-lib 1.2.3 rpm I > prepared). A quick glance at upstream sources showed there are now an > mplayer and vl

Re: Virtualization on ARM (was: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture)

On Wed, 10 Jul 2013, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 11:32:46AM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote: Excellent proposal. I of course think this would be just awesome! This proposal doesn't address virtualization! I think this is great, BUT I'd also like to see a widely available

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 18:01 -0400, Cole Robinson wrote: > On 07/10/2013 05:34 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:46 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100 > >> Peter Robinson wrote: > >> > >>> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas > >>> wrote: >

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/10/2013 05:34 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:46 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100 >> Peter Robinson wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas >>> wrote: >> >> ...snip... >> test instances for maintainers as described he

Re: GPG verification in SPECs

On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 11:15:05PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > Hi, > > upstream of pam_mount pointed me to OpenSUSE's gpg-offline RPM macros at > https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Base:System/gpg-offline > > They allow to use a keyring and detached signature as additional source > in SPECs to

Fedora ARM Weekly Status Meeting Minutes 2013-07-10

Thank you everybody for joining today's Fedora-ARM meeting. For those who were unable to attend the minutes are below. Thank you! Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-07-10/fedora-meeting-1.2013-07-10-20.02.html Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedo

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 12:09 -0400, Peter Jones wrote: > > Is LXDE considered a release blocking desktop? I honestly don't know. > > I also don't think it matters whether LXDE or FVMW2 or Gnome is the > > default desktop on ARM. The criteria should probably be that it ships > > with a desktop th

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:51 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:02:24 +0200 > Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller > > > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with > >

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:46 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100 > Peter Robinson wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas > > wrote: > > ...snip... > > > > test instances for maintainers as described here: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machi

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 13:56 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 07/10/2013 12:36 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > Plus, in relation to this - the llvmpipe issue brings up that one of > > the 'release blocking desktops' *does not work*. This would, by definition, > > block the release unless

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 07:45 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > - Original Message - > >> Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said: > >> > I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the > >> > 'deliverables SOP' I started se

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:14:24PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote: >> Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> > I was working on adding 2 more SOC's for packagers earlier this week. >> > >> > I wanted to see how much call there was for these... should I try a

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:17:47PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote: > On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 08:28 -0400, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > > I still have serious concerns regarding build times: > > * arm - https://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=150248 ~ > > 17h > > * current primary -

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:14:24PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I was working on adding 2 more SOC's for packagers earlier this week. > > > > I wanted to see how much call there was for these... should I try and > > make them accessable by all packagers? Or just have a gro

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 13:02 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with the > desktop team > > We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit fro

Virtualization on ARM (was: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture)

On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 11:32:46AM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote: > Excellent proposal. I of course think this would be just awesome! This proposal doesn't address virtualization! I think this is great, BUT I'd also like to see a widely available cheap ARM platform that supports virtualization, A

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2013-07-11 16:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2013-06-27 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. rktime): 2013-07-11 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT 2013-07-11 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT 2013-07-11 16

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

Hi, On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:58:22 +0200 Xavier Bachelot wrote: > Hi, > > On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > The following packages currently depend on xine-lib: > > * gxine > > * (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected) > > * kaffeine (my package, the reason why I maintain xin

Planned Outage: koji storage move - 2013-07-18 21:00 UTC

Planned Outage: koji storage move - 2013-07-18 21:00 UTC There will be an outage starting at 2013-07-18 21:00 UTC, which will last approximately 24 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2013-07-18 21

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:06:50 -0400 (EDT) Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > Yeah, I know the reasons but still this would make it really hard for > us to push changes or test a build fix. I would like all archs to > have equal attention but not at the price of others. I still have bad > memories from p

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

- Original Message - > From: "Peter Robinson" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:17:49 PM > Subject: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov > wrote: > > - O

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal >> doesnt yet have it. > > Only i?86/x86_64/ppc/ppc64/s390/s390x/sparc/sparc64/tilegx/tilepro > really hav

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Till Maas wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas wrote: >> >>> > Which hardware is supported by ARMv7 hfp 32bit builds? Will th

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > - Original Message - >> From: "Josh Boyer" >> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" >> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:45:53 PM >> Subject: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture >> >> On Wed, J

Fedora ARM Weekly Status Meeting 2013-07-10

ARM enthusiasts and watchers, Please join us today (Wednesday, July 10th) at 4PM EDT (8PM UTC) for the Fedora ARM weekly status meeting in #fedora-meeting-1 on Freenode. On the agenda so far: 1) Problem packages 2) Kernel Status Update 3) Aarch64 - Status Update, problem packages -

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: GLIBC 2.18

Oops as noted by jreznik, this thread took a brief detour onto the docs list by mistake. On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:47:30AM -0400, Robyn Bergeron wrote: > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Toshio Kuratomi" > > To: "For participants of the Documentation Project" > > > > Sent: Wednes

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal > doesnt yet have it. Only i?86/x86_64/ppc/ppc64/s390/s390x/sparc/sparc64/tilegx/tilepro really have full stack protector support, while perhaps -fstack-protector

Re: Schedule for Wednesday's FESCo Meeting (2013-07-10)

- Original Message - > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 07/10/2013 01:14 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:43:04AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >> Note: As of this writing, the agenda for this week is very light. > >> The one known agenda ite

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/10/2013 04:09 PM, Peter Jones wrote: That doesn't mean that the release criteria as they stand aren't good for ARM - but they're criteria for evaluating RCs, not the criteria for ARM as a PA. Right It's two different things, and it's important that we not confuse them. The question isn

Re: Heads up, new cfitsio 3.350 in rawhide

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Sergio Pascual wrote: > Hello, a new cfitsio (3.350) is going to land tomorrow in rawhide. This > version comes with a significant change, upstream provides a soname for the > shared library. This means that hopefully updating cfitsio won't be so > painful in the

Re: Schedule for Wednesday's FESCo Meeting (2013-07-10)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/10/2013 01:14 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:43:04AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> Note: As of this writing, the agenda for this week is very light. >> The one known agenda item is waiting on information which hasn't >>

Re: Schedule for Wednesday's FESCo Meeting (2013-07-10)

On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:43:04AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Note: As of this writing, the agenda for this week is very light. The one > known agenda item is waiting on information which hasn't been submitted yet. > If you have something to discuss, please reply to this e-mail ASAP so we > c

Heads up, new cfitsio 3.350 in rawhide

Hello, a new cfitsio (3.350) is going to land tomorrow in rawhide. This version comes with a significant change, upstream provides a soname for the shared library. This means that hopefully updating cfitsio won't be so painful in the future. Regards, Sergio -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedor

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Jul 10, 2013, at 8:29 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > If ARM merely wants to be > able to produce something that's similar to Fedora then we should figure > out what a spin-based PA would look like, but that's not what's > currently being proposed. For F20, this makes more sense to me as a

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:57:43 +0200 Till Maas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas > > wrote: > > > > Which hardware is supported by ARMv7 hfp 32bit builds? Will ther

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal > doesnt yet have it. > from redhat-rpm-config > just because gcc accepts a flag, doesn't mean it has been implemented in the compiler. -- devel mailing list de

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:33:28 -0400 > Peter Jones wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:50:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > llvmpipe has been known to be broken for month

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:33:28 -0400 Peter Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:50:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > llvmpipe has been known to be broken for months, and nobody on the > > ARM team appears capable of fixing it. As a result, ARM

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

Kevin Fenzi wrote: > I was working on adding 2 more SOC's for packagers earlier this week. > > I wanted to see how much call there was for these... should I try and > make them accessable by all packagers? Or just have a group and > interested people could be added to that group? I for one would

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 07:45:53AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > > > I don't see a problem with different set of blocking desktops for ARM, even > > as primary architecture. But it's really about resources - do we have people > > willing to

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Till Maas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas wrote: > >> > Which hardware is supported by ARMv7 hfp 32bit builds? Will there be >> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/A

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas wrote: > > Which hardware is supported by ARMv7 hfp 32bit builds? Will there be > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM > > The list is expanding regularly and there's a lot

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:51 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:02:24 +0200 > Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller > > > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with > >

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:02:24 +0200 Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with > the desktop team > > We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit fr

Re: Problem with abrt update on F18?

On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 16:19 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > I saw this during the update: > > > Updating : abrt-libs-2.1.5-1.fc18.x86_64 >10/76 > cp: cannot create regular file > â/var/tmp/abrt/ccpp-2013-03-27-09:24:26-2877/environâ: No such file or > directory > cp: cannot create regular file

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100 Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas > wrote: ...snip... > > test instances for maintainers as described here: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers > > I've never seen the above before

[HEADS UP] levedb update from 1.9.0 to 1.12.0 for Fedora 19

Hello All! I'm updating leveldb from 1.9.0 to 1.12.o for Fedora 19. Actually that's mostly a change of the number in spec-file (NOT a soname bump) and a few compatible enhancements, however I also backported one essential patch from Basho's fork of leveldb, which is required for the next version of

[perl-Package-Stash] Update to 0.35

commit da9669e03c9e2bd63d82c256d6181106852a99c5 Author: Paul Howarth Date: Wed Jul 10 16:32:58 2013 +0100 Update to 0.35 - New upstream release 0.35 - Remove old, deprecated API - BR: perl(Getopt::Long) - perl(Package::DeprecationManager) is no longer needed perl-Pa

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 11:12 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said: > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller > > > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with the > > desktop tea

File Package-Stash-0.35.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by pghmcfc

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Package-Stash: 423e99f76382cb71119f5f3a69c1e29e Package-Stash-0.35.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/m

Re: Requesting provenpackager help

Great. Thank you! Il 09/07/2013 20:35, Jochen Schmitt ha scritto: On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote: There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed (and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji). Is there any provenpackager t

[perl-Dist-CheckConflicts] Created tag perl-Dist-CheckConflicts-0.08-1.fc20

The lightweight tag 'perl-Dist-CheckConflicts-0.08-1.fc20' was created pointing to: 2588498... Update to 0.08 -- 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/p

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 08:28 -0400, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > I still have serious concerns regarding build times: > * arm - https://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=150248 ~ 17h > * current primary - > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=429023 ~1h 30m > > Th

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said: > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with the > desktop team > > We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit frontends (gpk-up

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:02:57AM -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > I don't see a problem with different set of blocking desktops for ARM, even > as primary architecture. But it's really about resources - do we have people > willing to work for example on LXDE (I'd say more resources friendly for >

Re: I'm going to retire opengl-games-utils

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: > Hello All! > > I've no idea how did I become an opengl-games-utils maintainer in the > first place (perhaps I applied as a co-maintainer years ago). Also I > think that the package isn't needed anymore, so I'm going to remove > myself as a

I'm going to retire opengl-games-utils

Hello All! I've no idea how did I become an opengl-games-utils maintainer in the first place (perhaps I applied as a co-maintainer years ago). Also I think that the package isn't needed anymore, so I'm going to remove myself as a maintainer. If anyone wants to take care of this package, then don't

[off topic] [research] Interview for contributors over 50 for Oregon State University Research

Hello, Researchers at Oregon State University are striving to conduct research to learn more about the free/open source software community landscape as it relates to older adults. We’re looking for older adults who are older than 50 and are currently involved with a free/open source software proje

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" < johan...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/09/2013 08:00 PM, drago01 wrote: > > > On Tuesday, July 9, 2013, Jonathan Masters wrote: >> Matthew, >> >> We'll be looking into LLVM in due course. There are a few of us capable of fixing the issue (that you

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/10/2013 12:36 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Plus, in relation to this - the llvmpipe issue brings up that one of the 'release blocking desktops'*does not work*. This would, by definition, block the release unless we intend to have different criteria for ARM as a primary arch. Then we should

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 07/09/2013 08:00 PM, drago01 wrote: On Tuesday, July 9, 2013, Jonathan Masters > wrote: > Matthew, > > We'll be looking into LLVM in due course. There are a few of us capable of fixing the issue (that you were noted as being extremely concerned about on IRC at the

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

On 07/10/2013 01:42 PM, Michael J Gruber wrote: Do you top-post on rpmfusion-developers? I'm sorry if I messed that up, I'm not on that list and don't know the policy. As on most lists, no, we don't top post, but no worries ;-) We were talking about restructuring the xine packages, and xine-u

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

On Jul 10, 2013 5:25 AM, "Jaroslav Reznik" wrote: > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with the > desktop team > > We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit frontends (

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

- Original Message - > From: "Josh Boyer" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:45:53 PM > Subject: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > - Original Me

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > - Original Message - >> Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said: >> > I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the >> > 'deliverables SOP' I started several releases ago: >> > >> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Us

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

Do you top-post on rpmfusion-developers? I'm sorry if I messed that up, I'm not on that list and don't know the policy. We were talking about restructuring the xine packages, and xine-ui was supposed to be subsumed by another package if I remember correctly. Do we move first than repackage? In t

F20 Self Contained Change: Application Installer

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller Change owner(s): Richard Hughes , together with the desktop team We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit frontends (gpk-update-viewer and gpk-application) by a new application.

F20 Self Contained Change: Shared Certificate Tools

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Shared Certificate Tools = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SharedCertificateTools Change owner(s): Stef Walter Fedora now has infrastructure for sharing system trusted certificates between the various crypto libraries. Tools are being worked on for addi

F20 Self Contained Change: Hadoop

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Hadoop = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Hadoop Change owner(s): Matthew Farrellee Provide native Apache Hadoop packages. == Detailed description == Apache Hadoop is a widely used, increasingly complete big data platform, with a strong open source comm

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

On 07/10/2013 11:57 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: Xavier Bachelot venit, vidit, dixit 10.07.2013 10:58: Hi, On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: The following packages currently depend on xine-lib: * gxine * (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected) * kaffeine (my package, the reason

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

- Original Message - > Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said: > > I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the > > 'deliverables SOP' I started several releases ago: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_releng_SOP_deliverables > > > > (I don't rea

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

Xavier Bachelot venit, vidit, dixit 10.07.2013 10:58: > Hi, > > On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> The following packages currently depend on xine-lib: >> * gxine >> * (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected) >> * kaffeine (my package, the reason why I maintain xine-lib in the fi

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

Hi, On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: The following packages currently depend on xine-lib: * gxine * (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected) * kaffeine (my package, the reason why I maintain xine-lib in the first place) * oxine * xine-plugin * xine-ui These packages would have t

Re: Moving xine-lib and dependent apps to RPM Fusion Free for F17?

Hi Kevin, On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: In Kaffeine's case, upstream is switching from xine-lib to MPlayer in their git repository, so it will likely have to move to RPM Fusion sooner or later anyway. I took a look at kaffeine as found in F19 yesterday, and it is still using xin