Re: [GSoC'15] Btrfs content-based-storage mode

I have submitted a proposal to the Fedora Project. Please find it here: http://harshadjs.github.io/2015/03/27/Fedora-BTRFS-Content-Storage-Mode/ I hope that a mentor finds me and we could kick-start the development of content-based-storage mode for BTRFS, this summer! Cheers, Harshad. On Thu, Ma

Re: Pushing the extra AppData files into Rawhide

Thank you, I've received the notifications. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

On 26 March 2015 at 17:28, Bojan Smojver wrote: > Kevin Fenzi scrye.com> writes: > > > If you wish to test something before it's fully pushed to testing, you > > can download it directly from the buildsystem via the web interface, > > koji command line or bodhi client command line. > > I am full

Re: Heads up - openssh 6.8 coming to F22

Once upon a time, Nico Kadel-Garcia said: > Also, heads up on OpenSSH releases: they're planning to disable ssh-1 > compilation by default in a near future release, so the maintainer at > Fedora will need to decide whether to manually enable it. Please don't disable it in the client; I use SSH to

Re: Heads up - openssh 6.8 coming to F22

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Jakub Jelen wrote: > Hi all, > > I know that it is quite late in F22 schedule and freeze is coming, but we > decided to push recent upstream version into F22 before beta freeze to keep > up with upstream. > I spent some time with testing various use cases with our

Re: [GSoC'15] Btrfs content-based-storage mode

Thanks, and I am on top of it. Will post here, once I upload it to Google Melange. - Harshad. On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Itamar Reis Peixoto < ita...@ispbrasil.com.br> wrote: > > On Mar 24, 2015 10:04 PM, "harshad shirwadkar" < > harshadshirwad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > >

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote: > Maybe I'm misunderstanding how things work, but I think every package in > updates-testing is signed by a human, on an "offline" machine (i.e. someone > has to walk the RPM to it using physical media, sign it and then bring it > back and uplo

Re: [GSoC'15] Btrfs content-based-storage mode

On Mar 24, 2015 10:04 PM, "harshad shirwadkar" wrote: > > Hello all, > > I am a CS graduate student at Carnegie Mellon University, and past contributor to the Fedora Project via Google Summer of Code 2011. > > For my research, I would like to have btrfs with content based storage option. This idea

[Test-Announce] Fedora 22 Beta Test Compose 5 (TC5) Available Now!

As per the Fedora 22 schedule [1], Fedora 22 Beta Test Compose 5 (TC5) is now available for testing. Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6132#comment:7 (and comment 8). Please see the following pages for download links and testing ins

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky znmeb.net> writes: > As a bleeding-edge user I'd be in favor of this, although I thought > that was what 'updates-testing' was. Maybe I'm misunderstanding how things work, but I think every package in updates-testing is signed by a human, on an "offline" machine (i.e. some

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote: > Kevin Fenzi scrye.com> writes: > >> If you wish to test something before it's fully pushed to testing, you >> can download it directly from the buildsystem via the web interface, >> koji command line or bodhi client command line. > > I am fu

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

Kevin Fenzi scrye.com> writes: > If you wish to test something before it's fully pushed to testing, you > can download it directly from the buildsystem via the web interface, > koji command line or bodhi client command line. I am fully aware of that. I'm making a different point entirely here.

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 09:06 +1100, Bojan Smojver wrote: > Hi there, > > I've been a bit perplexed by the Fedora updates recently (talking > about > F-21 specifically). Many of them appear to be obsolete the moment > they > hit stable, sometimes even testing. > > Take the kernel, for instance. 3

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:15:16 + (UTC) Bojan Smojver wrote: > Corey Sheldon gmail.com> writes: > > > those ARE mirror list links the master mirror servers to be exact. > > Really not a file distribution problem I'm trying to get at here. If > you check out these two URLs: > > https://admin.

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

Corey Sheldon gmail.com> writes: > those ARE mirror list links the master mirror servers to be exact. Really not a file distribution problem I'm trying to get at here. If you check out these two URLs: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-4457/kernel-3.19.2-201.fc21 https://admin.

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

those ARE mirror list links the master mirror servers to be exact. Corey W Sheldon Freelance IT Consultant, Multi-Discipline Tutor (p) 310.909.7672 G+: LinkedIn: Github:

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

Chris Murphy colorremedies.com> writes: > That might be normal in that it takes a while for mirrors to update, > although I'm not sure how long (it could be days). Just to avoid confusion, I am not talking about mirrors. I am talking about updates not appearing at all (i.e. here: http://dl.fedor

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

1) Things take awhile most times as its using a queue system.2) Just because it's available in testing or stable does not mean its ready as it still takes time for the mirrors (where you are likely grabbing from unless not using the meta link) to see and sync with them and the fact that these hap

Re: GNOME 3.16.0 megaupdate

On 03/23/2015 10:17 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: > Hi all, > > Finally, the long wait is over and the 3.16.0 release is here! Or almost > over, first we have to get those pesky tarballs out upstream and builds > done downstream. :) ... and it's now in F22 updates-testing. Testing and karma appreciated

Re: A proposal for Fedora updates

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote: > Hi there, > > I've been a bit perplexed by the Fedora updates recently (talking about > F-21 specifically). Many of them appear to be obsolete the moment they > hit stable, sometimes even testing. > > Take the kernel, for instance. 3.19.2-201

A proposal for Fedora updates

Hi there, I've been a bit perplexed by the Fedora updates recently (talking about F-21 specifically). Many of them appear to be obsolete the moment they hit stable, sometimes even testing. Take the kernel, for instance. 3.19.2-201.fc21 replaced the previous build in bodhi on the 24th. It is still

Quick Review Request (owncloud-client)

Hi, I'd appreciate a quick* review on owncloud-client, so we can push the new version: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1202805 (*) It's an existing package that got renamed upstream, so it should fairly easy to be reviewed. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http

More packager notifications migrated to FMN

Recall that the infrastructure team has been working on a new notifications system[1] in an attempt to unify some of the notifications that get pushed out by our infrastructure. As the new system improves (and as we get time to clean house), we will be turning off the native notifications of vario

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > > As Adam implied, you can add your own, higher-numbered file with the > same options and NM will use those in preference to the Fedora-installed > one. See 'man NetworkManager.conf' for specifics. Thanks, I found your blog post "NetworkMan

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 18:29 +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > You can edit /etc/NetworkManager/conf.d/20-connectivity-fedora.conf to > > disable it. > > > > Is there a *proper* way to do that so that there aren't any conflicts with

Re: Pushing the extra AppData files into Rawhide

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 05:40:29PM +, Richard Hughes wrote: > So, the overwhelming amount of help I received (one person) meant I > spent the whole of today fixing up 230 packages. Most of the packages Looks like about 22 hours since you asked for help, so... I dunno, one person seems pretty g

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On 03/26/2015 12:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> You can edit /etc/NetworkManager/conf.d/20-connectivity-fedora.conf >> to disable it. > > It would probably be better (if NM respects it) to add a higher- > numbered file to override it; that way you aren't changing the > contents of a packaged f

Re: Pushing the extra AppData files into Rawhide

On 25 March 2015 at 19:40, Richard Hughes wrote: > -- I can't promise cookies, but I'll really appreciate it and it means > the applications won't disappear from Fedora 23. Yell if you have any > questions. So, the overwhelming amount of help I received (one person) meant I spent the whole of tod

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 12:24 -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote: > - Original Message - > > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:52 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 21:02 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > > This was most

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 11:21 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 04:15 +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Adam Williamson < > > adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > Lots of people have been seeing it, it may be related to some > > > iss

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > You can edit /etc/NetworkManager/conf.d/20-connectivity-fedora.conf to > disable it. > Is there a *proper* way to do that so that there aren't any conflicts with future updates, e.g. commenting the lines out, removing/renaming the file, se

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

- Original Message - > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:52 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > > On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 21:02 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > This was most likely caused by some issues with out proxy servers this > > > >

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

- Original Message - > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 21:02 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > This was most likely caused by some issues with out proxy servers this > > > evening. We were adding 3 new proxy servers into the rotation and

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:52 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 21:02 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > This was most likely caused by some issues with out proxy servers this > > > evening. We were adding 3 new proxy serve

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 21:02 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > This was most likely caused by some issues with out proxy servers this > > evening. We were adding 3 new proxy servers into the rotation and there > > were some config issues with

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > No, it still makes sense for wired networks. Have you ever used an > ethernet wall-jack at a hotel? It generally goes through a captive portal, > just like wireless. > Yes, I realized that later on and I discovered the messages pertain

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 21:02 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > This was most likely caused by some issues with out proxy servers this > evening. We were adding 3 new proxy servers into the rotation and there > were some config issues with some of them. ;( > > This would have only affected some folks in

Re: Captive portal detection on wired connections - bug or feature?

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 04:15 +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Adam Williamson < > adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > Lots of people have been seeing it, it may be related to some > > issues > > with the Fedora infrastructure this afternoon (the check works b

Re: Fedora 22 Beta blocker bug status #1

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:57:31PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > 12. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185604 - systemd - > "fedup upgrade fails within the initramfs-fedup env" > > Both the cause and the fix for this seem to be known at this point, > and we're waiting on the systemd

Minutes from Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2015-03-26)

== #fedora-meeting-2: Env and Stacks (2015-03-26) == Meeting started by hhorak1 at 13:00:40 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2015-03-26/env-and-stacks.2015

Heads up - openssh 6.8 coming to F22

Hi all, I know that it is quite late in F22 schedule and freeze is coming, but we decided to push recent upstream version into F22 before beta freeze to keep up with upstream. I spent some time with testing various use cases with our downstream patches and I would like to point out that I did

Fedora 22 Beta blocker bug status #1

Hi folks! It's everyone's favourite time of the year - time for QA to make you feel bad about blocker bugs! We're still six days out from Beta freeze, but I wanted to try and get out ahead of the blocker list and try to keep up the 'shipping on time' trend we started with Alpha... If you're di

Agenda for Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2015-03-26)

I've got few messages from people who cannot attend today's meeting, but still there may be something to discuss. Sorry for very late announcement. WG meeting will be at 13:00 UTC (9:00 EST, 14:00 Brno, 9:00 Boston, 22:00 Tokyo, 23:00 Brisbane) in #fedora-meeting-2 on Freenode. = Topics = * F

F-22 Branched report: 20150326 changes

Compose started at Thu Mar 26 07:15:02 UTC 2015 Broken deps for armhfp -- [Sprog] Sprog-0.14-27.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.0) [aeskulap] aeskulap-0.2.2-0.19beta1.fc22.armv7hl requires libofstd.so.3.6

Kakoune - new Vim inspired editor

Hi all, I want to draw your attention to new editor Kakoune. -- Vim inspired — Faster as in less keystrokes — Multiple selections — Orthogonal design -- It's now under heavy development by the mawww and I think it has a bright future. I think it's now stable enough to be used and mawww wants fee

Re: captive portal implementation found lacking

On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 21:52 -0400, David Airlie wrote: > Otherwise I think this feature is a bit half baked as is. I don't understand how you can make *any* decisions based on HTTP reachability, without *first* picking up proxy settings from DHCP/VPN/WPAD etc., poking them into PacRunner, and *u

Re: [ppc] Default stack size on ppc64

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 08:57 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Is pthread_create used even for the main thread in the process (I > thought the kernel created that). In any case threads aren't being > used explicitly by this process. > > Anyway I guess the guard page is just a hole that causes the

Re: New to the list, and... possible bug ?

Thank you Petr, Le 25/03/2015 13:20, Petr Pisar a écrit : > On 2015-03-23, Hoggins! wrote: >> Le 23/03/2015 16:56, Petr Pisar a =C3=A9crit : >> Actually, no. I've always had this "error", but it was working okay. >> Now, when I try to launch rollerd with : rollerd -rrfile >> /var/named/all.rollre

Re: [ppc] Default stack size on ppc64

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 07:57:25PM -0500, Steven Munroe wrote: > On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 19:45 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 06:30:25PM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > If the compiler is single-threaded, and increasing the stack ulimit > > > fixes the problem, that