Dne 14.9.2015 v 23:10 Brendan Conoboy napsal(a):
>> /Then/ we could start thinking about /truly minimal/ concepts,
>> perhaps “container minimal” = “the minimal set needed to start and
>> run an executable dependent on Fedora ABI” (e.g. kernel version
>> requirement +glibc+locale data+Python 3 int
Dne 14.9.2015 v 21:52 Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
> On 09/11/2015 07:51 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> Dne 10.9.2015 v 15:53 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
>>> * Increases the available pool of software that can be packaged
>>> substantially (many m
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> ...
>
> To allow or not allow bundling is the small side point here - the questions
> should be more of "Are we a distribution of packages? Are we an OS? Where
> do we see the distribution/OS fit in how software is consumed and provid
On 09/14/2015 04:13 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
While working through a package review[1] this excerpt from the
documentation section[2] was brought to my attention:
"Marking a /relative/ path with |%doc| in the |%files| section will
cause RPM to copy the referenced file or directory from |%_builddi
I'm resending this announcement and FAQ from the bugzilla-announce list
as it will be of interest to Fedora Developers and users.
A Upgrade FAQ is available at:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/docs/bugzilla-upgrade-faq.html
And the announcement post is:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/bugzilla-anno
I maintain the cross-binutils and cross-gcc packages. These produce powerpc64
subpackages with binaries in. However, since I was asked to provide support
for ppc64-linux-gnu-x in addition to powerpc64-linux-gnu-x commands, I provide
symlink rpms for the ppc64 name that link to the former name.
T
On 09/07/2015 05:34 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 2.9.2015 v 20:59 Brendan Conoboy napsal(a):
5. Ring membership is at the source package level, not the binary
package. If one source package's binary/noarch sub-package is in ring
0, all sub-packages are in ring 0.
So we are going to include a
On 09/07/2015 06:52 AM, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
[snip]
Oh I’m not at all suggesting that the Fedora universe should not be
self-hosting, or that this self-hosting property should not be
regularly verified by mass rebuilds or the like.
I just wanted to say that that having various /subsets/ of the
On 09/07/2015 06:42 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
On 7 September 2015 at 13:21, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
Also, it seems to me that it would be useful to, at least conceptually, to
not think about Fedora as a self-hosting perpetual motion^Wrecompilation
machine, but as “just another huge application” bei
On 09/07/2015 05:21 AM, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
2015-09-02 23:24 GMT+02:00 Brendan Conoboy mailto:b...@redhat.com>>:
[blc]
>> 5. Ring membership is at the source package level, not the binary
>> package. If one source package's binary/noarch sub-package is in ring
>> 0, all sub-pa
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:38:58 +0200, you wrote:
>> There is a reason that the Atomic / CoreOS idea combined with Docker
>> is gaining traction, and it is because it deals with the reality of
>> dealing with software whose dependencies don't work in the traditional
>> distribution world
>
>so i don'
On Monday, 14 September 2015 at 21:35, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 02:38:55PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> wrote:
> > New bundling exception could be granted automatically in cases where:
> > * the bundled code is not packaged in Fedora yet
> > * no other Fedora pack
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Dave Love wrote:
> Dave Johansen writes:
>
> >> We do have docker images that can be used [0] - but we currently don't
> >> have a user friendly way to find them. You currently have to look
> >> through koji to find them [1].
> >>
> >> Hope this helps!
> >>
> >> [
On 09/11/2015 07:51 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Dne 10.9.2015 v 15:53 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
>> * Increases the available pool of software that can be packaged
>> substantially (many modern languages such as Ruby and Go are
>> realistica
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 02:38:55PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> New bundling exception could be granted automatically in cases where:
> * the bundled code is not packaged in Fedora yet
> * no other Fedora package bundles it already
> However, the above puts the burden of unbundlin
I'm working on packaging hgsubversion (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221459 ) and I've run into
some test failures on F23/Rawhide that seem to be caused by the update to
subversion 1.9.0. Upstream has recommended that I try and bisect the source
of the failure (
https://groups.googl
Missing expected images:
Cloud atomic Disk x86_64
Cloud base Disk i386
No images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20150913
No images in 23 Branched 20150913 but not this.
Failed openQA tests: 24 of 46
ID: 2403Test: i386 generic_boot default_install
ID: 2398Test: i386 univers
Am 14.09.2015 um 21:04 schrieb Adam Williamson:
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 20:57 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Um. But weren't you just saying:
"if Fedora changes to more and more recommend "pip", "gem" and
"cpan"
like installs instead RPM packages it is no longer a distribution
over
the long becau
Missing expected images:
Kde Live i386
Cloud base Disk i386
Cloud base Disk x86_64
Kde Live x86_64
Cloud atomic Disk x86_64
Kde Disk armhfp
No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20150913
No images in Rawhide 20150913 but not this.
Failed openQA tests: 18 of 23
ID: 2332Test: x86_64
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 20:57 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Um. But weren't you just saying:
> >
> > "if Fedora changes to more and more recommend "pip", "gem" and
> > "cpan"
> > like installs instead RPM packages it is no longer a distribution
> > over
> > the long because that would mean finally y
Am 14.09.2015 um 20:50 schrieb Adam Williamson:
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 20:38 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
It's not a case of whether anyone here wants to go down that road
or
not, because we are already there.
There is a reason that the Atomic / CoreOS idea combined with
Docker
is gaining trac
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 20:38 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > It's not a case of whether anyone here wants to go down that road
> > or
> > not, because we are already there.
> >
> > There is a reason that the Atomic / CoreOS idea combined with
> > Docker
> > is gaining traction, and it is because i
Am 14.09.2015 um 20:31 schrieb Gerald Henriksen:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 12:45:13 +0200, you wrote:
if Fedora changes to more and more recommend "pip", "gem" and "cpan"
like installs instead RPM packages it is no longer a distribution over
the long because that would mean finally you have a core
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 12:45:13 +0200, you wrote:
>if Fedora changes to more and more recommend "pip", "gem" and "cpan"
>like installs instead RPM packages it is no longer a distribution over
>the long because that would mean finally you have a core OS and handle
>anything else like Microsoft or A
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 14 September 2015 at 10:43, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Adam Williamson
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 10:13 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>>
We also haven't established any kind of migratio
On 09/14/2015 09:57 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 16:54 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> On 12 September 2015 at 04:10, Adam Williamson
>> wrote:
>>> I agree that the discussion here needs to be more broad-based; see
>>> the
>>> other thread fork. I was just providing support for
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 11:09 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> What we haven't managed to do yet is update the package review
> > > process
> > > to better account for the distinction, such as by adopting a
> > > "COPR
> > > first" model, where folks put a package up in COPR with bundled
> > > compone
On 14 September 2015 at 10:43, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 10:13 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>>> We also haven't established any kind of migration plan between the
>>> two
>>> repositories. In the darktable example
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 10:13 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>> We also haven't established any kind of migration plan between the
>> two
>> repositories. In the darktable example, one of the reasons we ended
>> up
>> going back to the FP
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 17:55 +0200, Haïkel wrote:
> > New bundling exception could be granted automatically in cases
> > where:
> > * the bundled code is not packaged in Fedora yet
> > * no other Fedora package bundles it already
> >
>
> Interesting idea, unbundling on demand.
>
> I may ask what
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 10:13 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> We also haven't established any kind of migration plan between the
> two
> repositories. In the darktable example, one of the reasons we ended
> up
> going back to the FPC and re-requesting an exception was that we
> don't
> have any me
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 12:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> and much more important:
>
> if Fedora changes to more and more recommend "pip", "gem" and "cpan"
> like installs instead RPM packages it is no longer a distribution
> over
> the long because that would mean finally you have a core OS
perl-libintl-1.24-1.fc24 changed license
from (LGPLv2+) to (GPLv3+ and LGPLv2+).
-- Petr
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 16:54 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 12 September 2015 at 04:10, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > I agree that the discussion here needs to be more broad-based; see
> > the
> > other thread fork. I was just providing support for Stephen's
> > contention that this is not some air
2015-09-14 14:38 GMT+02:00 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
:
>
> This case doesn't automatically mean that we should allow bundling.
> Especially, if there are multiple consumers of the library in question.
> A recent example is kwsys, which is bundled in every project released
> by kitware. See bug
On 09/14/2015 07:08 AM, Josef Stribny wrote:
On 09/12/2015 12:41 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/11/2015 09:09 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
What does Fedora users gain with "dnf
install rails" or "dnf install ipython" versus "gem install rails"
and "pip
install ipython"?
This indee
Change in package status over the last 168 hours
14 packages were orphaned
-
ScientificPython [f22, f21] was orphaned by kevin
A collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing
https://admin.fe
On 14.09.2015 15:33, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Agenda:
>
> - Fedora.Base - RHEL.Base - Flock recap (continued)
> - Ring 1 vs Ring 0 (continued)
> - define the minimal install (continued)
> - define the docker base image (continued)
> - minimal disk image for importing into libvirt (continued)
> - ge
This Thursday, we will meet on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting-2
to make sure we are coordinated and ready for the Beta release of
Fedora 23 on Tuesday, September 22, 2015.
Please note that this meeting will occur even if the release is
delayed at the Go/No-Go meeting on the same day two hours
On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 20:46 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> On 09/11/2015 08:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > We certainly agree on that.
> >
> > > > which has already been
> > > > answered by the board.
> > > > ( people will first debate where to draw the line if that
> > > > discussio
While working through a package review[1] this excerpt from the
documentation section[2] was brought to my attention:
"Marking a *relative* path with %doc in the %files section will cause RPM
to copy the referenced file or directory from %_builddir to the proper
location for documentation. Files c
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 16:54 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 12 September 2015 at 04:10, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > I agree that the discussion here needs to be more broad-based; see
> > the
> > other thread fork. I was just providing support for Stephen's
> > contention that this is not some air
Agenda:
- Fedora.Base - RHEL.Base - Flock recap (continued)
- Ring 1 vs Ring 0 (continued)
- define the minimal install (continued)
- define the docker base image (continued)
- minimal disk image for importing into libvirt (continued)
- generic installer? (continued)
- Open Floor
Please add ite
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 14/09/15 12:00 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
>>
>> I build my app with shared libraries. In my spec file, I source a
>> script which export LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
>> Below is how I proceed in my spec file:
>>
>>
On Monday, 14 September 2015 at 13:56, Haïkel wrote:
> 2015-09-14 13:17 GMT+02:00 Andrew Haley :
> > On 09/13/2015 09:23 PM, Haïkel wrote:
> >> I'm not speaking about PHP, most of the upstream I deal with
> >> are python developers. Bad habits are rather spreading than
> >> regressing.
> >
> > We'r
On 09/11/2015 04:34 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> How do you propose to resolve symbol conflicts if both the system
>> library and the bundled library are loaded into the same process? The
>> current ELF linking scheme lacks good support for bundling libraries
>> whose exported symbols have not b
On 09/14/2015 08:28 AM, Thomas Spura wrote:
> Kalev Lember mailto:kalevlem...@gmail.com>>
> schrieb am So., 13. Sep. 2015 um 13:37 Uhr:
>
> On 09/09/2015 10:10 PM, Thomas Spura wrote:
> > I retired ScientificPython as it does require an older numpy and
> doesn't
> > build anytime s
On 14/09/15 12:00 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
I build my app with shared libraries. In my spec file, I source a
script which export LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
Below is how I proceed in my spec file:
%global _prod_dir /opt/intel/compilers_and_libraries_2016/linux
%glob
On 09/14/2015 02:20 PM, arnaud gaboury wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:03 PM, arnaud gaboury
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> On 09/14/2015 09:52 AM, arnaud gaboury wrote:
For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not the
def
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:03 PM, arnaud gaboury
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> On 09/14/2015 09:52 AM, arnaud gaboury wrote:
>>> For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not the
>>> default /etc
>>
>> This will break quite a few RPM macros
arnaud gaboury wrote:
> %configure
> --sysconfdir=/etc/R
Add \ at the end of line to continue, ie, use instead:
%configure \
--sysconfdir=/etc/R
(or put it all on one line).
-- rex
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fed
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 09/14/2015 09:52 AM, arnaud gaboury wrote:
>> For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not the
>> default /etc
>
> This will break quite a few RPM macros. Why, exactly, do you want to do
> this?
The only reason is t
Alejandro Alvarez Ayllon wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A couple of packages I [co-]maintain are heavily plugin-based, and those
> plugins are installed under /usr/lib(64)//, while the core
> libraries are installed into /usr/lib(64)
>
> Then, there are other projects that have their own set of libraries,
2015-09-14 13:17 GMT+02:00 Andrew Haley :
> On 09/13/2015 09:23 PM, Haïkel wrote:
>> I'm not speaking about PHP, most of the upstream I deal with
>> are python developers. Bad habits are rather spreading than
>> regressing.
>
> We're not going to solve that problem by adopting bad habits
> ourselve
On 09/14/2015 09:52 AM, arnaud gaboury wrote:
> For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not the
> default /etc
This will break quite a few RPM macros. Why, exactly, do you want to do
this?
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fed
Compose started at Mon Sep 14 07:15:03 UTC 2015
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[ScientificPython]
ScientificPython-2.8-20.fc22.armv7hl requires libmpi.so.1
[apache-scout]
apache-scout-1.2.6-11.fc21.noarch requires mvn(org.apache.jud
On 09/13/2015 09:23 PM, Haïkel wrote:
> I'm not speaking about PHP, most of the upstream I deal with
> are python developers. Bad habits are rather spreading than
> regressing.
We're not going to solve that problem by adopting bad habits
ourselves.
Andrew.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedo
Compose started at Mon Sep 14 05:15:03 UTC 2015
Broken deps for i386
--
[IQmol]
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0
[ScientificPython]
2015-09-14 12:45 GMT+02:00 Reindl Harald :
>
>
>
> and much more important:
>
> if Fedora changes to more and more recommend "pip", "gem" and "cpan" like
> installs instead RPM packages it is no longer a distribution over the long
> because that would mean finally you have a core OS and handle anyt
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 11:03:13 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
>
>> > %build
>> > mkdir %{buildroot}/etc/R
>>
>> I already tried this method, with no sucess. Finally, after a close
>> look at my SPEC file, I found one $ which has to be moved t
Am 14.09.2015 um 12:41 schrieb Vít Ondruch:
Dne 11.9.2015 v 23:09 Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
What does Fedora users gain with "dnf install rails" or "dnf install
ipython" versus "gem install rails" and "pip install ipython"?
Easier installation of packages with binary extensions? RubyGems ca
Dne 11.9.2015 v 23:09 Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
> What does Fedora users gain with "dnf install rails" or "dnf install
> ipython" versus "gem install rails" and "pip install ipython"?
Easier installation of packages with binary extensions? RubyGems can't
specify dependencies on system libraries,
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 11:03:13 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
> > %build
> > mkdir %{buildroot}/etc/R
>
> I already tried this method, with no sucess. Finally, after a close
> look at my SPEC file, I found one $ which has to be moved to % (I
> rewrote my file trying to use the conventional % for vari
I build my app with shared libraries. In my spec file, I source a
script which export LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
Below is how I proceed in my spec file:
%global _prod_dir /opt/intel/compilers_and_libraries_2016/linux
%global _mklroot_dir %{_prod_dir}/mkl
%global _mkllibp
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 14.09.2015 um 10:15 schrieb arnaud gaboury:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:04 AM Adam Williamson
>> mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 09:52 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
>> > For some pra
Am 14.09.2015 um 10:15 schrieb arnaud gaboury:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:04 AM Adam Williamson
mailto:adamw...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote:
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 09:52 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
> For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not
> the
> de
Join us on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting-2 for this important
meeting, wherein we shall determine the readiness of the Fedora 23
Beta.
Please follow the [FedoCal] link to find the time of the meeting in
your time-zone.
[FedoCal] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/Fedora%20release/#m2677
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:04 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 09:52 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
> > For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not
> > the
> > default /etc
> >
> > Here is what I did:
> >
> > %build
> > .
> > mkdir -p {_builddir}/R-%{vers
Hello,
A couple of packages I [co-]maintain are heavily plugin-based, and those
plugins are installed under /usr/lib(64)//, while the core
libraries are installed into /usr/lib(64)
Then, there are other projects that have their own set of libraries,
depend on the core libraries, and also req
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 09:52 +0200, arnaud gaboury wrote:
> For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not
> the
> default /etc
>
> Here is what I did:
>
> %build
> .
> mkdir -p {_builddir}/R-%{version}/etc/R
> .
> %configure
> --sysconfdir=/etc/R
> ..
>
>
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 17:24 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> I don't believe this is the pip package maintainer's fault, I believe
> it's due to the fact that our processes for updating packages are far
> too manual and thus require significant amounts of additional work
> following even a backwards c
For some practical reason, I want sysconfdir to be /etc/R, and not the
default /etc
Here is what I did:
%build
.
mkdir -p {_builddir}/R-%{version}/etc/R
.
%configure
--sysconfdir=/etc/R
..
make throw me an error:
--sysconfdir=/etc/R: No such file or directory
$ ls {_buildd
On 14 September 2015 at 00:05, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Sex, 2015-09-11 at 22:41 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>>
>> On 09/11/2015 09:09 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> > What does Fedora users gain with "dnf
>> > install rails" or "dnf install ipython" versus "gem install rails" and "pip
>> >
On 09/12/2015 12:41 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 09/11/2015 09:09 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
What does Fedora users gain with "dnf
install rails" or "dnf install ipython" versus "gem install rails"
and "pip
install ipython"?
This indeed is very good question.
I'm not sure how thing
74 matches
Mail list logo
