Dne 15.10.2015 v 18:27 Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:59:56AM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>> It is my pleasure to announce new version of Copr.
>>> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/
>>
>> Seems that the new version broke sorting by
Dne 15.10.2015 v 16:24 Michael Cronenworth napsal(a):
> I would suggest adding PlayOnLinux to RPMFusion. Downloading binaries this
> way was frowned[1] upon before.
>
> [1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1331
However POL does not download the games. And as stated before it is useful for
Dne 15.10.2015 v 23:23 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):
> Hello,
>
> Please forgive my ignorance, but how is this supposed to be used? I
> guess it's handy to keep track of all the current keys, but unlike,
> say rpmfusion-free-release, the keys are not placed or linked in
> /etc/pki/, nor are they
On 10/12/2015 12:04 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It's GNOME 3.18.1 release this week and I'll be wrangling the builds for
> Fedora. Same drill as with previous megaupdates: if you are helping with
> builds, please use f23-gnome build target.
>
> $ fedpkg build --target f23-gnome
>
> I
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Right now at least two projects (mock and fedora-upgrade) contains and use
> those keys.
> So once this get into Fedora (and Epel) I can remove those keys from
> fedora-upgrade and mock and use this common package.
>
> Mock need CentOS an
Dne 16.10.2015 v 10:13 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):
> Btw, what about upstream links to the keys in the spec file?
I did not use SourceX in spec file, because my source is tar.gz file created
from github.
This make the maintenance more easier.
However - good idea - I will create some documenta
I've had an updated SwiftMailer spec in my back pocket for a while
that I have been meaning to submit. I'll submit the review request
for it soon.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Remi Collet wrote:
> Le 15/10/2015 18:20, notificati...@fedoraproject.org a écrit :
>> +rm -f tests/Monolog/Handler/
Compose started at Fri Oct 16 07:15:03 UTC 2015
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[openstack-swift]
openstack-swift-2.3.0-2.fc23.noarch requires python-pyeclib
[python-fiat]
python-fiat-1.5.0-2.fc23.noarch requires ScientificPython
Compose started at Fri Oct 16 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
IQmol-2.3.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/15/2015 06:49 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi, We detect migration problem from bodhi 1 to 2 [1]
>
> Can someone workaround and push to stable, because they reached
> the stable karma threshold:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 15.10.2015 v 23:23 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):
> > Hello,
> >
> > Please forgive my ignorance, but how is this supposed to be used? I
> > guess it's handy to keep track of all the current keys, but unlike,
> > say rpmfusion-free-rel
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 23:49:22 +0100
Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi,
> We detect migration problem from bodhi 1 to 2 [1]
>
> Can someone workaround and push to stable, because they reached the
> stable karma threshold:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-11787
> https://bodhi.fedora
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 09:00:29AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I'd suggest all maintainers should periodically check:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?user=&status=testing
> For their updates that are in testing.
Noting here that there's an easy link to that url from your Bodhi
profile
As scheduled [1], Fedora 23 Final Test Compose 10 (TC10) and TC11 are
now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation
testing!
As discussed at yesterday's blocker review meeting, we requested two
TCs at the same time because of the GNOME 3.18.1 mega-update. The two
TCs should
On 10/16/2015 12:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
As scheduled [1], Fedora 23 Final Test Compose 10 (TC10) and TC11 are
now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation
testing!
Hey Adam/Cloud list,
Does anyone know what happened between TC9 / TC10 / TC11 with regards to
On Sex, 2015-10-16 at 09:00 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 23:49:22 +0100
> Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > We detect migration problem from bodhi 1 to 2 [1]
> >
> > Can someone workaround and push to stable, because they reached the
> > stable karma threshold:
> >
> > https:
It's been a few months since I've seen any mention of this.
Has there been any change in the legal status of bring ZFS to official
fedora repos?
Regards,
Zach
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http:/
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Zach Villers
wrote:
> It's been a few months since I've seen any mention of this.
>
> Has there been any change in the legal status of bring ZFS to official
> fedora repos?
>
>
Has the license changed? I thought that was the reason it couldn't be
included in the
On 10/16/2015 11:40 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>
>
> On 10/16/2015 12:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> As scheduled [1], Fedora 23 Final Test Compose 10 (TC10) and TC11 are
>> now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation
>> testing!
>>
>
> Hey Adam/Cloud list,
>
> Does anyon
On 10/16/2015 02:24 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 10/16/2015 11:40 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 10/16/2015 12:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
As scheduled [1], Fedora 23 Final Test Compose 10 (TC10) and TC11 are
now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation
testing!
Hey A
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Zach Villers wrote:
> It's been a few months since I've seen any mention of this.
>
> Has there been any change in the legal status of bring ZFS to official
> fedora repos?
No.
josh
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.
On Fri, 2015-10-16 at 14:33 -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>
> On 10/16/2015 02:24 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > On 10/16/2015 11:40 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> > >
> > > On 10/16/2015 12:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > > As scheduled [1], Fedora 23 Final Test Compose 10 (TC10) and
> > > > TC11 are
>
On Fri, 2015-10-16 at 09:44 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 10/12/2015 12:04 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It's GNOME 3.18.1 release this week and I'll be wrangling the
> > builds for
> > Fedora. Same drill as with previous megaupdates: if you are helping
> > with
> > builds, please
Various packages now install files into /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs for use when
building rpms. Currently that directory is owned by:
rpm-build-4.13.0-0.rc1.4.fc23.x86_64
javapackages-tools-4.6.0-6.fc23.noarch
Of the various packages on my machine that install files there:
gstreamer1-1.6.0-2.fc23.x8
Have you already tried their Fedora repository?
http://zfsonlinux.org/fedora.html
Richard
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
No missing expected images.
No images in this compose but not 23 Branched 20151015
No images in 23 Branched 20151015 but not this.
Failed openQA tests: 7 of 52
ID: 6237Test: x86_64 universal server_simple_free_space@uefi
ID: 6153Test: i386 workstation_live default_install
ID: 61
No missing expected images.
No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151015
Images in Rawhide 20151015 but not this:
Mate disk raw armhfp
Failed openQA tests: 8 of 52
ID: 6245Test: x86_64 universal server_simple_free_space@uefi
ID: 6208Test: x86_64 kde_live default_install
I
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 03:06:01PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Various packages now install files into /usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs for use when
> building rpms. Currently that directory is owned by:
>
> rpm-build-4.13.0-0.rc1.4.fc23.x86_64
> javapackages-tools-4.6.0-6.fc23.noarch
>
> Of the vario
fedora-repos should have all the keys needed for upgrade. So the only thing
needing the keys is mock. However I'm not sure you should include rpmfusion
keys in Fedora.
Dennis
On October 16, 2015 2:26:16 AM CDT, "Miroslav Suchý" wrote:
>Dne 15.10.2015 v 23:23 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):
>>
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 07:37:15PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> fedora-repos should have all the keys needed for upgrade. So the only thing
> needing the keys is mock. However I'm not sure you should include rpmfusion
> keys in Fedora.
On a related note, something that I thought about when try
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 07:37:15PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> fedora-repos should have all the keys needed for upgrade. So the only thing
>> needing the keys is mock. However I'm not sure you should include rpmfusion
>> k
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 03:05:42AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 07:37:15PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> >> fedora-repos should have all the keys needed for upgrade. So the only
> >> thing needing
I have tried it. I don't like messing with dkms during upgrades. I remembered
MM saying something about their being conversations about the license issue
that were encouraging during an interview after the F22 release and wondered if
there was any follow up.
*apologies to MM if my recollection
33 matches
Mail list logo
