Hi,
> > Apples and oranges. There's no installer on ARM. There's no need to wipe
> > all your data on a desktop system that you have one unit of.
>
> Yes, there is, we support anaconda just like on all the other arches.
> It's not as widely used as people like to just consume the disk images
>
On Qui, 2016-11-17 at 21:04 +0100, Christian Dersch wrote:
>
> On 11/17/2016 09:01 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
> >
> > On 17/11/16 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, folks!
> > >
> > > While looking into an issue with how GNOME Software decides which
> > > release to offer an upg
On Qui, 2016-11-17 at 12:25 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-11-17 at 12:18 -0800, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > You'll notice we don't explicitly specify *how* you should do
> > > this.
> > > That is,
> > >
On 17/11/16 12:04 PM, Christian Dersch wrote:
>
> On 11/17/2016 09:01 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
>> On 17/11/16 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> Hi, folks!
>>>
>>> While looking into an issue with how GNOME Software decides which
>>> release to offer an upgrade to when there's more than one p
So are we going to see you tomorrow at BoA? How is it going?
Denise
> On Nov 17, 2016, at 7:55 PM, Subhendu Ghosh wrote:
>
> Assuming cloud-init can also select the storage or is that too late in the
> process?
>
>
>> On Nov 16, 2016 15:58, "Vivek Goyal" wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 0
Assuming cloud-init can also select the storage or is that too late in the
process?
On Nov 16, 2016 15:58, "Vivek Goyal" wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:19:06PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > On 11/16/2016 03:09 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:01:06PM -0500, Step
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-11-17 at 12:18 -0800, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson
>> wrote:
>>
>> > You'll notice we don't explicitly specify *how* you should do this.
>> > That is,
>> > if you're currently runni
Hi,
bijiben is GNOME notes.
Since i am not any more working on bijiben upstream, i am now orphaning
package.
So, upstream maintainer is needed [1].
The most important is to port to newer WebKit version [2].
Upstream bug has partial patch for this so its quite doable.
Cheers
Pierre-Yves
[1]
On Thu, 2016-11-17 at 12:18 -0800, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > You'll notice we don't explicitly specify *how* you should do this.
> > That is,
> > if you're currently running Fedora 23, and you want to upgrade to
> > Fedora 25
> > next w
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> You'll notice we don't explicitly specify *how* you should do this. That is,
> if you're currently running Fedora 23, and you want to upgrade to Fedora 25
> next week, are you supposed to:
>
> i) Upgrade to Fedora 24 first, then from Fedo
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga
wrote:
> On 17/11/16 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Hi, folks!
>>
>> While looking into an issue with how GNOME Software decides which
>> release to offer an upgrade to when there's more than one plausible
>> candidate, I noticed something in
On 11/17/2016 09:01 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
> On 17/11/16 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Hi, folks!
>>
>> While looking into an issue with how GNOME Software decides which
>> release to offer an upgrade to when there's more than one plausible
>> candidate, I noticed something interestin
On 17/11/16 10:26 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi, folks!
>
> While looking into an issue with how GNOME Software decides which
> release to offer an upgrade to when there's more than one plausible
> candidate, I noticed something interesting: we do not actually have a
> policy on what we 'recommen
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On 2016-11-17 11:22 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> For some time now, the system partition is not HFS+ and not
>> identifiable as HFS+ and cannot be mounted on Linux in any way. The
>> default installation uses Core Storage (Apple's LVM lik
On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 05:55:21PM -0500, Ben Rosser wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:13 AM, Jan Kurik wrote:
>
> > For the Fedora 26 timeframe, we will lock down the users who can
> > submit to the MBS to a small number of Modularity WG members. This is
> > not ideal, but the thought is that we
On 2016-11-17 11:22 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
For some time now, the system partition is not HFS+ and not
identifiable as HFS+ and cannot be mounted on Linux in any way. The
default installation uses Core Storage (Apple's LVM like thing), and
even converts non-Core Storage systems upon upgrade so t
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On 2016-11-17 10:30 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> Not exactly. I do the same tests every cycle and assumed I had done
>> those tests, and I still think I did, but it's possible there's some
>> unusual nuance in my particular setup that cau
Hey, sorry I didn't respond sooner. I failed to see this hit the list.
Responses follow inline, below.
On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 07:22:12AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:13 AM, Jan Kurik wrote:
> > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Module Build Service =
> > https://fedorapr
On 2016-11-17 10:30 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Not exactly. I do the same tests every cycle and assumed I had done
those tests, and I still think I did, but it's possible there's some
unusual nuance in my particular setup that caused me to not hit the
bug. But I'm not traveling with my Mac at the mo
Missing expected images:
Cloud_base qcow2 x86_64
Atomic qcow2 x86_64
Workstation live i386
Kde live x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz x86_64
Atomic raw-xz x86_64
Workstation live x86_64
Kde live i386
Failed openQA tests: 54/79 (x86_64), 14/15 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
Old failures (same test failed in Rawhide-20
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> 2. The Fedora QA group has 1 mac mini which is very old and is only
> used for total install and not dual boot. It would not have found this
> issue. The Fedora QA group also has no one using Mac hardware day to
> day.
The age is pro
Hi, folks!
While looking into an issue with how GNOME Software decides which
release to offer an upgrade to when there's more than one plausible
candidate, I noticed something interesting: we do not actually have a
policy on what we 'recommend' people to do in this case.
There's one specific
At the second round of Fedora 25 Final Go/No-Go Meeting, has just been
Fedora 25 Final compose 1.3 declared as GOLD.
GA of this release is planed on Tuesday 2016-November-22.
Meeting details can be seen here:
Log:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2016-11-17/f25-final-gono-go-mee
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 17 November 2016 at 09:08, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>> On 11 November 2016 at 03:20, Andreas Tunek wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > As a mac owner (although one that is not very well supported by
>>> >
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2016-11-18 16:00 UTC'
Links to all issues below ca
= System Wide Change: Fedora 26 Boost 1.63 upgrade =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/F26Boost163
Change owner(s):
* Jonathan Wakely < jwakely AT redhat DOT com >
This change brings Boost 1.63.0 to Fedora 26. This will mean F26 ships
with a recent upstream Boost release.
== Detailed Descr
On 17 November 2016 at 11:40, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>> On 2016-11-17 07:43 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>>
>>> 2. The Fedora QA group has 1 mac mini which is very old and is only
>>> used for total install and not dual boot. It would no
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On 2016-11-17 07:43 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>
>> 2. The Fedora QA group has 1 mac mini which is very old and is only
>> used for total install and not dual boot. It would not have found this
>> issue. The Fedora QA group also has
On 2016-11-17 07:43 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
2. The Fedora QA group has 1 mac mini which is very old and is only
used for total install and not dual boot. It would not have found this
issue. The Fedora QA group also has no one using Mac hardware day to
day.
This bit isn't quite true. We
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20161116.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20161117.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 9
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 66
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 3.35 MiB
Size of dropped packages
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 7/101 (x86_64), 2/17 (i386)
New failures (same test did not fail in 25-20161116.n.0):
ID: 48821 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/48821
ID: 48826 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso deskto
On 17 November 2016 at 10:22, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
>> No I am not asking for continuous testing. I am asking that if people
>> really care about the hardware support they get in the muck and do
>> just a little of the work in an organized fashion. Put togethe
- Original Message -
> No I am not asking for continuous testing. I am asking that if people
> really care about the hardware support they get in the muck and do
> just a little of the work in an organized fashion. Put together a Mac
> SIG that focuses on getting the best experience on t
>
>> No I am not asking for continuous testing. I am asking that if people
>> really care about the hardware support they get in the muck and do
>> just a little of the work in an organized fashion. Put together a Mac
>> SIG that focuses on getting the best experience on the hardware. Send
>> some
On 17 November 2016 at 09:08, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> On 11 November 2016 at 03:20, Andreas Tunek wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > As a mac owner (although one that is not very well supported by
>> > Linux*) I really appreciate the fact that Fedora works. And saying you
>
OLD: Fedora-25-20161116.n.0
NEW: Fedora-25-20161117.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0.00 B
Size of dropped packages:0.00 B
Size of
- Original Message -
> On 11 November 2016 at 03:20, Andreas Tunek wrote:
> >
> >
> > As a mac owner (although one that is not very well supported by
> > Linux*) I really appreciate the fact that Fedora works. And saying you
> > do not want to support that hardware anymore just because y
37 matches
Mail list logo
