Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On Thursday, 12 January 2017 05:23:52 IST Kevin Kofler wrote: > FHS multilib is designed only for binaries that can be natively executed, > where there is a clear, fixed preference on one architecture over another. > (If you can run both i686 and x86_64 binaries, you automatically want the > x86

Re: F26 Self Contained Change: Transdiff

On 12/01/17 06:59, pravin@gmail.com wrote: On 10 January 2017 at 14:39, Tom Hughes mailto:t...@compton.nu>> wrote: I don't really understand the logic here... I would expect anything in Fedora to be built with whatever translations are provided in the upstream release - are you

Re: Applications with AppData and not visible in the software center

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > Wearing designer hat, I will take a look at making a set of icons for > PorteClé (keychain in english). > Could you submit a request on Fedora Design team page and assign it to > my email? Thanks! Issue filed, but I cannot seem to find a

Re: Applications with AppData and not visible in the software center

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 03:41:56PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: >> This one has the too small icon "problem". It only has a 32x32 one, >> and with my (also wearing the Portecle upstream hat) graphical skills >> a new, better one simply will not

Re: Headsup: Xserver update switching Intel GPUs from xorg-x11-drv-intel to -modesetting by default coming to rawhide

On Wednesday, 11 January 2017 at 14:24, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 11-01-17 12:15, Samuel Rakitničan wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > A while back Debian has switched to using the modesetting Xorg driver > > > rather then the intel Xorg driver for Intel GPUs. > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > Is

Re: Headsup: Xserver update switching Intel GPUs from xorg-x11-drv-intel to -modesetting by default coming to rawhide

On Thursday, 12 January 2017 at 12:56, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 12.01.2017 um 12:44 schrieb Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski: > > > Yes, we're just changing the default, if you drop a 99-local.conf file in > > > /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d with the following contents: > > > > > > Section "OutputClass" > >

Re: Headsup: Xserver update switching Intel GPUs from xorg-x11-drv-intel to -modesetting by default coming to rawhide

On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 18:59, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 01/10/2017 08:22 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > If you encounter any issues causes by this change, please file > > a bug in bugzilla. > > Are performance regressions covered under this clause? > > Iris 5100 (Haswell) > gtkperf -

Re: F26 Self Contained Change: Transdiff

On 12 January 2017 at 14:33, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 12/01/17 06:59, pravin@gmail.com wrote: > > On 10 January 2017 at 14:39, Tom Hughes > > wrote: >> >> I don't really understand the logic here... >> >> I would expect anything in Fedora to be built with whateve

Re: Headsup: Xserver update switching Intel GPUs from xorg-x11-drv-intel to -modesetting by default coming to rawhide

On Thursday, 12 January 2017 at 13:38, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote: > On Thursday, 12 January 2017 at 12:56, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 12.01.2017 um 12:44 schrieb Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski: > > > > Yes, we're just changing the default, if you drop a 99-local.conf file > > > > in > > > > /etc

Re: Headsup: Xserver update switching Intel GPUs from xorg-x11-drv-intel to -modesetting by default coming to rawhide

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 01:42:23PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 18:59, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > On 01/10/2017 08:22 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > If you encounter any issues causes by this change, please file > > > a bug in bugzilla. > > > >

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On 01/11/2017 08:23 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: you must absolutely split the binaries (which would conflict with the native binaries) and the libraries (which you need to do your cross-compilation or to run your non-native binaries) into separate subpackages wherever packages currently ship both, or

Ruby packages free to grap

Hi all, Michal Fojtík recently orphaned all his packages due to lack of the resources to maintain them properly (thans to taking care of them). Feel free to grab some: rpms/deltacloud-core -- Deltacloud REST API ( ) rpms/rubygem-aws -- Ruby gem for all Amazon Web Services ( master f25 f2

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 01/11/2017 08:23 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> >> you must absolutely split the binaries (which would conflict with the >> native >> binaries) and the libraries (which you need to do your cross-compilation >> or >> to run your non-native bi

Re: Ruby packages free to grab

rpms/rubygem-will_paginate -- Pagination plugin for web frameworks and other apps Is also free to grab Vít Dne 12.1.2017 v 15:31 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi all, > > Michal Fojtík recently orphaned all his packages due to lack of the > resources to maintain them properly (thans to taking ca

Re: Ruby packages free to grap

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 03:31:59PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Hi all, > > Michal Fojtík recently orphaned all his packages due to lack of the > resources to maintain them properly (thans to taking care of them). Feel > free to grab some: I took _most_ of the packages without co-maintainers: rub

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

Brendan Conoboy wrote: > Hey, I can agree to that. Can you agree that /usr/bin could then be a > symlink or linkfarm to /usr/target/usr/bin? No. It does not make sense to put the native architecture into a sysroot, that would be a violation of the FHS. Sysroots are only for the special use case

Re: future of official optical media support in Fedora

On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 08:44 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > Idea #2: Do not block on optical media issues for Final release for > > > > certain > > > > flavors/image types (Server, netinst) > > > > ~~~ > > > > The outcome se

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 05:28:47PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Hey, I can agree to that. Can you agree that /usr/bin could then be a > > symlink or linkfarm to /usr/target/usr/bin? > > No. It does not make sense to put the native architecture into a sysroot, > that would be a violation of the

libglvnd review request, reviewer needed

Hi All, I've just submitted a pkg review request for libglvnd: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1412764 This is the last building block needed to allow full parallel installation of the nvidia binary driver and nouveau / mesa, without needing various *.conf.d to select the right libG

Fedora Elections January 2017 - Voting period is in progress

Hi, let me remind you we have Voting period of the currently running Fedora Elections in progress. Please vote for your candidates to Council [1], FAmSCo [2] and FESCo [3]. The Voting period ends on January 16th, 2017 at 23:59:00 UTC. You might also check a Community Blog article, summarizing int

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

Hi, I think that an alternative approach that should be given some consideration is what I came up with for Exherbo. The differences from FHS are pretty small, and fits very easily into autotools and CMake based packages as well. There is the original motivational write up for this at: https

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

Hello again, As a quick follow up, since one of the points that was originally brought up with the original suggestion: the changes required to GCC to support this cross-compilation model is minimally invasive. You can find the patch for this at [1]. It enables the cross-compilation model on

Re: future of official optical media support in Fedora

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:44 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > One solution here is to make Everything netinst release blocking. There is a > good use case for that, it's the most universal install medium we have (you > can install anything from it). A different solution is to mark e.g. Server > netins

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On 01/12/2017 06:49 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: On 01/11/2017 08:23 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: you must absolutely split the binaries (which would conflict with the native binaries) and the libraries (which you need to do your cross-compilation o

libinfinity soname bump

Hi, libinfinity will be updated to 0.7.0 soon which includes a soname bump. AFAICS nothing else depends on it. Kind regards Till ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: libglvnd review request, reviewer needed

2017-01-12 19:04 GMT+01:00 Hans de Goede : > Hi All, > > I've just submitted a pkg review request for libglvnd: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1412764 > > This is the last building block needed to allow full > parallel installation of the nvidia binary driver and > nouveau / mesa,

Orphaned Packages in rawhide (2017-01-12)

The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life Note: If y

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

Saleem Abdulrasool wrote: > First, we accepted the /usr-merge (for simplicity and since most Linux > distributions were doing so) -- not doing so would require two parallel > trees, but would not prohibit the same approach. The next thing was to > introduce a "namespace" within the filesystem layo

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Saleem Abdulrasool wrote: >> First, we accepted the /usr-merge (for simplicity and since most Linux >> distributions were doing so) -- not doing so would require two parallel >> trees, but would not prohibit the same approach. The next thing

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)

> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > The sysroot approach could still work in an "FHS-compatible" way by > symlinking everything back. FHS permits symlinks to represent a > traditional tree in non-traditional structures. Yeah, we have a symbolic link `/usr/host` which point

Re: Packages FTBFS with Python 3.6

On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 13:00 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > python-gensim Our version of this is very old. The current upstream version looks closer to being buildable, but requires the 'smart_open' library, which isn't packaged for Fedora yet. I'm not really interested in packaging that just to fix

Re: future of official optical media support in Fedora

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >If you > pick Server or Cloud Edition using Everything netinstall, you get ext4 > on LVM with a massive /home volume rather unsuitable for servers, and > no free space in the VG for docker-storage-setup to configure for > itself. Everything net