Re: Fedora Elections May 2018 - Voting period in progress for Council and Mindshare elections

Please let me remind we have opened Voting to Fedora Council [1] and Mindshare Committee [2]. You can vote till June 6th, 2018 when the voting ends at 23:59:59 UTC. On Community blog [3] you can also find interviews with all the candidates. Please have a look at it. [1] https://admin.fedoraprojec

Re: Release criteria proposal: drop kickstart package criterion

On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:26:25AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 12:39 AM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > Hi, folks! > > > > We currently have a Final release criterion that reads as follows: > > > > "A spin-kickstarts package which contains the exact kickstart files > > used

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 7:46 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 13:40 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: >> = Proposed System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2 = >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StrongCryptoSettings2 > > The "how to test" section for this Change seems a lit

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 10:07:55PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > But, my gut feeling is that about half of those are not using a current > release _anyway_. Honest question: do you think that 12k would still > count as a healthy number? I mean, it's not peanuts. But maybe it'd be Ooh, I should re

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 03:50:34PM -0400, Jeff Backus wrote: > Thanks for the data. 25k is still a pretty healthy number. :) I realize Yeah, absolutely. And it's likely that those mirror numbers undercount, because not every system checks in daily, and then there's also NAT. But, my gut feeling i

Re: Release criteria proposal: drop kickstart package criterion

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 12:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi, folks! > > We currently have a Final release criterion that reads as follows: > > "A spin-kickstarts package which contains the exact kickstart files > used to build the release must be present in the release repository. > The included

Release criteria proposal: drop kickstart package criterion

Hi, folks! We currently have a Final release criterion that reads as follows: "A spin-kickstarts package which contains the exact kickstart files used to build the release must be present in the release repository. The included kickstarts must define the correct set of release repositories. Why?

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

Il gio 31 mag 2018, 13:42 Neal Gompa ha scritto: > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:54 AM Dave Love > wrote: > > > > Is there any existing system for rpm like the Debian one > > for building local > > configuration packages? If not, would it be feasible

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Modularity Office Hours

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Modularity Office Hours on 2018-06-05 from 10:00:00 to 11:00:00 US/Eastern At fedora-modular...@chat.freenode.net The meeting will be about: This is where you ask the Fedora Modularity Team questions (and we try to answer them)! Join us on

Re: [X86] Re: Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Jeff Backus wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: >> >> On 4 June 2018 at 14:18, Matthew Miller wrote: >> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:01:13PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> >> > >>support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, t

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: > Jeff Backus wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > >> Jeff Backus wrote: > >> > >> > >> > Until (unless?) we have data indicating that this is a major drain on > >> > community resources, I'd push back on a change

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

Jeff Backus wrote: > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: > >> Jeff Backus wrote: >> >> >> > Until (unless?) we have data indicating that this is a major drain on >> > community resources, I'd push back on a change that actively excludes >> part >> > of the community. Now, if we do

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

On 4 June 2018 at 14:29, Dave Love wrote: > You wrote: > >> I think generally the Fedora/RH-ecosystem answer is to use Ansible for >> configuration, rather than configuration packages. >> >> That's not sayin' there can't be another answer, but in general that's >> the route *I'd* take to solve thi

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:00 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 06/04/2018 02:50 PM, Jeff Backus wrote: > >> Thanks for the data. 25k is still a pretty healthy number. :) I realize >> that there are a lot of unknowns in the data, so it is difficult to draw >> any hard conclusions, but 25k is stil

Re: [X86] Re: Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 4 June 2018 at 14:18, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:01:13PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> > >>support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, the majority of > >> > >>installations of i686 packages is for use

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 06/04/2018 02:50 PM, Jeff Backus wrote: Thanks for the data. 25k is still a pretty healthy number. :) I realize that there are a lot of unknowns in the data, so it is difficult to draw any hard conclusions, but 25k is still much larger than 0. Splitting into i686 into i586 and i686 would giv

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:01:13PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > > >>support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, the majority of > > > >>installations of i686 packages is for use on x86_64 systems, as > > > >>multi-lib RPMs. > > > >Based

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 4 June 2018 at 14:18, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:01:13PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> > >>support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, the majority of >> > >>installations of i686 packages is for use on x86_64 systems, as >> > >>multi-lib RPMs. >> > >Based on what data

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 04:04:30PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > >>only addition over the i686/Pentium Pro baseline is a requirement to > > >>support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, the majority of > > >>installations of i686 packages

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: > Jeff Backus wrote: > > > > Until (unless?) we have data indicating that this is a major drain on > > community resources, I'd push back on a change that actively excludes > part > > of the community. Now, if we do have data indicating that suppo

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:55 PM Jeff Backus wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Florian Weimer > wrote: > >> > >> On 06/04/2018 05:55 PM, Jeff Backus wrote: > >>> > >>> Would you please provide more detail on what problem o

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 12:43 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/HiddenGrubMenu We (QA) would like to note that the "How to test" section of this Change seems heavily under-developed: "1. Install Fedora in a fresh v

Fedora Rawhide-20180604.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 12/137 (x86_64), 5/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20180603.n.1): ID: 244870 Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_xfs@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/244870 Old failures (same test faile

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2

On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 13:40 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2 = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StrongCryptoSettings2 The "how to test" section for this Change seems a little worryingly barebones: "Applications which follow the syste

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM Dave Love wrote: > > You wrote: > > > I think generally the Fedora/RH-ecosystem answer is to use Ansible for > > configuration, rather than configuration packages. > > > > That's not sayin' there can't be another answer, but in general that's > > the route *I'd* take

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

You wrote: > Neal Gompa wrote: >> No such thing currently exists, because an equivalent to `dpkg-divert` >> does not exist in RPM. > > You are probably aware of this, but for the other readers of this thread: I wasn't anyhow, thanks! > File triggers can be (ab)used to do something like that, th

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

You wrote: > I think generally the Fedora/RH-ecosystem answer is to use Ansible for > configuration, rather than configuration packages. > > That's not sayin' there can't be another answer, but in general that's > the route *I'd* take to solve this problem on my systems. I guess we disagree abou

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:01:13PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > >>support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, the majority of > > >>installations of i686 packages is for use on x86_64 systems, as > > >>multi-lib RPMs. > > >Based on what data? > > The mirror data I've seen, but it's really outda

Re: Introduction

Hi and thank you. :) L. T. Dne 04.06.2018 v 18:55 Matthew Miller napsal(a): On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 09:21:22AM +0200, Lukáš Tyrychtr wrote: My name is Lukáš Tyrychtr and i am a student currently having an intership at Red Hat. The objective of the internship is mainly fixing accessibility bugs

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 04:04:30PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > >>only addition over the i686/Pentium Pro baseline is a requirement to > >>support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, the majority of > >>installations of i686 packages is for use on x86_64 systems, as > >>multi-lib RPMs. > >Based o

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:55 PM Jeff Backus wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >> On 06/04/2018 05:55 PM, Jeff Backus wrote: >>> >>> Would you please provide more detail on what problem or problems we are >>> trying to solve? Is this purely for efficiency re

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

Jeff Backus wrote: > Until (unless?) we have data indicating that this is a major drain on > community resources, I'd push back on a change that actively excludes part > of the community. Now, if we do have data indicating that supporting > non-SSE2 systems with the i686 architecture is a not-ins

xpa license change

The license in xpa has changed from LGPLv2+ in version 2.1.15 to MIT in xpa 2.1.18 Regards, Sergio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https:/

Re: Introduction

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 09:21:22AM +0200, Lukáš Tyrychtr wrote: > My name is Lukáš Tyrychtr and i am a student currently having an > intership at Red Hat. The objective of the internship is mainly > fixing accessibility bugs and overall improving the situation in > Fedora, so in the future you can

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 06/04/2018 05:55 PM, Jeff Backus wrote: > >> Would you please provide more detail on what problem or problems we are >> trying to solve? Is this purely for efficiency reasons? >> > > Mainly developer efficiency. There will be fewer test

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

On 05/31/2018 04:54 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: Plus, there's an upside: if you're hammering F11 or F8 or F12 or Esc or whatever to try and get into the BIOS, and you miss it, then at least you stop in grub instead of going straight into the OS. A big part of the 'dark pattern' of the curre

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:22 AM, Till Maas wrote: > > My proposal was for the instructions to recommend pressing a certain key > but still accepting any key in grub, then there is no lie, since "Press > space to enter grub" is still true when other keys allow the same. I'm still not a fan because

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

* Chris Adams [04/06/2018 10:58] : > > I think you are missing a some of The Atom chips that are 32-bit only; > there are versions that were released as late as 2010 that don't support > 64-bit (I don't know when they were discontinued). You're thinking of the Lincroft series of Intel CPUs: http:/

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20180604.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20180603.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20180604.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:4 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 36 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 06/04/2018 05:55 PM, Jeff Backus wrote: Would you please provide more detail on what problem or problems we are trying to solve? Is this purely for efficiency reasons? Mainly developer efficiency. There will be fewer test suite problems due to excess precision (a bunch of packages carry pa

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 17:21 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > On 06/04/2018 05:07 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 16:04 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > > > > > > This proposal suggests to accept this reality and build

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 08:59 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > > On 06/04/2018 04:28 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > It should, because -march=x86-64 implies just SSE2 and FXSR, and Xeon > MP > > > supports both. But the intent is what the subject

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

Once upon a time, Adam Jackson said: > Certainly, I'm no netburst fan either. But the last[*] 32-bit-only > Intel chip was Yonah (Core 1), which went out of production in 2008- > ish, so there's about seven years worth of CPUs between the > introductions of SSE2 and AMD64. I think you are missing

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64 = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/i686_Is_For_x86-64 > > > Owner(s): > * Florian Weimer > > > Fedora builds its i686 packages for use on x86-64 systems as multi-lib > RPMs. > > >

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 17:21 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 06/04/2018 05:07 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 16:04 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > > > > This proposal suggests to accept this reality and build the i686 > > > > > packages in such a way that they require the

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:23 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 06/04/2018 11:28 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >> On 06/04/2018 10:50 AM, Guido Aulisi wrote: > > >> It should, because -march=x86-64 implies just SSE2 and FXSR, and Xeon MP >> supports both. But the intent is what the subject says: i686 b

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Monday, June 4, 2018, 4:35:34 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64 = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/i686_Is_For_x86-64 > Owner(s): > * Florian Weimer > Fedora builds its i686 packages for use on x86-64 systems as multi-lib RPMs. > == Detailed d

Re: Hiding the grub menu by default on single OS installs

Dne 1.6.2018 v 19:00 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a): >> "TK" == Tomas Kovar writes: > TK> - this one is on the polish side of things: > [don't keep bouncing to text mode] > > I might also add that as part of this, we'd also need to get rid of the > very early message about EFI secure boot be

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 06/04/2018 05:07 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 16:04 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: This proposal suggests to accept this reality and build the i686 packages in such a way that they require the ISA level of (early) x86-64 CPUs. On which x86 CPU families will Fedora continue t

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

Dne 1.6.2018 v 16:29 Ken Coar napsal(a): > On 06/01/2018 05:06 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> It is irony, that people, who are capable to get into the grub menu if >> they need, complain about it being hidden. So to say, I am 100% for >> hiding the grub menu, speeding up the boot process, and if need

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 16:04 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > This proposal suggests to accept this reality and build the i686 > > > packages in such a way that they require the ISA level of (early) > > > x86-64 CPUs. > > > > On which x86 CPU families will Fedora continue to work? > > Based on

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 08:59 -0500, Ian Pilcher wrote: > On 06/04/2018 04:28 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > It should, because -march=x86-64 implies just SSE2 and FXSR, and Xeon MP > > supports both. But the intent is what the subject says: i686 binaries > > are for running legacy software on x86-

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 10:09 AM Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On 06/04/2018 11:28 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > On 06/04/2018 10:50 AM, Guido Aulisi wrote: > > > It should, because -march=x86-64 implies just SSE2 and FXSR, and Xeon MP > > supports both. But the intent is what the subject says: i686 b

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 06/04/2018 02:39 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: == Detailed description == Currently, the i686 RPM packages are built in such a way that they are compatible with very old i686 systems, such as the Pentium III. The only addition over the i686/Pentium Pro baseline is a requirement to support l

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 06/04/2018 04:28 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: It should, because -march=x86-64 implies just SSE2 and FXSR, and Xeon MP supports both.  But the intent is what the subject says: i686 binaries are for running legacy software on x86-64 systems, and nothing more. So the 32-bit x86 SIG would be requ

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN

On 2018-06-04, Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2018-05-25, Jan Kurik wrote: >>= Proposed System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN = >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Perl_Move_to_MetaCPAN >> > This change was approved and I will start updating the packages in a few > moments. > > Each affected pa

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 06/04/2018 11:28 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: On 06/04/2018 10:50 AM, Guido Aulisi wrote: It should, because -march=x86-64 implies just SSE2 and FXSR, and Xeon MP supports both.  But the intent is what the subject says: i686 binaries are for running legacy software on x86-64 systems, and noth

Re: Change in Copr retention policy?

Dne 4.6.2018 v 10:03 Jan Pazdziora napsal(a): > In any case, it'd be nice to notify the owners of those repos to give > them chance to review what they have and potentially rebuild their > content on newer buildroots, or just mark their repos "alive" and > extend the expiration for another 180 days

Re: Hiding the grub menu by default on single OS installs

Hi, On 04-06-18 09:16, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi, Note I've dropped the fedora-devel list (-ETOOMUCHBIKESHED) and added Javier and Jan to the Cc. Ugh, so clearly I failed to remove fedora-devel from the CC. Ah well. I hope this mistake shows that there is nothing nefarious going on here and th

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

> == Detailed description == > Currently, the i686 RPM packages are built in such a way that they are > compatible with very old i686 systems, such as the Pentium III. The > only addition over the i686/Pentium Pro baseline is a requirement to > support long NOPs, for Intel CET. However, the major

Re: Nonresponsive maintainer: guidograzioli

On 06/04/2018 10:14 AM, Till Hofmann wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm trying to get in contact with Guido Graizoli (FAS guidograzioli). He > has not responded to a bug report requesting an update of bibtex2html > [1]. The package is currently also FTBFS [2], where he did not respond > either. I also tri

F29 System Wide Change: NSS load p11-kit modules by default

= Proposed System Wide Change: NSS load p11-kit modules by default = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NSSLoadP11KitModules Owner(s): * Daiki Ueno When NSS database is created, PKCS#11 modules configured in the system's p11-kit will be automatically registered and visible to NSS applica

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN

On 2018-05-25, Jan Kurik wrote: >= Proposed System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Perl_Move_to_MetaCPAN > This change was approved and I will start updating the packages in a few moments. Each affected package will receive one commit with "cpan.org a

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 06/04/2018 10:50 AM, Guido Aulisi wrote: This proposal suggests to accept this reality and build the i686 packages in such a way that they require the ISA level of (early) x86-64 CPUs. Will Fedora 29 run on the CPU listed above? It should, because -march=x86-64 implies just SSE2 and FXSR,

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

2018-06-04 10:35 GMT+02:00 Jan Kurik : > = Proposed System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64 = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/i686_Is_For_x86-64 > > > Owner(s): > * Florian Weimer > > > Fedora builds its i686 packages for use on x86-64 systems as multi-lib RPMs. > > > > == Detailed descr

F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

= Proposed System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64 = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/i686_Is_For_x86-64 Owner(s): * Florian Weimer Fedora builds its i686 packages for use on x86-64 systems as multi-lib RPMs. == Detailed description == Currently, the i686 RPM packages are built in su

Nonresponsive maintainer: guidograzioli

Hi all, I'm trying to get in contact with Guido Graizoli (FAS guidograzioli). He has not responded to a bug report requesting an update of bibtex2html [1]. The package is currently also FTBFS [2], where he did not respond either. I also tried contacting him privately by e-mail, but I did not get a

Re: Change in Copr retention policy?

On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 12:30:28PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > This means that we still have repos for fedora-18-* and epel-5-*. > > Is this reasonable? Or are we just wasting storage? According to our logs > those repositories are still accessed (yes > even that fedora-18). It could be it

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

Hi, On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 03:44:12PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Till Maas wrote: > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 02:30:20PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:00 AM, Jason L Tibbitts III > > > >> > If we're going to patch grub to expand the

Introduction

Hello. My name is Lukáš Tyrychtr and i am a student currently having an intership at Red Hat. The objective of the internship is mainly fixing accessibility bugs and overall improving the situation in Fedora, so in the future you can expect some work in this regard, currently i am working on

Re: Hiding the grub menu by default on single OS installs

Hi, Note I've dropped the fedora-devel list (-ETOOMUCHBIKESHED) and added Javier and Jan to the Cc. On 01-06-18 20:03, Peter Jones wrote: On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 05:47:36PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi, On 31-05-18 15:20, Robert Marcano wrote: On 05/31/2018 06:52 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: