On 12/11/19 8:46 am, Scott Talbert wrote:
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Scott Talbert wrote:
Ouch. So now you're talking about wanting to package a *fork* of a
development release of wxGTK.
No. (unless it was done by simply turning on a config item). Looking
closer, building audacity requires an
On 12/11/19 8:05 am, David Timms wrote:
Audacity support when my users crash because they aren't running the
recommended library (there is other locally adjusted libs which Audacity
uses). Not that this is different from the past - but I would like it to
oops, dropped word
On 12/11/19 1:33 am, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019, 15:09 VÃt Ondruch <mailto:vondr...@redhat.com>> wrote:
Dne 11. 11. 19 v 14:39 Kevin Kofler napsal(a):
> David Timms wrote:
>> I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (onc
On 12/11/19 1:51 am, Scott Talbert wrote:
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, David Timms wrote:
Issue:
Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1.
The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel.
wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2
On 12/11/19 2:36 am, Christopher Engelhard wrote:
On 11/11/2019 3:51 PM, Scott Talbert wrote:
> Hi, one of the wxGTK maintainers here. Where is the requirement to use
> wxGTK 3.1 documented? Like Kevin, I can't find that documented.Â
And if
> it is definitely required, *why* is it
On 12/11/19 12:39 am, Kevin Kofler wrote:
David Timms wrote:
Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1.
Does it really? I cannot find this requirement in their git repository.
see: https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Building_On_Linux
or from the horse - (Mr Ed):
https
Issue:
Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1.
The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel.
wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 release.
Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 next year.
On 11/10/18 01:50, José Abílio Matos wrote:
Even so the problem described seems to be related with packages that were not
build for F29 by mistake (probably around the time that F29 was branched from
rawhide August 14). If the same nvr exists in F28 and rawhide it is difficult
to come with a
On 20/09/18 09:38, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-09-20 at 07:58 +1000, David Timms wrote:
> The conditional is correct but [1] from the previous %endif you leave
> two blanks lines which you can't, one blank line makes terminate the
> ./configure command and so last option &q
Hi, (this is a 4th retry, now trying devel as first try to packaging a
week ago says held by moderator, but doesn't seem to have been posted to
the list, and I don't know why...)
Audacity has had the following as part of rpm spec in the %configure
section:
%configure \
My package needs:
build.log.gz:
checking for libudev.h... no
checking whether we are using gcc 4.9.0 or later... no
configure: error: Audacity requires at least GCC 4.9
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.FSzJJr (%build)
Is there a RH-7 or EPEL-7 package which provides gcc-4.9 ?
On 05/03/16 13:37, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
>
> https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/119e1b68-e27b-11e5-a932-525400120b80/task_output/audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23.log
Hi, I've received the above notification from the QA
Hi any GTk3 or WxWidgets devs,
In Audacity (next), upstream has moved to wxGTK3. The only visible issue
I can see is with the placement of text within drop down fields.
The text is too low, and if it's too wide, the combo box isn't resizing
to fit the width. [1]
Just wondered if this is a
On 24/11/15 01:29, Scott Talbert wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2015, David Timms wrote:
>
> When updating my code for wxGTK3, there were some places where I had to
> add a Layout() call to my wxPanel after adding items to a wxChoice in
> order to get it to size correctly. The same c
On 14/11/15 01:18, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 13.11.2015 v 13:30 David Timms napsal(a):
>> Hi, I submitted an audacity build f22,23,rawhide. Usually it finishes in
>> 12-20 mins. 22/23 are done, but rawhide's been 80 minutes, so I think
>> something has gone
Hi, I submitted an audacity build f22,23,rawhide. Usually it finishes in
12-20 mins. 22/23 are done, but rawhide's been 80 minutes, so I think
something has gone wrong... No logs yet for it.
https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/dtimms/audacity-git/build/139224/
Can I, should I kill the build and
Hi, I would welcome any feedback about the epel-7 updates-testing
candidate for Audacity 2.1.1. It's available from the [Builds] link at:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7245/audacity-2.1.1-1.el7
If you can, thanks for your testing :-)
trying on -devel On 25/06/15 02:06, David Timms wrote:
I haven't seen this one before. I'm fixing up my first mistake which was
that adding the new source file to look-aside dropped the
audacity-manual zip entry from sources.
I've re-added that, but still getting build failure on fedpkg
Hi, I'm keen to install F22 on a laptop (shared with windows 7), but the
installer bugs out due to problems in libparted when reading my disk
(bz: 1223111):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1223111
The machine boots and runs the live iso via usb, but also can't do
install to the HD due
On 01/04/15 12:54, Bill Nottingham wrote:
David Timms (dti...@iinet.net.au) said:
...
I thought about trying to reliably parse major/minor/subminor versions in
bash, and track it against where things were implemented. But then just went
the lazy route:
if appstream-util --help | grep -q
On 27/03/15 04:48, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 05:40:29PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
So, the overwhelming amount of help I received (one person) meant I
spent the whole of today fixing up 230 packages. Most of the packages
Looks like about 22 hours since you asked for
On 01/04/15 00:34, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 31 March 2015 at 14:07, David Timms dti...@iinet.net.au wrote:
I see my package was adjusted, but I can't get it to build:
I only build the new-enough libappstream-glib into rawhide -- seeing
as most of the f23 builds have succeeded I'll do
On 21/01/15 22:15, Matthias Runge wrote:
On 21/01/15 11:49, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
I don't have a solution to bring extra resources to reviewing (which
will be the ideal), but I'd like to propose an amendment to allow
bringing packages even if no reviewers are available (the typical
On 08/10/14 10:41, Mike Ruckman wrote:
The list of ttys you see along the bottom is from tmux [0]. From that screen
if you were to hit `ctrl-b 2` it would switch to the pane labelled 'shell' at
the bottom of the screen.
Uh-hah, thankyou.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi, booted up a F21 alpha iso cd, and realized after the long wait that
I didn't have networking configured during boot, and this probably led to:
- no repository
- no package selection possible.
I thought I would Alt-F1,F2 etc to find the shell (and set up networking
manually, rather than
Hi, I'm trying to build an updated package, first in master, then in f21
and the command failed with the below. Google hasn't helped me so far.
What happening here ?
Dave.
=
$ fedpkg build
Building tnef-1.4.11-1.20140826git0b35ad8.fc21 for f21-candidate
Created task: 7494307
Task info:
On 18/09/13 20:45, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 17/09/13 20:30, David Timms wrote:
...
Note that old builds (source and binary RPMs, plus logs) can be found
at: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages/pkgname/
Thanks Richard, Mikolaj and Paul. These were all useful and helpful
responses
In trying to track down when a bug began showing up, I'd like to build
an earlier version of my package eg from 9 months ago (hence earlier
upstream release and different spec/patches). How can that be achieved
on the builder ?
Does the build system keep the build logs of old packages, ie that
On 08/09/12 11:50, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Well, if you want to look, or anyone else wishes to take up the
gauntlet:
http://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/mash/tree/utils/spam-o-matic
Thanks for the link. Anyone see merit in these ideas ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 07/09/12 22:07, Fedora Branched Report wrote:
Compose started at Fri Sep 7 09:15:28 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
Who would like to re-arrange this report to be more effective and useful ?
1. The broken dependency first, not
On 18/02/12 09:46, Richard Vickery wrote:
Have you received an indication from anyone to do this?
No, actually. Although I thought I sent it to the test list but see now
I sent to devel.
I would like to
help test it; how am I to get it off the site using Google-Chrome?
Looks like I built a
testing operate as
expected.
build: {rawhide}, also runs on F16 OK.
i686:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771416
x86_64:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771415
Any crash/exceptions definitely report in bugzilla.
Cheers, David Timms.
ps. An ffmpeg mp3
On 29/11/11 06:51, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:18:01PM +0100, Jos Vos wrote:
I was looking for a tool to record X/VNC session in a movie and found
pyvnc2swf. But looking at the project's home page,
http://www.unixuser.org/~euske/vnc2swf/index.html, I see that the
On 23/06/11 22:53, Alexander Kurtakov wrote:
maintainers of most of the stack are slightly moving it to maven 3 only. We
Hey Alex, is that supposed to be slowly ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 02/05/11 11:01, Reindl Harald wrote:
the application must cpu-runtime-detect itself what means taht for
performance-critical parts different code is included and at
the start the application checks what code-parts have to be used
but this is nothing anybody can make generic by packaging if
Hi, a user of rakarrack was getting startup exception SIGILL [1].
Seems the config/make/compile process for this app checks CPU capability
of the machine it is being compiled on, and applies optimisations that
are available on that processor.
The user has a much older processor.
Upstream
On 01/05/11 16:47, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Rpm's and Fedora's philosophy is to let rpm specify/dictate CFLAGS,
which packages are supposed to respect.
Yes, I still have VSs bug (514991) regarding opt flags still open.
So, for the lesser CPU problem, does that mean I just suggest, rebuild
srpm on
On 01/05/11 17:41, Hans de Goede wrote:
Erm, specifying a minimum support CPU in the package description is
not acceptable IMHO. The fix here is to patch the packages buildsystem,
so that it gets build for the minimum cpu level which is supported by
Fedora, and thus will work out of the box on
Hi, I'm adding a subpackage -manual to audacity to include the
additional manual archive. It links from the help menu items if it is
installed, or else points you to the in development online version.
I already made a mistake and included manual files in both the main and
sub package. The spec
On 02/05/11 06:31, Kevin Kofler wrote:
David Timms wrote:
Should I be suggesting to upstream to attempt to detect CPU before
running non-available instructions, eg as part of app startup ?
Further, what can I run over an existing executable to detect what CPU
it was built for, ie what
I guess anyone on the scm-commits list would have seen a few like this:
On 18/01/11 08:59, topdog wrote:
dokuwiki-2010-11-07a.tgz | Bin 0 - 2758654 bytes
dokuwiki-rm-bundled-libs.patch|54035
+
dokuwiki-use-fedora-email-valid.patch |
On 05/10/10 07:27, Jon Ciesla wrote:
In my experience, git add the patch, fedpkg commit -p, fedpkg build.
The tag is based on the git revision hash, so it's unique, no need to
bump the EVR.
Cool, thanks, will do.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi, new to git, and while following the conversion guide [1], I missed
the fact that I had added a new patch, but not added it to git.
So the build failed. I have now: git add x.patch
I'm not sure what is correct procedure to attempt rebuild with the
included patch:
1. fedpkg commit -p
2. fedpkg
Hi there,
I was wondering if there is any process that we (spin developers - music
list) could use to confirm that a spin iso was
1. built with a particular kickstart file (or list of files when there
is kickstart %include x directives).
2. hasn't been doctored on purpose eg by the person
On 07/07/10 20:16, Thomas Spura wrote:
To get such a button, to apply for becoming real maintainership makes
this possible and is the easiest way, because it doesn't need e.g. a
fast track procedure or anyone agreeing from fesco or anyone to change
it manually in pkgdb.
When you have
I vaguely remember something about this, but can't find it in wiki or
list archives:
My upstream hasn't updated in years, but the package (glglobe) still
builds for fedora and epel. Late in 2009, it appears that the upstream
hosting site was closed: http://www.geocities.com (now yahoo).
However,
On 21/06/10 09:38, Thomas Spura wrote:
Any comments (other than 'show me the money/code') ?
I don't see a benefit of that... When a build fails, it kills all
other current builds of other architectures, so you need to check that
architecture, that fails first and the diff would not contain
Probably thought of a million times, but was wondering whether it would
be possible, and useful to give diff capabilities within the koji web
interface.
eg: x86_64 build
...
Output build.log (tail)
root.log (tail)
state.log (tail)
could become:
Output build.log (tail)
Hi, with the recent libcurl/curl updates for F12 I tried a:
rpm -q --changelog of each.
While curl's changelog looks normal, the information is shown twice for
libcurl.
Is this normal for a subpackage ?
Bug in rpm ?
Bug in the package (while the .spec in cvs looks normal):
On 17/06/10 23:59, Mogens Kjaer wrote:
On 06/17/2010 03:51 PM, David Timms wrote:
Hi, with the recent libcurl/curl updates for F12 I tried a:
rpm -q --changelog of each.
While curl's changelog looks normal, the information is shown twice for
libcurl.
Do you have two libcurl's? (i686
On 18/03/10 05:32, Gergely Buday wrote:
if such list does not exist, can you name a few missing item from
fedora? Think of relatively small would-be software, without a GUI.
Not sure if you mean you would like to work on gui interface to existing
CLI ?
Anyway, I think it would be nice for
://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522920 if interested.
Cheers, David Timms
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522920 if interested.
Cheers, David Timms
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
53 matches
Mail list logo
