Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I have put up a repository with an updated zif snapshot for Fedora 15 at:
> http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/kkofler/zif-backport/fedora-zif-
backport.repo
There's once again a new snapshot today. (I haven't announced every new
snapshot in the repository and will NOT anno
Jef Spaleta wrote:
> I fully admit that this case is meant to be indicative of a class of
> transactions and not a smoking gun. I was reaching for a simple to
> understand virtual provides scenario, in the same vein as the test cases
> that zif's compile time make check does already. I believe it
On 09/23/2011 01:39 AM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> I can understand in the case where you have some knowledge of what
>> the
>> various package chains do.
> Such cases do exist. The libibverbs package requires a libibverbs-driver in
> order to run. Which driver you wan
- Original Message -
> I can understand in the case where you have some knowledge of what
> the
> various package chains do.
Such cases do exist. The libibverbs package requires a libibverbs-driver in
order to run. Which driver you want depends on hardware, and we don't normally
instal
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 13:43, Doug Ledford wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> Wow... just wow.
>>
>> -jef"please hold while koji asks you a series of questions concerning
>> multiple provider cascades to pre-populate the build environment for
>> your rawhide scratch build that you have just
- Original Message -
> Wow... just wow.
>
> -jef"please hold while koji asks you a series of questions concerning
> multiple provider cascades to pre-populate the build environment for
> your rawhide scratch build that you have just requested"spaleta
You can always have a switch to provid
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> I'm
>> just trying to test how well zif handles the multple provider case
>> and understand how it makes the judgment on what is installed.
>
> There's probably a pretty strong argument to be made that if packa
- Original Message -
> I'm
> just trying to test how well zif handles the multple provider case
> and understand how it makes the judgment on what is installed.
There's probably a pretty strong argument to be made that if package A requires
foo, and packages B, C, and D all provide foo, t
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> (And besides, your example is about the worst you could pick, since if
> somebody is skilled enough with package management to remove the PackageKit
> frontend, surely he or she knows what to do if zif wants to pick the wrong
> one. ;-) Real
Jef Spaleta wrote:
> you have systems with just KDE and no GNOME installed yes? zif install
> paprefs
>
> with kpackagekit not installed does zif do the more optimal thing and pull
> kpackagekit in as a dep to fill PackageKit-session-service requirement?
I'm not sure why you're asking that. It
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> I hope the above helps answer your question. I can install the RC2
> with a minimal install if that would help any.
>
>
Almost what I wanted :-> But appreciated.
What you have asked Is a related question. What do you get if you have
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 16:42, Jef Spaleta wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Stephen John Smoogen
> wrote:
>>
>> What do you want me to do to try and test it more? Install some KDE items?
>>
>
> Remove the gnome DE stack entirely install the KDE stack, make sure
> kpackagekit is not i
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> What do you want me to do to try and test it more? Install some KDE items?
>
>
Remove the gnome DE stack entirely install the KDE stack, make sure
kpackagekit is not installed and run it again. kpackagekit is probably
going to be inst
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 16:06, Jef Spaleta wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Kevin Kofler
> wrote:
>>
>> Jef Spaleta wrote:
>> > Kevin, were you able to reproduce my problem with the official adobe
>> > repository?
>>
>> To be honest, I haven't tried it, I've been busy enough filing t
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jef Spaleta wrote:
> > Kevin, were you able to reproduce my problem with the official adobe
> > repository?
>
> To be honest, I haven't tried it, I've been busy enough filing the bugs for
> the issues I found myself and retesting them with tod
Jef Spaleta wrote:
> Kevin, were you able to reproduce my problem with the official adobe
> repository?
To be honest, I haven't tried it, I've been busy enough filing the bugs for
the issues I found myself and retesting them with today's snapshot.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
dev
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I'm building a new snapshot of zif, which should fix #739980 (but I have
> to test that), and will be pushing it to the repository (no matter whether
> it actually fixes #739980 or not).
There's now zif-0.2.4-0.93.20110920git.fc15 in the repository, but you'll
probably have
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I hope we can get all the annoyances in zif sorted out soon.
>
>
Kevin, were you able to reproduce my problem with the official adobe
repository? I'm still not sure if my multiple issues with zif depsolving
are a problem with my system specif
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I have put up a repository with an updated zif snapshot for Fedora 15 at:
> http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/kkofler/zif-backport/fedora-zif-backport.repo
So, I found several issues, mostly in zif or PackageKit-zif, but also one in
KPackageKit/Apper:
https://bugzilla.redha
Hi,
I have put up a repository with an updated zif snapshot for Fedora 15 at:
http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/kkofler/zif-backport/fedora-zif-backport.repo
The repository also includes a rebuild of PackageKit to deal with the bumped
zif soname. This should only affect PackageKit-zif, but all
20 matches
Mail list logo
