Fellow Fedora Linux User, and Q/A leader Can't use aisleriot and MELD.

I am on the mailing list but don't know where to post bug--omission. Bugzilla, at times, is a pita to use. The Aisleriot game, and also the MELD graphical diff command are missing some libraries.It is one/some python items that are missing and used by at least the two mentioned. Leslie Saten

Re: Q: is a missing info URL for a package a problem?

On 4/7/20 11:38 AM, Marius Schwarz wrote: Description of problem: the Info URL of the package "clamsmtp" seems to be offline ... $  dnf info clamsmtp | grep -i url URL  : http://memberwebs.com/stef/software/clamsmtp/ $ host  memberwebs.com Host memberwebs.com not found: 2(SERVFAIL) i

Re: Q: is a missing info URL for a package a problem?

On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 11:38:55AM +0200, Marius Schwarz wrote: > Description of problem: > > the Info URL of the package "clamsmtp" seems to be offline ... > > > $  dnf info clamsmtp | grep -i url > URL  : http://memberwebs.com/stef/software/clamsmtp/ > > $ host  memberwebs.com > Host

Q: is a missing info URL for a package a problem?

Description of problem: the Info URL of the package "clamsmtp" seems to be offline ... $  dnf info clamsmtp | grep -i url URL  : http://memberwebs.com/stef/software/clamsmtp/ $ host  memberwebs.com Host memberwebs.com not found: 2(SERVFAIL) it does not look like a temporary error. Is t

Re: The 'rpm -q --whatrequires' variant to get list of all dependant packages?

t; dependants, e.g. on 'foo-devel'. > > Is there something similar to 'dnf repoquery --whatrequires foo-libs > --all-deps' > in RPM? See the following: > > $ rpm -q --whatrequires libarchive > no package requires libarchive > $ sudo dnf remove l

Re: The 'rpm -q --whatrequires' variant to get list of all dependant packages?

On Thursday, November 10, 2016 11:46:16 AM CET Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 10/11/16 07:08, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > Is there something similar to 'dnf repoquery --whatrequires foo-libs > > --all-deps' > > in RPM? See the following: > > > > $ rpm -q -

Re: The 'rpm -q --whatrequires' variant to get list of all dependant packages?

On 10/11/16 07:08, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > Is there something similar to 'dnf repoquery --whatrequires foo-libs > --all-deps' > in RPM? See the following: > > $ rpm -q --whatrequires libarchive > no package requires libarchive > $ sudo dnf remov

Re: The 'rpm -q --whatrequires' variant to get list of all dependant packages?

> $ rpm -q --whatrequires libarchive > no package requires libarchive This does the trick for me: rpm -q --whatrequires $(rpm -q --provides libarchive | awk '{print $1}') Dridi ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedo

Re: The 'rpm -q --whatrequires' variant to get list of all dependant packages?

ious about "ultimate" repoquery to get list of > > SOURCE > > dependants, e.g. on 'foo-devel'. > Is there something similar to 'dnf repoquery --whatrequires foo-libs > --all-deps' > in RPM?  See the following: > > $ rpm -q --whatrequires libar

The 'rpm -q --whatrequires' variant to get list of all dependant packages?

answer? I can do > sub-queries later do pick the important rebuild candidates. > > Also, I would be curious about "ultimate" repoquery to get list of SOURCE > dependants, e.g. on 'foo-devel'. Is there something similar to 'dnf repoquery --whatrequires foo-li

Re: Q: Splitting existing pkg into subpackages?!

On 30/10/14 10:58, Sergio Pascual wrote: 2014-10-30 10:50 GMT+01:00 Alec Leamas mailto:leamas.a...@gmail.com>>: On 30/10/14 10:41, Sergio Pascual wrote: Hello 2014-10-30 10:32 GMT+01:00 Alec Leamas mailto:leamas.a...@gmail.com>

Re: Q: Splitting existing pkg into subpackages?!

2014-10-30 10:50 GMT+01:00 Alec Leamas : > On 30/10/14 10:41, Sergio Pascual wrote: > >> Hello >> >> 2014-10-30 10:32 GMT+01:00 Alec Leamas > >: >> >> Hi all! >> >> >> Feeling dumb (again...) I have a package which I now need to split >> into subpackages.

Re: Q: Splitting existing pkg into subpackages?!

On 30/10/14 10:41, Sergio Pascual wrote: Hello 2014-10-30 10:32 GMT+01:00 Alec Leamas mailto:leamas.a...@gmail.com>>: Hi all! Feeling dumb (again...) I have a package which I now need to split into subpackages. [cut] Does this help? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_

Re: Q: Splitting existing pkg into subpackages?!

Hello 2014-10-30 10:32 GMT+01:00 Alec Leamas : > Hi all! > > > Feeling dumb (again...) I have a package which I now need to split into > subpackages. Also, I want the original package to just be an empty one > pulling in all the new subpackages, giving a smooth upgrade path > (installing the base

Q: Splitting existing pkg into subpackages?!

Hi all! Feeling dumb (again...) I have a package which I now need to split into subpackages. Also, I want the original package to just be an empty one pulling in all the new subpackages, giving a smooth upgrade path (installing the base package installs everything, as it used to be). My pro

Re: Reopening: Q: webfonts:

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Petr Vobornik wrote: > This solution is much nicer and can be used by other font packages as well. > > Here's the new package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036754 Very awesome, thanks! I'll sponsor you and review. :-) Luckily, I pushed off the we

Re: Reopening: Q: webfonts:

On 11/30/2013 09:04 PM, Paul Flo Williams wrote: Petr Vobornik wrote: Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Just write a fontforge or ttx script that flips this bit at rpm build time, assuming you've done your legal review correctly the bit is in contradiction with the font license (if the font was no instal

Re: Reopening: Q: webfonts:

Petr Vobornik wrote: >> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >>> >>> Just write a fontforge or ttx script that flips this bit at rpm build >>> time, assuming you've done your legal review correctly the bit is in >>> contradiction with the font license (if the font was no installable we >>> could not package it i

Re: Reopening: Q: webfonts:

On 11/28/2013 02:25 PM, Paul Flo Williams wrote: Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Mer 27 novembre 2013 15:39, Petr Vobornik a écrit : OTF/TTF fails in all modern versions of IE when the font does not have embedding permissions set to 'installable' [1]. It's more common that one would say. Of cour

Re: Reopening: Q: webfonts:

Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le Mer 27 novembre 2013 15:39, Petr Vobornik a écrit : >> >> OTF/TTF fails in all modern versions of IE when the font does not have >> embedding permissions set to 'installable' [1]. It's more common that >> one would say. > > Of course it is very common, it's the defaul

Re: Reopening: Q: webfonts:

Le Mer 27 novembre 2013 15:39, Petr Vobornik a écrit : > Hi, > > I would like to reopen the discussion about packaging web fonts since > its conclusion(below) is not very usable. > > The issue I'm dealing with is that we want FreeIPA Web UI to use Open > Sans and Font Awesome(FA) font. FA is being

Reopening: Q: webfonts:

is: *Should packaging of WOFF and EOT be explicitly allowed by packaging rules?* Subsequent Qs like "Where?" and "What about the already packaged fonts" don't matter until the main Q is answered. [1] http://caniuse.com/ttf [2] http://caniuse.com/woff [3] http://caniu

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Dim 5 mai 2013 12:30, Alec Leamas a écrit : > On 05/05/2013 11:40 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> Are you sure it works well in IE8 at all? Because there are lots of >> other >> reasons a modern web site will fail in old ie versions > Double checking... and you're right, openerp only supports IE

Re: Q: webfonts:

Am 05.05.2013 11:44, schrieb Nicolas Mailhot: > And XP is out-of-support Microsoft-side. So any company use (that is what > is being talked about here) is likely to stop soonish fix your calendar there where i live we have 2013 and not 2014 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 05/05/2013 11:40 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Dim 5 mai 2013 10:19, Alec Leamas a écrit : This seems to mean that we force web applications to exclude IE version 8 (and older) clients. As this seems to be a widely used IE version today, is this really the way to go? It seems to be a case

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Dim 5 mai 2013 12:01, Felix Miata a écrit : > On 2013-05-05 11:44 (GMT+0200) Nicolas Mailhot composed: > >> XP is out-of-support Microsoft-side. > > For what definition of "out-of-support"? > > http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/endofsupport.aspx > > Considering Fedora release lifetimes, Wi

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 2013-05-05 11:44 (GMT+0200) Nicolas Mailhot composed: XP is out-of-support Microsoft-side. For what definition of "out-of-support"? http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/endofsupport.aspx Considering Fedora release lifetimes, WinXP seems to have abundant life left. -- "The wise are known

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Dim 5 mai 2013 11:27, Felix Miata a écrit : > On 2013-05-05 10:19 (GMT+0200) Alec Leamas composed: > >> Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > >>> Here is the current status of @font-face ttf/otf support in browsers: >>> http://caniuse.com/ttf ... > >> This seems to mean that we force web applications to exc

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Dim 5 mai 2013 06:40, T.C. Hollingsworth a écrit : > On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Nicolas Mailhot > wrote: >> I think spot will agree there is no way we'll ever ship a font >> consisting >> of company logos, it's trademark hell > > We ship *lots* of trademarked logos. In Firefox alone the

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Dim 5 mai 2013 10:19, Alec Leamas a écrit : > This seems to mean that we force web applications to exclude IE version > 8 (and older) clients. As this seems to be a widely used IE version > today, is this really the way to go? It seems to be a case of Fedora being first and Microsoft being l

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 2013-05-05 10:19 (GMT+0200) Alec Leamas composed: Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Here is the current status of @font-face ttf/otf support in browsers: http://caniuse.com/ttf ... This seems to mean that we force web applications to exclude IE version 8 (and older) clients. As this seems to be a

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 05/03/2013 09:50 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Ven 3 mai 2013 21:06, Alec Leamas a écrit : Still hesitating a here: if upstream has decided to support the widest possible set of browsers (including IE): should we really just drop the formats required by IE? From a user perspective, I don't

Re: Q: webfonts:

On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > I think spot will agree there is no way we'll ever ship a font consisting > of company logos, it's trademark hell We ship *lots* of trademarked logos. In Firefox alone there are trademarked logos from Mozilla, Google, Amazon, Yahoo!, Micr

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 05/03/2013 09:50 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: [cut] I'm truly a font newbie. That said, is there really a meaningful fallback for a font such as sozial (https://github.com/adamstac/zocial)? I. e., is there a reasonable fallback for a Facebook button? I think spot will agree there is no way we

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

On 05/03/2013 04:15 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Mar 23 avril 2013 19:10, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit : There will probably be more of this, fedora-review is updated with a new test looking for bundled font files.My gut feeling is also that there are some other bundled fonts in existing packages.

Re: Q: webfonts:

On Fri, 2013-05-03 at 10:15 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > "NM" == Nicolas Mailhot writes: > > NM> I don't think selinux will block web server accesses to > NM> /usr/share/fonts/something, since we deploy webapps in > NM> /usr/share/something_else, which is pretty much the same namesp

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Ven 3 mai 2013 21:06, Alec Leamas a écrit : > Still hesitating a here: if upstream has decided to support the widest > possible set of browsers (including IE): should we really just drop the > formats required by IE? From a user perspective, I don't really follow > this although I do underst

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 05/03/2013 03:51 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Lun 29 avril 2013 11:22, Alec Leamas a écrit : The reply makes me feel a little more confused, on a higher level. How does that reply translate to the packaging of a web application with some bundled webfonts ? "scratching my head". That means

Re: Q: webfonts:

> "NM" == Nicolas Mailhot writes: NM> I don't think selinux will block web server accesses to NM> /usr/share/fonts/something, since we deploy webapps in NM> /usr/share/something_else, which is pretty much the same namespace. Well, there are a whole lot of specific fcontext entries for conten

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Ven 3 mai 2013 16:24, Jason L Tibbitts III a écrit : >> "NM" == Nicolas Mailhot writes: > > NM> I'm not convinced at all this needs changing, since mod_alias > NM> permits mapping of system paths anywhere you want in your URL space. > > But selinux probably doesn't, so the issue is slightl

Re: Q: webfonts:

> "NM" == Nicolas Mailhot writes: NM> I'm not convinced at all this needs changing, since mod_alias NM> permits mapping of system paths anywhere you want in your URL space. But selinux probably doesn't, so the issue is slightly more complicated. - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedo

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Ven 3 mai 2013 14:45, Miroslav Suchý a écrit : >> Note that in my case the "fonts" are just just images and icons, which >> makes the normal font fallback mechanisms useless. They are needed, >> period. > > Well it is not defined in policy. Actually, the current policy forbids fonts anywhere

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

Le Mar 23 avril 2013 19:10, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit : >> There will probably be more of this, fedora-review is updated with a >> new test looking for bundled font files.My gut feeling is also that >> there are some other bundled fonts in existing packages... There are many packaging font tests

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

Le Mar 23 avril 2013 17:55, Alec Leamas a écrit : > So one question would be what happens in such a definition if none of > the src: elements are found. The browser will try to display something with its system fonts. If the missing fonts used standard encoding, it may even work perfectly. Anywa

Re: Q: webfonts:

Le Lun 29 avril 2013 11:22, Alec Leamas a écrit : > The reply makes me feel a little more confused, on a higher level. How > does that reply translate to the packaging of a web application with > some bundled webfonts ? "scratching my head". That means that you usually do not need a special form

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 04/29/2013 11:22 AM, Alec Leamas wrote: The reply makes me feel a little more confused, on a higher level. How does that reply translate to the packaging of a web application with some bundled webfonts ? "scratching my head". Me too :) Note that in my case the "fonts" are just just images

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 04/29/2013 11:04 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: On 04/27/2013 01:49 PM, Alec Leamas wrote: I'm trying to package a web application with bundled fonts. These fonts are used by the web clients (browsers), and just served from the Fedora webapp. The case is similar to javascript .js files. Trying t

Re: Q: webfonts:

On 04/27/2013 01:49 PM, Alec Leamas wrote: I'm trying to package a web application with bundled fonts. These fonts are used by the web clients (browsers), and just served from the Fedora webapp. The case is similar to javascript .js files. Trying to package the webfonts as dependencies I have r

Q: webfonts:

Hi! I'm trying to package a web application with bundled fonts. These fonts are used by the web clients (browsers), and just served from the Fedora webapp. The case is similar to javascript .js files. Trying to package the webfonts as dependencies I have run into problem together with my rev

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 06:42:07PM +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: > On 2013-04-23 18:19, Tom Callaway wrote: > >On 04/23/2013 12:05 PM, Alec Leamas wrote: > >>Just a double check: whether I symlink or patch the css files, the > >>system path must be accessible for the web app. Is this really true in > >

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

On 2013-04-23 18:19, Tom Callaway wrote: On 04/23/2013 12:05 PM, Alec Leamas wrote: Just a double check: whether I symlink or patch the css files, the system path must be accessible for the web app. Is this really true in general, isn't it depending on the web server configuration? Hmm. I thin

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

On 2013-04-23 16:17, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 03:37:03PM +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: In a large package (openerp7) I have found some bundled .ttf and .otf font files. One of these (Inconsolata) seems to exist in Fedora as levien-inconsolata-fonts, the others (see below) I

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

On 04/23/2013 09:37 AM, Alec Leamas wrote: > In a large package (openerp7) I have found some bundled .ttf and .otf > font files. One of these (Inconsolata) seems to exist in Fedora as > levien-inconsolata-fonts, the others (see below) I cannot find with a > quick search. > > The fonts are parts of

Re: Q: bundled fonts.

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 03:37:03PM +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: > In a large package (openerp7) I have found some bundled .ttf and > .otf font files. One of these (Inconsolata) seems to exist in Fedora > as levien-inconsolata-fonts, the others (see below) I cannot find > with a quick search. > > The

Q: bundled fonts.

In a large package (openerp7) I have found some bundled .ttf and .otf font files. One of these (Inconsolata) seems to exist in Fedora as levien-inconsolata-fonts, the others (see below) I cannot find with a quick search. The fonts are parts of specific addons (a. k. a. plugins). They are refe

Re: Q: Conflicting -devel packages

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 23:27:13 +0200, Alec Leamas wrote: > This is about a package BZ #787713. It's standard, C++ library with a > base and -devel package. > > The devel package contains both arch-dependent stuff (*.so) and noarch > headers. *.so in -devel packages never conflict, because %_l

Q: Conflicting -devel packages

This is about a package BZ #787713. It's standard, C++ library with a base and -devel package. The devel package contains both arch-dependent stuff (*.so) and noarch headers. Now, Ralf Corsepius raised the issue that package-devel.i386 and package-devel.x86_64 cant be installed in paralle

Re: Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 16:39 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Thu, 21.06.12 18:22, Alexey I. Froloff (ra...@raorn.name) wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 03:39:43PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > Disabling IPv4 should result in socket(AF_INET, ...) returning > > > EAFNOSUPPORT. Just

Re: Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

On Thu, 21.06.12 18:22, Alexey I. Froloff (ra...@raorn.name) wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 03:39:43PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > Disabling IPv4 should result in socket(AF_INET, ...) returning > > EAFNOSUPPORT. Just taking away 127.0.0.1 doesn't do anything like that. > Yep, and it doe

Re: Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 03:39:43PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > Disabling IPv4 should result in socket(AF_INET, ...) returning > EAFNOSUPPORT. Just taking away 127.0.0.1 doesn't do anything like that. Yep, and it doesn't prevent for anyone listening on 0.0.0.0... But still, is it possible to

Re: Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) said: > On Thu, 21.06.12 16:59, Alexey I. Froloff (ra...@raorn.name) wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 02:44:42PM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > > > I can't find who sets "inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host" address to lo > > > > interface. Commented out the

Re: Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

On Thu, 21.06.12 16:59, Alexey I. Froloff (ra...@raorn.name) wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 02:44:42PM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > > I can't find who sets "inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host" address to lo > > > interface. Commented out the IPADDRESS in ifcfg-lo - no result. > > systemd sets this

Re: Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 02:44:42PM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > I can't find who sets "inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host" address to lo > > interface. Commented out the IPADDRESS in ifcfg-lo - no result. > systemd sets this very early during boot. Is is configurable? -- Regards,-- Sir Raorn.

Re: Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 04:42:54PM +0400, Alexey I. Froloff wrote: > Hi, > > I am running F17 in IPv6-only network (behind NAT64 gateway) and > would like to get rid of 127.0.0.1 address from lo interface. > Please, don't tell me, that this "would break lots of stone-aged > software", because such

Q: IPv6-only setup - get rid of 127.0.0.1

Hi, I am running F17 in IPv6-only network (behind NAT64 gateway) and would like to get rid of 127.0.0.1 address from lo interface. Please, don't tell me, that this "would break lots of stone-aged software", because such configuration works for about a year already in non-RH distro. I can't find

q

Le lundi 06 décembre 2010 à 20:09 +0100, Miloslav Trmač a écrit : > Are there other reasons? App writers are busy reinventing the wheel, changing the configuration files syntax, and believing they can't do wrong; make sure their mess is blocked at the outbound port before we get rooted. -- Nico

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On 08/08/10 20:19, Matt McCutchen wrote: > > My advice: stop doing that. Taken -- Regards, Frank Murphy UTF_8 Encoded Friend of Fedora -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 19:47 +0100, Frank Murphy wrote: > On 08/08/10 19:28, Matt McCutchen wrote: > > >> By that I mean the maintainer\Co-Maintainer\Good Citizen > >> retelling the same fix\workaround posted earlier in the bug. > >> To either enable\updates-testing or do xyz. > >> Because the bug

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 20:01 +0100, M A Young wrote: > On Sun, 8 Aug 2010, Matt McCutchen wrote: > > > Users should already be reading the existing information, because abrt > > provides the link after it makes its changes (adding the user to CC and > > adding a comment with the "how to reproduce"

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On Sun, 8 Aug 2010, Matt McCutchen wrote: > Users should already be reading the existing information, because abrt > provides the link after it makes its changes (adding the user to CC and > adding a comment with the "how to reproduce" text, if it was nonempty). > The proposal would just be to rev

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On 08/08/10 19:28, Matt McCutchen wrote: >> By that I mean the maintainer\Co-Maintainer\Good Citizen >> retelling the same fix\workaround posted earlier in the bug. >> To either enable\updates-testing or do xyz. >> Because the bug report hasn't been read by the "added to" person. > > As I said, I

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 09:24 +0100, Frank Murphy wrote: > On 08/08/10 03:25, Matt McCutchen wrote: > > >> > >> Would it be any benefit to the maintainers\bugzappers. > >> If abrt opened the existing link, before it would report? > > > > And then what? Encourage the user not to add a comment unless

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On 08/08/10 03:25, Matt McCutchen wrote: >> >> Would it be any benefit to the maintainers\bugzappers. >> If abrt opened the existing link, before it would report? > > And then what? Encourage the user not to add a comment unless they have > new information? If that is the proposal, I am in favor

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On Sat, 2010-08-07 at 11:51 +0100, Frank Murphy wrote: > Thougth I ask for some feedback. > > Currently when abrt finds an existing bug, > it goes > " similar bug found, (shows a link) adding you to cc" > > looking at some of the bugs, that I have reported or cc'd on. > Where someone earlier in t

Re: abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 11:51:07 +0100, Frank wrote: > Thougth I ask for some feedback. > > Currently when abrt finds an existing bug, > it goes > " similar bug found, (shows a link) adding you to cc" > > looking at some of the bugs, that I have reported or cc'd on. > Where someone earlier in the th

abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

Thougth I ask for some feedback. Currently when abrt finds an existing bug, it goes " similar bug found, (shows a link) adding you to cc" looking at some of the bugs, that I have reported or cc'd on. Where someone earlier in the thread had sent a workaround/fix etc.. and cc's just being added aut

Re: rpm -q --changelog listing items twice

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 >> libcur

Re: rpm -q --changelog listing items twice

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 and x86_64)? That

Re: rpm -q --changelog listing items twice

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. Likely you have 2 libcurls installed, libcurl.i386 and libc

rpm -q --changelog listing items twice

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):

[389-devel] q about bug 554887 - Net::LDAP password modify extop breaks; msgid in response is 0xFF

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554887 The problem appears to be this - passwd_extop.c line 173: /* We copy the connection from the original pblock into the * pblock we use for the internal modify operation. We do * this to allow the password policy code to b