Le Jeu 17 septembre 2009 02:47, Jesse Keating a écrit :
> On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 20:08 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
>> Why not report all conflicts, instead of only those on your PATH?
>
> Because these aren't file level conflicts, as in they can both exist on
> the filesystem at the same time and RPM
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 20:08 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> Why not report all conflicts, instead of only those on your PATH?
This is acting at the level of individual filenames (dropping the
directory component from the path), and doesn't have any knowledge about
a file beyond its full installation pa
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 21:10:16 -0400,
Neal Becker wrote:
>
> But the original problem was a file level conflict. Is it ever valid for 2
> packages to own the same file?
Yes. At a minimum the file's contents has to be identical in the two packages.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora
Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 20:08 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
>> Why not report all conflicts, instead of only those on your PATH?
>
> Because these aren't file level conflicts, as in they can both exist on
> the filesystem at the same time and RPM won't care. However they can
> l
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 17:32 -0700, J. Randall Owens wrote:
> Why not just have a system somewhere with Everything installed, including new
> stuff? That's what I almost have myself, and I noticed the libotf/openmpi
> conflict quite a while ago (it's why I don't have the latter installed
> anymore
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 20:08 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> Why not report all conflicts, instead of only those on your PATH?
Because these aren't file level conflicts, as in they can both exist on
the filesystem at the same time and RPM won't care. However they can
lead to unexpected things due to P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/16/2009 05:08 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
> Why not report all conflicts, instead of only those on your PATH?
Why not just have a system somewhere with Everything installed, including new
stuff? That's what I almost have myself, and I noticed the li
Why not report all conflicts, instead of only those on your PATH?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 18:45 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> Which makes me wonder, how could this conflict have been avoided? Is there
> a tool that would check any new package to see if any object* in it would
> conflict with any existing package? If not, sounds like a good thing to
> have.
>
>
When: Friday, 2009-09-18 @ 15:00 UTC (11 AM EDT)
Where: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
Join us Friday for the second blocker bug review of the F-12-Beta cycle.
Review will focus on unresolved bugs listed on the F12Beta list
Have an issue you'd like to propose for F12Beta? Please conside
Which makes me wonder, how could this conflict have been avoided? Is there
a tool that would check any new package to see if any object* in it would
conflict with any existing package? If not, sounds like a good thing to
have.
* Here, object means filesystem object. I'm not sure if there are
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 22:55 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 September 2009, Jay Fenlason wrote:
> > otfdump will be in
> > openmpi-devel: %{_libdir}/%{name}/bin/ where it won't interfere with
> > libotf.
>
> IIUC this will only help wrt. the packaging conflict; interference still
>
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 12:01 +0200, Milan Crha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 2009-09-13 at 07:40 -0500, Mike Chambers wrote:
> > In the date field while viewing emails, it shows the time in 24 hour
> > time instead of 12 hour time with am/pm. I have went into any
> > preferences and made sure the
After a recent xorg bug[1] with intel chips, I had to question the use
of bodhi for karma/comments after an update has been pushed to "updates."
Should the comments and karma for packages be closed after an update
leaves "updates-testing?" I don't see any value and it seems the wrong
place to have
On 09/16/2009 08:59 AM, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
> Am 16.09.2009 17:47, schrieb Toshio Kuratomi:
>
>> That still leaves open the question of why no one has asked rsync
>> upstream to make their fork publicly available instead of hoarding
>> it as a private, internal copy.
>
> I would ask, why the mo
On 09/16/2009 03:22 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> I'm MC'ing the boot/init miniconf next week at the plumbers
> conference in Portland, and a slot has become available that
> I don't have anyone to fill.
>
> If you're going to be there anyway, and you have something to
> talk about that may be relevant
On Wednesday 16 September 2009, Jay Fenlason wrote:
> otfdump will be in
> openmpi-devel: %{_libdir}/%{name}/bin/ where it won't interfere with
> libotf.
IIUC this will only help wrt. the packaging conflict; interference still
happens as $PATH changes e.g. when loading/unloading the openmpi modu
I'm MC'ing the boot/init miniconf next week at the plumbers
conference in Portland, and a slot has become available that
I don't have anyone to fill.
If you're going to be there anyway, and you have something to
talk about that may be relevant (other talks lined up include
dracut & upstart) then l
Jay Fenlason wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:04:17PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 14:53 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
It seems both openmpi and libotf supply a %{_bindir}/otfdump. otf is
either:
OpenTypeFont (libotf)
or
OpenTraceFormat (openmpi)
I maintain libotf.
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:04:17PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 14:53 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> > It seems both openmpi and libotf supply a %{_bindir}/otfdump. otf is
> > either:
> >
> > OpenTypeFont (libotf)
> > or
> > OpenTraceFormat (openmpi)
> >
> > I maintain libot
Jon Ciesla wrote:
> Neal Becker wrote:
>> It seems both openmpi and libotf supply a %{_bindir}/otfdump. otf is
>> either:
>>
>> OpenTypeFont (libotf)
>> or
>> OpenTraceFormat (openmpi)
>>
>> I maintain libotf. I'm not sure how to address this.
>>
>> My only interest in libotf is so emacs can use
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 14:53 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> It seems both openmpi and libotf supply a %{_bindir}/otfdump. otf is
> either:
>
> OpenTypeFont (libotf)
> or
> OpenTraceFormat (openmpi)
>
> I maintain libotf. I'm not sure how to address this.
>
> My only interest in libotf is so emacs
Neal Becker wrote:
It seems both openmpi and libotf supply a %{_bindir}/otfdump. otf is
either:
OpenTypeFont (libotf)
or
OpenTraceFormat (openmpi)
I maintain libotf. I'm not sure how to address this.
My only interest in libotf is so emacs can use it. For that, it doesn't
need the binaries
It seems both openmpi and libotf supply a %{_bindir}/otfdump. otf is
either:
OpenTypeFont (libotf)
or
OpenTraceFormat (openmpi)
I maintain libotf. I'm not sure how to address this.
My only interest in libotf is so emacs can use it. For that, it doesn't
need the binaries. Perhaps they could
After the update of texlive-2009 packages on rawhide latex has ceased to work:
$ pdflatex mnc_modulo_2-mod-graph
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.1415926-1.40.10 (Web2C 2009)
restricted \write18 enabled.
kpathsea: Running mktexfmt pdflatex.fmt
I can't find the format file `pdflatex.fmt'!
The suspect
On 09/16/2009 08:59 AM, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
> Am 16.09.2009 17:47, schrieb Toshio Kuratomi:
>
>> That still leaves open the question of why no one has asked rsync
>> upstream to make their fork publicly available instead of hoarding
>> it as a private, internal copy.
>
> I would ask, why the mo
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 08:47 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Ah -- I was reading that as three separate options. I can see how it
> could be read as three steps in a single solution as well.
>
> That still leaves open the question of why no one has asked rsync
> upstream to make their fork publicl
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 10:32 +0545, Daniel Drake wrote:
> 2009/9/15 Jerry Vonau :
> > Are you just adding rpms to the install media? Or are you trying
> > something more difficult? I have a process in mind if you're just adding
> > rpms to the mix...
>
> Just adding RPMs would be enough, but also w
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Jan Kratochvil
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> filed as:
>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523698
>
> how to possibly fix the problem by a backport from rpm5.org as suggested
by
> Jeff Johnson.
>
For rpm 4.4 the backport was already filled but reject.
https://
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 16.09.2009 17:47, schrieb Toshio Kuratomi:
>
> That still leaves open the question of why no one has asked rsync
> upstream to make their fork publicly available instead of hoarding
> it as a private, internal copy.
>
I would ask, why the modificati
On 09/16/2009 08:39 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 08:10 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> This is a logical leap. rsync has forked zlib but they are only using
>> the fork internally. 2 and 3 get that fork out in the open so that
>> more
>> than one program can use it. 2 and 3 are
On 09/16/2009 08:20 AM, Nathanael Noblet wrote:
I didn't because it still had quite a few patches that needed to go
upstream. I'll take a look at version 2.3...
Yeah the lib-patches is still full of patches...
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.co
On 09/16/2009 03:32 AM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> 2009/9/15 Simo Sorce :
>> On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 12:34 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>> This would be great if maintainers were willing to fix issues after
>>> the
>>> fact. Look at rsync -- there's no incentive to fix the library issue
>>> at
>>
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 08:10 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> This is a logical leap. rsync has forked zlib but they are only using
> the fork internally. 2 and 3 get that fork out in the open so that
> more
> than one program can use it. 2 and 3 are solutions when solution 1
> fails. Since solut
On 09/16/2009 12:42 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 14:01 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> On 09/15/2009 01:29 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
>>> Sorry but the packager may have no way to influence upstream.
>>> And to be honest having a huge patch against rsync and/or zsync to
>>> extract
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> Colin Walters writes:
>
>> I'd imagine that running the "live Anaconda" UI from inside the GDM X
>> session wouldn't take significantly more resources than the Anaconda
>> OS after creating an image that doesn't have games, etc.
>
> Images
On 09/16/2009 06:43 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 11:32 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>> Looking through the mailing list archives, as far as I can tell, noone
>> has tried this course of action yet:
>>
>> 1) Ask zlib upstream to accept the changes that the rsync devs made to
>>
On Sep 16, 2009, at 6:02 AM, Pim Zandbergen wrote:
Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 07/09/2009 02:31 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
That said, I have it up and running on an F11 host at home right
now,
satisfying everything else w/Fedora packages.
Yeah same here.
Did any of you create a calend
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 11:32 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> Looking through the mailing list archives, as far as I can tell, noone
> has tried this course of action yet:
>
> 1) Ask zlib upstream to accept the changes that the rsync devs made to
> zlib and issue a new release
> 2) Ask rsync upst
Hi,
filed as:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523698
how to possibly fix the problem by a backport from rpm5.org as suggested by
Jeff Johnson.
Thanks,
Jan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-li
Compose started at Wed Sep 16 06:15:05 UTC 2009
Broken deps for i386
--
anerley-0.0.20-3.fc12.i686 requires libmissioncontrol-client.so.0
anerley-devel-0.0.20-3.fc12.i686 requires pkgconfig(libmissioncontrol)
clutter-c
On 09/16/2009 08:02 AM, Pim Zandbergen wrote:
Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 07/09/2009 02:31 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
That said, I have it up and running on an F11 host at home right now,
satisfying everything else w/Fedora packages.
Yeah same here.
Did any of you create a calendarserver R
Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 07/09/2009 02:31 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
That said, I have it up and running on an F11 host at home right now,
satisfying everything else w/Fedora packages.
Yeah same here.
Did any of you create a calendarserver RPM ?
That would give a head start trying to bu
On 09/16/2009 01:59 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> And yes I am the maintainer of rsync and I am not doing the job, because
> I don't want to have to create or maintain such patcheset until the day
> I am reasonably sure upstream will want such patches.
So, have you asked upstream this question?
> Fi
On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 09:42 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 19:29 +1000, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
> > I've had a problem with X in f12 or some time that sees the mouse
> > pointer freezing. I'm now having the same issue in f11.
> >
> > I'm happy to file a bug in bugzilla, but I'm h
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 12:05 +0200, Milan Crha wrote:
> > One thing I have noticed though is that "yesterday" shown in the Date
> > column in table format seems to be two days (i.e. on 13th September all
> > emails received on both the 12th and 11th September are shown as
> > yesterday), and the "2
2009/9/15 Simo Sorce :
> On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 12:34 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> This would be great if maintainers were willing to fix issues after
>> the
>> fact. Look at rsync -- there's no incentive to fix the library issue
>> at
>> this point because rsync is already in the distribution.
Colin Walters writes:
> I'd imagine that running the "live Anaconda" UI from inside the GDM X
> session wouldn't take significantly more resources than the Anaconda
> OS after creating an image that doesn't have games, etc.
Images sound significantly more difficult to create and maintain than
ki
Hi,
On Sun, 2009-09-13 at 15:25 +0100, Quentin Armitage wrote:
> I recollect that Evolution used to display times in am/pm format, but
> mine is now displaying in 24 hour format (which I happen to prefer).
see my reply to Mike for the preferences entry.
> One thing I have noticed though
Hi,
On Sun, 2009-09-13 at 07:40 -0500, Mike Chambers wrote:
> In the date field while viewing emails, it shows the time in 24 hour
> time instead of 12 hour time with am/pm. I have went into any
> preferences and made sure the two settings that have time in them are
> correct and what I w
2009/9/8 Ville Skyttä :
> On Tuesday 08 September 2009, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
>
>> I'll plan to upgrade fuse in Rawhide (and, possibly, in F-11) up to
>> ver. 2.8.0, and there will be so-name bump.
>
> Rationale for considering doing it in F-11?
After some thinking, I reconsidered plans to update
Hello!
2009/9/8 Till Maas :
> Will you also rebuild the packages once the new fuse is in place?
Yes, I'll try to rebuild also all packages, dependent on fuse.
--
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/l
On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 14:01 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On 09/15/2009 01:29 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > Sorry but the packager may have no way to influence upstream.
> > And to be honest having a huge patch against rsync and/or zsync to
> > extract a library against the will of the rsync and/or
53 matches
Mail list logo
