On 10/13/2009 01:58 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
On 10/11/2009 09:46 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/11/2009 10:03 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
I do use TB (read my email headers). I fully understood that TB 3.0 was
in beta and could drastically change at any moment. I keep track of
their d
On 10/13/2009 06:49 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 21:01 +0100, Richard Fearn wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> Totem isn't using python-gdata anymore, so I'm orphaning it.
>>> Feel free to pick it up at:
>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/python-gdata
>>
>> As I'm curren
On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 23:05 +0200, Joshua C. wrote:
> 2009/10/5 Adam Jackson :
> > On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 19:19 +0200, Joshua C. wrote:
> >
> >> (gdb) bt
> >> #0 0x003cc3cd70b3 in __select_nocancel () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> >> #1 0x004e615a in WaitForSomething (
> >> pClientsReady
I received the following from upstream. Anyone know the answer to the
question (how do freetype-config, etc workaround this issue?)
In article <200910092117.36851.ndbeck...@gmail.com>, Neal Becker
writes:
> I maintain libotf for Fedora.
Thank you very much for that work!
> We have received
Neal Becker writes:
> I received the following from upstream. Anyone know the answer to the
> question (how do freetype-config, etc workaround this issue?)
freetype-config is just a wrapper around pkg-config.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813
Compose started at Tue Oct 13 06:15:09 UTC 2009
Broken deps for i386
--
sugar-toolkit-0.86.0-1.fc12.i686 requires python-json
Broken deps for x86_64
--
sugar-toolkit-0
2009/10/12 Toshio Kuratomi :
> I've been a comaintainer of the python-setuptools package for a long time
> and recently became the owner when icon relinquished it. It is currently a
> tumultuous time for distributing python modules with a new and active
> maintainer for distutils inside of the pyt
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 07:10:06AM -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
>
> As far as I know, there's none. So, it's ok to remove
> libotf-config. But, why does libotf-config don't work with
> multilib? How do the other XXX-config programs
> (e.g. freetype-config, fribidi-config, gtk-config, ...) work
> w
On 10/12/2009 03:39 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Hi Marcela,
Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
Modified Files:
libid3tag.spec
Log Message:
* Mon Oct 12 2009 Marcela Mašláňová - 0.15.1b-10
- rebuilt of package with correct licence
[...]
-License:GPLv2+
+License:GPLv2
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 06:25:24PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Kevin Kofler
> > wrote:
> >> Rawhide Report wrote:
> >>> Removed package python-json
> >>
> >> Why was this removed? sugar-toolkit require
2009/10/13 Rodd Clarkson :
> On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 23:05 +0200, Joshua C. wrote:
>> 2009/10/5 Adam Jackson :
>> > On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 19:19 +0200, Joshua C. wrote:
>> >
>> >> (gdb) bt
>> >> #0 0x003cc3cd70b3 in __select_nocancel () from /lib64/libc.so.6
>> >> #1 0x004e615a in WaitFo
Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> I'm really sorry. I went through reviews of many packages with
> script, which has many false positives. Your package was perfectly
> okay as it was before.
:) No worries, I'm glad I asked. Will you handle reverting this
change or shall I? It wasn't ever built, just c
On 10/12/2009 11:43 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On 10/13/2009 01:58 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
On 10/11/2009 09:46 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/11/2009 10:03 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
I do use TB (read my email headers). I fully understood that TB 3.0 was
in beta and could drastically c
On 10/12/2009 11:18 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/13/2009 11:28 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
The changes were not expected. Actually, the fact that TB3 is still in
beta was not expected, since it was supposed to be released as a final
within a week of FF35. Clearly, things haven't been goi
On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 23:56 -0400, James Antill wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 09:19 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > The thing with doing updates for F11 is the regression rate due to
> > lack of QA, I put Mesa packages into updates-testing that fixed a
> > lot of r300/r500 bugs back at the start of
On 10/13/2009 03:29 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
I'm really sorry. I went through reviews of many packages with
script, which has many false positives. Your package was perfectly
okay as it was before.
:) No worries, I'm glad I asked. Will you handle reverting
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:52:30PM +0100, Mat Booth wrote:
>
> I was unaware of all this. Is there a reason why the setuptools author
> will not grant commit rights to others? Going solely on your email it
> seems like a fork would be unnecessary if he was willing to share the
> workload...
>
He
2009/10/13, Mat Booth :
> 2009/10/12 Toshio Kuratomi :
>> I've been a comaintainer of the python-setuptools package for a long time
>> and recently became the owner when icon relinquished it. It is currently
>> a
>> tumultuous time for distributing python modules with a new and active
>> maintaine
WHO IS CORSEPIU?
2009/10/13, GEORGIOS GIANNAKIS :
> 2009/10/13, Mat Booth :
>> 2009/10/12 Toshio Kuratomi :
>>> I've been a comaintainer of the python-setuptools package for a long
>>> time
>>> and recently became the owner when icon relinquished it. It is
>>> currently
>>> a
>>> tumultuous time
2009/10/13, GEORGIOS GIANNAKIS :
> WHO IS CORSEPIU?
>
> 2009/10/13, GEORGIOS GIANNAKIS :
>> 2009/10/13, Mat Booth :
>>> 2009/10/12 Toshio Kuratomi :
I've been a comaintainer of the python-setuptools package for a long
time
and recently became the owner when icon relinquished it. It
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE Summary
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> Author: ajax
>
> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/libXres/devel
> In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv12383
>
> Modified Files:
> .cvsignore libXres.spec sources
> Log Message:
> * Tue Oct 13 2009 Adam Jackson 1.0.4-1
> -
Hi ,
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> Author: ajax
>
> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/libXt/devel
> In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv10252
>
> Modified Files:
> .cvsignore libXt.spec sources
> Log Message:
> * Tue Oct 13 2009 Adam Jackson 1.0.7-1
> - li
Christopher Aillon redhat.com> writes:
> The UI change was obvious, but as it was upstream's decision, and we
> follow upstream, didn't think much of it. In retrospect, we should have
> considered undoing that change. We are looking into that now.
>
> Not everyone had issues with the indexin
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:04 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> > -BuildRequires: pkgconfig
> > -BuildRequires: libX11-devel
> > -BuildRequires: libXext-devel
> > +BuildRequires: pkgconfig(xext)
> >
> > %description
> > X-Resource is an extension that allows a client to query
> > @@ -21,7 +19,6 @@ the
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:18 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> I am confused here. Why this is removed? I still see xt.pc needs
> those "Requires".
rpm now autogenerates the pkgconfig requirements,
both /usr/bin/pkg-config and also the pkgconfig(foo) level requirements.
Maybe the guidelines haven't
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:18 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> > -# needed by xt.pc
> > -Requires: xorg-x11-proto-devel
> > -Requires: libX11-devel
> > -Requires: libSM-devel
> > -
> I am confused here. Why this is removed? I still see xt.pc needs
> those "Requires".
Because rpm is smart enough to f
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:18 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
I am confused here. Why this is removed? I still see xt.pc needs
those "Requires".
rpm now autogenerates the pkgconfig requirements,
both /usr/bin/pkg-config and also the pkgconfig(foo) level
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 01:21:38PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
>
> atropine:~% repoquery --whatprovides 'pkgconfig(xext)'
> libXext-devel-0:1.0.99.4-3.fc12.i686
> atropine:~% repoquery --requires libXext-devel | grep pkg
> pkgconfig
> pkgconfig(x11)
> pkgconfig(xextproto)
>
> So, whatever. Clearl
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 10:32 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> If all Fedora releases have the autoprovides but EL-5 is still
> affected, the
> draft can be as simple as: rpm detects pkgconfig dependencies in all
> Fedora
> releases, please move the pkgconfig requires from [LINK] to the EPEL
> specifi
Am Dienstag, den 13.10.2009, 10:21 -0700 schrieb Jesse Keating:
> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:18 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> > I am confused here. Why this is removed? I still see xt.pc needs
> > those "Requires".
>
> rpm now autogenerates the pkgconfig requirements,
> both /usr/bin/pkg-config a
Adam Jackson wrote, at 10/14/2009 03:20 AM +9:00:
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 10:32 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
If all Fedora releases have the autoprovides but EL-5 is still
affected, the
draft can be as simple as: rpm detects pkgconfig dependencies in all
Fedora
releases, please move the pkgconfig
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:20:52 -0400, Adam wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 10:32 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > If all Fedora releases have the autoprovides but EL-5 is still
> > affected, the
> > draft can be as simple as: rpm detects pkgconfig dependencies in all
> > Fedora
> > releases, please
On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 11:15 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 10/11/2009 03:41 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> > I don't think so. Not willing to put words in Jeff's mouth, but I don't
> > think he was discussing the UI changes of Thunderbird. I took it as he was
> > rather
> > discussing the upg
On 10/13/2009 07:40 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> No, because they didn't cause problems for us or anyone in testing, and
> the changes were not expected to cause much of an issue. The UI change
> was obvious, but we had no problem with it, and did not expect an uproar
> over it. The indexer w
Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 13.10.2009, 10:21 -0700 schrieb Jesse Keating:
>> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:18 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
>> > I am confused here. Why this is removed? I still see xt.pc needs
>> > those "Requires".
>>
>> rpm now autogenerates the pkgconfig requiremen
Rahul Sundaram fedoraproject.org> writes:
> The general attitude in this thread (not you) and elsewhere that it was
> ok to cause problems was worrying me. Thanks for looking into this problem.
>
> Rahul
I am not sure that there is evidence for that! I think that some people were
justifyably c
Am Dienstag, den 13.10.2009, 14:42 -0500 schrieb Rex Dieter:
> Christoph Wickert wrote:
>
> > Am Dienstag, den 13.10.2009, 10:21 -0700 schrieb Jesse Keating:
> >> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:18 +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> >> > I am confused here. Why this is removed? I still see xt.pc needs
> >>
Hi,
I am really pleased to see how fast the cross-compile project has evolved,
and
I was able to create a very simple script to cross-compile mpg123:
http://orion.lcg.ufrj.br/RPMS/SPECS/cross-mingw-mpg123
However, I am more interested in cross-compiling opengl applications.
Any plans to provide
On 10/14/2009 01:44 AM, Mike Cloaked wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram writes:
>
>> The general attitude in this thread (not you) and elsewhere that it was
>> ok to cause problems was worrying me. Thanks for looking into this problem.
>>
>> Rahul
>
> I am not sure that there is evidence for that!
Eviden
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 10:32 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> If all Fedora releases have the autoprovides but EL-5 is still
>> affected, the
>> draft can be as simple as: rpm detects pkgconfig dependencies in all
>> Fedora
>> releases, p
stop using rar.
be free.
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am really pleased to see how fast the cross-compile project has evolved,
> and
> I was able to create a very simple script to cross-compile mpg123:
>
> http://orion.lcg.ufrj.br/RPMS/SPECS/cross-mingw-
James Antill wrote:
> Personally I'd suggest pushing to updates-testing but wait a _long_
> time (maybe even never) before pushing to stable.
"Never" is definitely the wrong answer: updates-testing is not for stuff
which is too unstable to go stable, ever. Any update sitting in testing for
more
43 matches
Mail list logo
