On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2009, at 4:38, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, those comments in the patches are quite informative, like "libtool
>> sucks".
>>
>> Seriously, this "comment about the patch in th
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 07:03:13AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> It would be nice if you folks add these little explanations as
>> comments next to the patches of the gcc SPEC file. (this is also a
>> packaging require
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 06:17:26AM -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
>> How could I learn what 4.5 features are backported?
>
> >From gcc %changelog?
>
> To list some of them:
>
> - VTA
> - -gdwarf-3, -gstrict-dwarf support, defaults to -gdwarf-3
> -
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Josephine Tannhäuser wrote:
> 2009/12/21, Josephine Tannhäuser :
>> 2009/12/19, Simon Wesp :
>>> griv: A GTK-Chat based on the RIV-Chat-protocol
>>> Bugs: 0
>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/bugs/griv
>>>
>>> python-rabbyt: Sprite library for Python
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> The temporary work-around is to compile with
>
> -fno-var-tracking-assignments
>
> and that also works for lv2-c++-tools in the review queue, btw.
>
Thanks! Yes, with that flag I was able to finish compiling muse and
lv2-c++-tools. Will
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:02:24 +
> Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I kicked off a couple of builds last night which appear stuck on koji.
>> I had checked they build locally with a make mockbuild before
>> submitting and all was fine.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I tried to submit an update for both the fc12 and fc11 versions of
> postgresql. It did not work; I had to file them as separate updates.
> I'm pretty sure it used to work --- is my memory failing me, or is
> this new breakage? If the latter, wh
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
>
> The new gnome-volume-control is so cut-down it's not useful to me. In
> the quest to be more Mac-like in removing mixer controls (and not even
> having any obvious "advanced" mode), I now have a choice of no audio or
> having full volume LFE ou
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> My proposal is to use "alternatives" for parallel installation, the
>> way java does. Then the user can switch between jack1 and jack2 as he
>> wants
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
>
> I'm an emacs user who's nearly completely useless in vi. But, really...
> it just doesn't matter if emacs isn't installed by default. If you want
> it, you know how to get it. And let's be frank: emacs is not something
> that a user wh
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Ben Williams wrote:
> (yes i know the size sux, but not
> everyone has highspeed internet thats why they are downloading the livecd
> and not the dvd)
>
Another interpretation would be: The contents of the DVD does not
satisfy the needs of many people.
I am in tha
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Monday, 23 November 2009 at 17:51, Jerry James wrote:
> [...]
>> I want a switch that says, "Yes, I know this application uses core
>> fonts. It isn't going to change. Shut up, please."
>
> +1.
>
Nicholas, I know you lo
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:31:27 -0500, Tony wrote:
>
>> On 09-11-21 06:40:45, drago01 wrote:
>> ...
>> > You misunderstood me, I was not suggesting adding another epoch but
>> > simply bump the %{epoch} for every release.
>>
>> If this were
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Nowadays the jack project has two branches - old jack (1) branch with
> version 0.116.2 and new one called jack2 version 1.9.3.
> I'd like to gather opinions and suggestions about applying new version for
> F13.
> Please, share yo
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Stu Tomlinson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 22:01, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:57 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>> There's many things that need to be changed in rpm but IMHO this isn't one
>>&g
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:57 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:08:15AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 17:11 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> >> Actually not
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> After getting okays from a few folks I decided to fix the long
>> standing libsndfile bugs.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Other than that, libsnd
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Josh Boyer wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 02:23:22AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>>Michael Schwendt wrote:
Many packagers don't know that maintaining a proper spec %changelog for
relevant spec file changes and %release bumps are
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I noticed that http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora appears to be
> strongly promoting i386 Fedora over x86_64. Is this intentional or an
> oversight?
>
It is intentional. This is one of the standard discussion topics of
this list. And it us
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 17:11 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> Actually not if done in conjunction with a release bump, such as we do
>> with a mass rebuild.
>>
>>
>
> Only if we make a promise to never use the same base n-v-r across the
>
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> After getting okays from a few folks I decided to fix the long
>> standing libsndfile bugs.
>>
>> One of these was a request [1] to s
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> What do I need to do, to build updated chunkd and tabled packages on top of
> the new cld?
>
You need to file a ticket to releng [1] and ask for buildroot
overrides as outlined in the guidelines somewhere I can't remember.
You need to provid
Hi folks,
After getting okays from a few folks I decided to fix the long
standing libsndfile bugs.
One of these was a request [1] to split the utilities that come with
libsndfile into a utils subpackage. I did this only for F-13.
Since libsndfile is used by so many other software, it is impractic
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/bugs/libsndfile
>>
>> What's up with libsndfile in Fedora and EPEL?
>> There are open tickets about C
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/bugs/libsndfile
>
> What's up with libsndfile in Fedora and EPEL?
> There are open tickets about CVEs filed in March.
> There are additional tickets without any reply.
>
Yeah, things go a littl
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 3:46 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there a way to extract multiple sources in a spec files %setup section?
>
> Something like:
>
> for i in {1..10}; do tar xfz %(SOURCE$i}; done
>
> Best Regards
> Marcus
>
%setup -q -c -n %{name} -a 0 -a 1 -a 2 -a 3 -a 4 -a 5 -a 6
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> I don't really want to revive the thread about automake 1.11, but I do
> want to point out that it did break actual buildability:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1761549&name=build.log
>
> Please, people. Don't update thi
2009/10/19 Miroslav Suchý
> May be good idea for Fedora as well...
> Mirek
>
>
> Původní zpráva
> Předmět: [opensuse-packaging] Junior Jobs
> Datum: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:46:58 +0200
> Od: Michal Hrusecky
>
> Hi,
>
> lately we formulated concept of openSUSE Junior Jobs[1]. Maintaine
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 09.10.2009, 18:56 -0400 schrieb Neal Becker:
>> Just received:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528237
>>
>> yum install libotf-devel.i586 libotf-devel.x86_64
>>
>> yields:
>>
>> Transaction Check Error:
>> f
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As of today, ppc and ppc64 are no longer primary architectures in koji
> starting
> with the dist-f13 tag. This is in accordance with the FESCo approved demotion
> of PowerPC starting with Fedora 13 development.
>
Can we drop AOT
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> I guess the line should be starting via
> install -d ShellScripts/mine/derot.txt ...
>
*sigh*. this should be:
install -p ShellScripts/mine/derot.txt ...
or even better:
install -pm 644 ShellScripts/mine/derot.txt ...
We wan
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:55 AM, ram s wrote:
> Hello,
>
Hi! I see that you are new to packaging. I advise you to read a bash
tutorial first. It will help.
> I am creating one rpm for my package.
>
> WHen I try to run spec file, it shows the sub directories can't be fine.
>
> Error:
>
> install:
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Matthew Booth wrote:
> I went over to https://translate.fedoraproject.org/ earlier with the idea of
> adding my project. Firstly, there's no hint of how to do this from the front
> page. After some Leisure Suit Larry style clicking on stuff at random until
> somethin
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Mani A wrote:
> http://puredata.info/
>
> is not in the package database.
>
> >From the license POV, there are no problems.
>
>
> Best
>
> A. Mani
>
Hi,
Fernando at planetccrma was working on packaging a recent version of
puredata. I don't know the current status.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Doug Warner wrote:
>> Does anyone have a Makefile target for download a SourceX file
>> (similar to Kevin Fenzi's recent report)? This would have the added
>> benefit of simplifying the update process for new versions (ex:
>> "make source NU
Hello everyone,
(If you don't own a multimedia package you can skip this thread)
This is a call for help for adjusting the .desktop files of your
multimedia applications according to the new FedoraStudio feature [1].
For those who missed the news, with F-12 we will have an optional
multimedia-men
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 19:07 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>>
>> Its kinda funny how the GNOME side is ending up on the 'conservative'
>> side here. We are pretty agressive in pushing new stuff into each
>> release. But we believe it is better t
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 11:34 +0200, drago01 wrote:
>
>> > I'm not quite sure if I could catch what you meant. Are you being
>> > sarcastic, implying that the rt2xxx staging drivers will stay in the
>> > staging repo forever? I sure hope not :)
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:58 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>
>> I maintain those drivers at RPMFusion. I will be happy beyond
>> imagination when the staging drivers are marked stable.
>
> They won't ever (the rt
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:23 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>> I was hoping that the devs who worked hard to even make it part of the
>>> source rpm might be lurking on this mailing list and see my post :)
>>
>> I don't think anything special is done to make it part of our
>> kernel .src.rpm, it's just
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bastien Nocera writes:
>> On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 18:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> [ consults CVS... ] So XZ support in F-11's rpm is less than a week
>>> old, there is *no* support in F-10, and we're already requiring
>>> the capability in order to
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 12:42 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
>> > Removing PA is far too often jumped on as the 'obvious' fix for
>> > resolving any kind of audio problem whatsoever. Even if it had nothing
>> > to do with PA in the first place.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 3:15 PM, oleksandr korneta wrote:
> on 07/25/2009 11:46 AM Chuck Anderson wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't even upgrade anymore. I just keep two partitions (Logical Volumes
>> actually)--one for Fedora N and one for Fedora N+1.
I took this one step forward. I keep 3 partitions Fedor
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a concern with the recent delays in signing packages and how best
> to handle that. I maintain Gnote in Fedora. This is very actively
> maintained and has frequent releases, even weekly. It is also a rather
> young project (ori
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Matt Domsch wrote:
>>
>> oget: calf,fluidsynth,hydrogen,jack-keyboard,lash,muse,tex-musixtex
>>
>
> All except the last one is due to the e2fsprogs split and I'm fixing them.
&g
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Matt Domsch wrote:
>
> oget: calf,fluidsynth,hydrogen,jack-keyboard,lash,muse,tex-musixtex
>
All except the last one is due to the e2fsprogs split and I'm fixing them.
But the last one may be an rpm or mock issue. I don't know what to do.
Any ideas?
http://linux.d
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil writes:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>>
>>> Orcan Ogetbil writes:
>>>
>>>> Wow! 78 messages and still, no one gave solid examples of what might
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil writes:
>
>> Wow! 78 messages and still, no one gave solid examples of what might
>> go wrong unnoticed if one uses autotools in a specfile.
>
> I already did, several times. You just ignored it.
>
W
Wow! 78 messages and still, no one gave solid examples of what might
go wrong unnoticed if one uses autotools in a specfile.
"Using autotools in a specfile is bad" started to sound like an urban
legend to me.
I'll keep reading.
Orcan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.c
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil writes:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>>
>>> [cut]
>>> Patching the configure
>>> script is much safer than patching configure.ac, then have auto
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> [cut]
> Patching the configure
> script is much safer than patching configure.ac, then have autoconf grok all
> .m4 macros and rebuild the whole thing, likely ending up with a completely
> different beast, that not only includes your changes
By the way,
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Owen Taylor wrote:
> I was rather surprised to see:
>
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2009-6661
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-6076
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-6370
>
> Wher
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Kevin Kofler said:
>> > It's not a default if you're providing a choice.
>>
>> I see no reason why we can't provide a choice of 2 desktops.
>
> Because giving people a choice when they can't possibly make a good
> informed decision is horr
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, Christopher Stone wrote:
>
>>
>> Whatever desktop RH employees are paid to work on to satisfy their
>> biggest RHEL customers needs. Or what they *think* their biggest RHEL
>> customers want.
>>
>> I think the question y
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> From my perspective, I am not convinced about the impact of the
>> disaster this package name will create. So far we didn't have SevenZip
>> in Fedora.
>
> We did have the real 7-Zip
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Rawhide Report wrote:
>> New package SevenZip
>> Java SDK for LZMA
>
> Why was this approved and imported with that name when we clearly agreed on
> this list that the name needs to be changed?
>
As far as I know, a general agreement h
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 6:28 PM, drago01 wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 6:04 PM, drago01 wrote:
>>> Why treat XFCE as second class citizen ...
>>
>> Easy answer: because the size of its userbase is not in
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 6:04 PM, drago01 wrote:
> Why treat XFCE as second class citizen ...
Easy answer: because the size of its userbase is not in the same order
of magnitude with Gnome.
> ok lets add it to the list.
> But what about LXDE ? .
>
> You see where this leads too ... a distro s
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 06/27/2009 09:13 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
>> As for integration, we offer a perfectly integrated KDE spin, thank you very
>> much... We're working really hard on distro integration. For example, why
>> do you think I wrote that KDM Conso
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
> I suggest everyone cut the drama. We're talking about whether or not the
> live cd is labeled as 'gnome desktop' or leaving it as it currently is which
> says: 'fedora 11 desktop edition: featuring the gnome desktop'.
>
> I don't see the need f
> 17:32:01 jds2001: #170 (Rename "Desktop" live image to
> "GNOME" live image) - FESCo - Trac -
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/170
> 17:32:06 This one is my proposal. See the ticket for
> the rationale.
[cut]
> 17:34:03 It stops misleading users about the contents
> of the image.
> 17
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> Having subpackages that do not have the SRPM name as a prefix is terrible on
> tools adn scripts and should be avoided.
>
> Why not lzma-sdk-java lzma-sdk-sharp etc.?
>
I think that's a problem of those tools/scripts and not of this pac
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 08:16:36PM -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >
> >- Let's keep F-12 the same: ppc, ppc64, i586, x86_64
> >- Since ppc and ppc64 are going to be dropped from F-13, fill in the
> >blank spot
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Seth Vidal wrote:
> > read that again? You would expect higher ver i386 to install over x86_64
> > ON an x86_64 box?
>
> I'd expect that too. There's certainly a reason why the current version is
> not available natively, if not, it's a bug i
2009/6/16 梁穗隆
>
> I hear that Fedora administrator will change the default 32-bit x86 arch for
> Fedora 12. The default arch is i686+SSE2.
>
> In my opinion, I do not want to change it. Or only change to i686. SSE2 is
> not necessary.
>
> Why do I think that? Because I live in China, and I have m
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> ppc/ppc64 is supported in RHEL. It is no longer a primary arch in Fedora.
>
> josh
>
Really? I obviously missed something.
/me will look at FESCo logs.
Orcan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redha
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Charles Butterfield wrote:
> Okay, so I mostly love Fedora. However, here are 4 things that got by blood
> really, really boiling, so I thought I’d share my emotions. They are mostly
> policy issues, where I think you have gotten it very very wrong.
>
Do yoursel
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Robert Scheck wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Probably because it's less maintenance work in the specfile to just always
>> add the wrapper. (On the other hand, it means extra work (adding an #ifdef)
>> when adding a secondary arch.)
>
> Well, h
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM, SmootherFrOgZ wrote:
>
> I assume that no one have any mono packages to rebuilt.
> then if so, i gonna request a push above packages.
>
Please do. This was F11-Target and I didn't even think this would not
be submitted ASAP and I had pushed gnome-guitar to updates.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:28 PM, SmootherFrOgZ wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 11:36 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> Mono-2.4 has been built for ppc64 in F11 and devel. So people should be
>> able to start rebuilding packages to include ppc64 as well as the other
>> arches. There's a few wrinkles t
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Jon Stanley wrote:
> Well, I have nothing on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting at this
> point. Thus, the entire meeting taking place at 17:00UTC in
> #fedora-meeting will be an open floor, unless someone comes up with
> something to discuss between now and then :)
71 matches
Mail list logo
