Why do those packages have to conflict with each other?
1. seedit and selinux-policy-{targeted,mls} -> i dont see a single
file conflicting atleast with the targeted policy...
2. qstat and torque-client both provide a qstat binary... is there
anything done to get that resolved upstream? or is it
> "RK" == Rudolf Kastl writes:
RK> 2. qstat and torque-client both provide a qstat binary... is there
RK> anything done to get that resolved upstream? or is it a "conflicts
RK> and forget" scenario?
This one, I think, should be easily resolvable with alternatives.
Actually I think all but a
On 11/04/2009 08:14 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> Why do those packages have to conflict with each other?
>
> 1. seedit and selinux-policy-{targeted,mls} -> i dont see a single
> file conflicting atleast with the targeted policy...
>
> 2. qstat and torque-client both provide a qstat binary... is ther
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "RK" == Rudolf Kastl writes:
>
> RK> 2. qstat and torque-client both provide a qstat binary... is there
> RK> anything done to get that resolved upstream? or is it a "conflicts
> RK> and forget" scenario?
>
> This one, I think, sh
> "ST" == Steve Traylen writes:
ST> Would be happy for an alternatives solution. I have yet another
ST> /usr/bin/qstat for a POSIX interface to batch on the way at some
ST> point.
Turns out that the other queuing systems (torque and gridengine) have
already renamed their qstat binaries (to q
2009/11/4 Jason L Tibbitts III :
>> "ST" == Steve Traylen writes:
>
> ST> Would be happy for an alternatives solution. I have yet another
> ST> /usr/bin/qstat for a POSIX interface to batch on the way at some
> ST> point.
>
> Turns out that the other queuing systems (torque and gridengine) hav
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> 2009/11/4 Jason L Tibbitts III :
>>> "ST" == Steve Traylen writes:
>>
>> ST> Would be happy for an alternatives solution. I have yet another
>> ST> /usr/bin/qstat for a POSIX interface to batch on the way at some
>> ST> point.
>>
>> Turns
2009/11/4 Steve Traylen :
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>> 2009/11/4 Jason L Tibbitts III :
"ST" == Steve Traylen writes:
>>>
>>> ST> Would be happy for an alternatives solution. I have yet another
>>> ST> /usr/bin/qstat for a POSIX interface to batch on the way a
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> 2009/11/4 Steve Traylen :
>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>>> 2009/11/4 Jason L Tibbitts III :
> "ST" == Steve Traylen writes:
ST> Would be happy for an alternatives solution. I have yet another
S
2009/11/4 Steve Traylen :
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>> 2009/11/4 Steve Traylen :
>>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
2009/11/4 Jason L Tibbitts III :
>> "ST" == Steve Traylen writes:
>
> ST> Would be happy for an alternatives s
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> 2009/11/4 Steve Traylen :
>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>>> 2009/11/4 Steve Traylen :
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> 2009/11/4 Jason L Tibbitts III :
>>> "ST" == Steve Traylen
bug against qstat filed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533016
as for seedit: i am going to investigate it further.
kind regards,
Rudolf Kastl
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
> Because seedit getting installed causes selinux-policy-targeted and friends
> to get screwed up.
That sounds like a reason to not ship seedit. Am I missing something?
Bill
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
2009/11/4 Bill Nottingham :
>> Because seedit getting installed causes selinux-policy-targeted and friends
>> to get screwed up.
>
> That sounds like a reason to not ship seedit. Am I missing something?
on first start of the seedit-gui there is a popup:
"you have to initialize before using selin
On 11/04/2009 01:38 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> Because seedit getting installed causes selinux-policy-targeted and friends
>> to get screwed up.
>
> That sounds like a reason to not ship seedit. Am I missing something?
>
> Bill
>
I would not ship it.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedor
Daniel J Walsh (dwa...@redhat.com) said:
> On 11/04/2009 01:38 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >> Because seedit getting installed causes selinux-policy-targeted and
> >> friends to get screwed up.
> >
> > That sounds like a reason to not ship seedit. Am I missing something?
> >
> > Bill
> >
> I
16 matches
Mail list logo
