On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 17:46 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 03:24:30PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > Review requst for compat-readline5:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510022
> >
> > After the package is accepted, I'll start patching the packages
> >
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 03:24:30PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> Review requst for compat-readline5:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510022
>
> After the package is accepted, I'll start patching the packages
> (except gnu-smalltalk and kdeedu) to build correctly with the compat
>
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 01:14 +0200, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 12:27 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > devtodo-0.1.20-3.fc12
>
> I maintain this package in Fedora. Just wrote the author asking for a
> clarification on licensing.
FYI, I got this reply:
Forwarded Mes
On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 12:27 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> devtodo-0.1.20-3.fc12
I maintain this package in Fedora. Just wrote the author asking for a
clarification on licensing.
--
// Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/
\X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/
--
fedora-devel-
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 02:48:47PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>> > kdeedu-4.2.95-1.fc12
>>
>> kdeedu only uses readline in KAlgebra which is GPLv2+ (and only in the
>> command-line version ("calgebra") at that), so no problems there. (I also
>>
On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 02:48:47PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > kdeedu-4.2.95-1.fc12
>
> kdeedu only uses readline in KAlgebra which is GPLv2+ (and only in the
> command-line version ("calgebra") at that), so no problems there. (I also
> verified that "calgebra" doesn't
On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 05:55:21PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Miroslav Lichvar (mlich...@redhat.com) said:
> > I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
> > that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
> > using readline.
> >
> > A possib
On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 12:27:47 +0200, you wrote:
>gnu-smalltalk-3.1-5.fc12
I have revisited this package for a license check and changed the
license tag to GPLv2+ with exceptions
Best Regards:
Jochen Schmitt
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/ma
On Sat, Jul 04, 2009 at 04:10:15PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Those applications are obsolete by definition.
Such a sentence doesn't make sense. As long as there are users and
maintainers for those applications they are not obsolete.
I personnally use xfig, xpdf, gv, grace, and I am far fro
Matej Cepl wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius, Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:29:46 +0200:
>> I thought, we banned all non-utf-8 aware packages?
>
> And BTW zsh has been fixed not to corrupt non-ASCII filenames?
Bash FTW! :-p
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https
Matej Cepl wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius, Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:29:46 +0200:
>> I thought, we banned all non-utf-8 aware packages?
>
> I agree, who needs grep after all :)
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=194471
>
That package WORKS with UTF-8, it's just very slow with it on some extreme
t
Ralf Corsepius, Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:29:46 +0200:
> I thought, we banned all non-utf-8 aware packages?
And BTW zsh has been fixed not to corrupt non-ASCII filenames?
Matěj
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Ralf Corsepius, Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:29:46 +0200:
> I thought, we banned all non-utf-8 aware packages?
I agree, who needs grep after all :)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=194471
Matěj
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/list
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Patrice Dumas wrote:
>> Certainly not. Many very useful package are not utf8 aware
>
> Those packages need to be fixed. It is not acceptable that we ship
> applications which don't work properly in our default locales. You can't
> even open your
Patrice Dumas wrote:
> Certainly not. Many very useful package are not utf8 aware
Those packages need to be fixed. It is not acceptable that we ship
applications which don't work properly in our default locales. You can't
even open your files with those broken applications if they're in a
director
On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 09:29:46PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> I thought, we banned all non-utf-8 aware packages?
Certainly not. Many very useful package are not utf8 aware, at least
many that use motif or the athena widget set. And yes, there are very
useful applications in that case.
More b
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> I thought, we banned all non-utf-8 aware packages?
Unfortunately, a lot of that crap went in anyway because some reviewers just
don't care. I agree with you that it's a showstopper. Applications which
don't support UTF-8 WILL NOT WORK properly in Fedora's default locales. N
On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 12:27 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> bti-015-1.fc11
> lvm2-2.02.48-1.fc12
I mailed Greg and Alasdair about these just so they know.
Jon.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
On 07/04/2009 03:56 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Jussi Lehtola wrote:
>> Quoting "Ralf Corsepius" :
>>> Yes, utf-8 awareness had been a review criterion since the earliest
>>> Fedora days.
>>
>> No. What you are thinking of is spec files and rpm filenames (and
>> documentation that is in non-ASCII
Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Quoting "Ralf Corsepius" :
drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius
wrote:
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
compatible interface and is licensed under BSD, unfortunately it
doesn't handle UTF-8.
Miroslav Lichvar (mlich...@redhat.com) said:
> I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
> that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
> using readline.
>
> A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
> compatible interfac
Quoting "Ralf Corsepius" :
drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
compatible interface and is licensed under BSD, unfortunately it
doesn't handle UTF-8.
I thought, we banned
drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
using readline.
A possible replacement is the editline libra
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>>
>> I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
>> that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
>> using readline.
>>
>> A possible replacement is the editline libra
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
using readline.
A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
compatible interface and is licensed under BSD, unf
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
> that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
> using readline.
>
> A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
> compatible interface and is licensed unde
Toshio Kuratomi writes:
> On 07/03/2009 03:27 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>> I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
>> that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
>> using readline.
>>
>> A possible replacement is the editline library whic
On 07/03/2009 03:27 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
> that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
> using readline.
>
> A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
> compatible interf
On 03/07/09 11:27, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
using readline.
A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
compatible interface and is lice
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> kdeedu-4.2.95-1.fc12
kdeedu only uses readline in KAlgebra which is GPLv2+ (and only in the
command-line version ("calgebra") at that), so no problems there. (I also
verified that "calgebra" doesn't use any GPL v2 only libraries.)
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-l
On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 04:00:02PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 07/03/2009 03:57 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
> > that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
> > using readline.
> >
> > A possi
On 07/03/2009 03:57 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
> that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
> using readline.
>
> A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
> compatible interf
I'd like to update readline to the latest version 6.0. The problem is
that the license was changed to GPLv3+ and we have some GPLv2 packages
using readline.
A possible replacement is the editline library which provides a
compatible interface and is licensed under BSD, unfortunately it
doesn't hand
33 matches
Mail list logo
