On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Josh Boyerjwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 06:46:36PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 11:21:58AM +, Rawhide Report wrote:
kernel-2.6.31-0.42.rc2.fc12
---
* Sat Jul 04 2009 Chuck Ebbert
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 from
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 22:17 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Why is it bad to patch configure.ac and rerun the autotools stuff?
I used to avoid re-running autotools in rpm builds because I worried
that a future autotools update would subtly screw up the build - e.g.
disabling a previously
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 17:52 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
As described on the Feature page, but if there's any specific
questions
about the reasoning on there I'll be happy to answer those questions.
I had read the feature page, in which you claim that a three-year cycle
disqualifies
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 09:27:33AM +0200, drago01 wrote:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Josh Boyerjwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 06:46:36PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 11:21:58AM +, Rawhide Report wrote:
kernel-2.6.31-0.42.rc2.fc12
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 10:27:43AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 17:52 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
As described on the Feature page, but if there's any specific
questions
about the reasoning on there I'll be happy to answer those questions.
I had read the feature
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
How exactly would that violate the GPL?
You aren't patching the actual source code.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Compose started at Mon Jul 6 06:15:04 UTC 2009
New package mcu8051ide
IDE for MCS-51 based microcontrollers
Updated Packages:
abiword-2.7.6-3.fc12
cln-1.3.0-1.fc12
* Thu Jul 02 2009 Deji Akingunola dakin...@gmail.com - 1.3.0-1
- Update to latest
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 18:50 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones writes:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 10:45:46AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
What line number changes? You cut a patch against configure, and you're
done. That's it.
And you get a big patch containing line
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 14:22 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
How exactly would that violate the GPL?
You aren't patching the actual source code.
Assuming GPLv2, the term in the license that you're referring to is
preferred form. There is clearly some difference of opinion
On Jul 6, 2009, at 0:27, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Josh Boyerjwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 06:46:36PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 11:21:58AM +, Rawhide Report wrote:
kernel-2.6.31-0.42.rc2.fc12
Hi.
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 13:16:12 +, Rawhide Report wrote:
prelink-0.4.1-1.fc12
* Sun Jul 05 2009 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com 0.4.1-1
- add support for STT_GNU_IFUNC on i?86/x86_64 and
R_{386,X86_64}_IRELATIVE
- add support for DWARF3/DWARF4 features generated
Nathanael Noblet wrote:
On Jul 5, 2009, at 9:33 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
...
Well their python run script checks for its dependancies, and if not
met will do a svn checkout of the right copy, however, they don't keep
copies of the libraries within their own repository. So if you fulfill
A message from Will Woods on thursday made me go looking at the comps
file for a bit.
A few groups have these sections:
grouplist
groupreqx-software-development/groupreq
/grouplist
this tag is not supported (and hasn't been) for a while in comps.
So groupreq is going to do exactly
Hi,
So I've been toying with the idea of getting more involved with
fedora. Up till now if there has been a bug or other issue, i'll file
a bug or simply get the srpm and try to update it to a newer version,
or create my own specs / rpms when they don't already exist. Lately
I've figured
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
On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 22:13:07 +0100, Christopher Brown
snecklif...@gmail.com
wrote:
Honestly, I'm impressed by your persistence but I think simply trying
to re-instate Fedora Legacy (which it sounds like this is what you are
trying to do) is doomed to permanent failure.
I love your
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 02:03:01 +0200, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at
wrote:
Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Whether 6 months of additional availability of security updates is going
to help, and to what extend, we'll have to see. Compared to the current
situation, that'll give an environment 7
2009/7/6 Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com:
On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 22:13:07 +0100, Christopher Brown
snecklif...@gmail.com
wrote:
Honestly, I'm impressed by your persistence but I think simply trying
to re-instate Fedora Legacy (which it sounds like this is what you are
trying to do) is
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 10:27:43 +0100, David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org
wrote:
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 17:52 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
As described on the Feature page, but if there's any specific
questions
about the reasoning on there I'll be happy to answer those questions.
I
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Christopher Brown wrote:
The sooner Fedora gets out of its identity crisis the better. I
believe the following:
Fedora is the distribution for those who love computers.
CentOS, Ubuntu and others are for those who dont.
well, crap. I guess I'm in the wrong place ;)
-sv
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:11:30 -0400, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
No, the sky does not fall. There are a few hurdles though.
1) Master mirror space. This used to be an issue, in that we had to move
older releases to alt.fp.o in order to make space for the new release. I
believe we
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Colin Walterswalt...@verbum.org wrote:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Peter Robinsonpbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
Interestingly with -ggdb it builds fine with out without -O0.
That makes it a lot more likely to be a compiler flaw (though not guaranteed).
Of
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 16:25:08 +0100, Christopher Brown
snecklif...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/7/6 Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com:
On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 22:13:07 +0100, Christopher Brown
snecklif...@gmail.com
wrote:
Honestly, I'm impressed by your persistence but I think simply trying
to
On 07/05/2009 03:28 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
I wanted to draw your attention to a feature I've proposed for Fedora
12, mysteriously called Extended Life Cycle.
You can find more details at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Extended_Life_Cycle
Instead of saying yet to be
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 11:16:45AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
I wanted to draw your attention to a feature I've proposed for Fedora
12, mysteriously called Extended Life Cycle.
You can find more details at
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 09:50:53PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
The FAQ should also answer
How is this going to succeed, where Fedora Legacy failed?. You should
this was debated a lot in the previous attempts, and I still think that
any attempt to do this with fedora infra (not necessarily
Using rawhide and gdm-2.26.1-13.fc12.i586 when I do a ck-list-sessions I see
Session4:
unix-user = '500'
realname = 'darrell pfeifer'
seat = 'Seat5'
session-type = ''
active = FALSE
x11-display = ':0'
x11-display-device = ''
display-device = ''
remote-host-name = ''
is-local = TRUE
on-since =
On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 23:58:52 +0200
Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com wrote:
I wanted to draw your attention to a feature I've proposed for Fedora
12, mysteriously called Extended Life Cycle.
You can find more details at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Extended_Life_Cycle
Hi,
since I sync my mail with the experimental gnome ui of offlineimap, I
encounter a small problem:
How do I tell cron to only invoke the job when I am logged in under
gnome only? Since consolekit (correct me if I am wrong on that) does not
provide a way to get that information (it is even
On Mon July 6 2009, Christoph Höger wrote:
since I sync my mail with the experimental gnome ui of offlineimap, I
encounter a small problem:
How do I tell cron to only invoke the job when I am logged in under
gnome only? Since consolekit (correct me if I am wrong on that) does not
Do you
Kevin Fenzi (ke...@scrye.com) said:
- The issue I have with this plan (and the others very like it) is that
if you say we will just do updates for the things we have people
willing to do updates it means the entire end of life distro is not
covered and the likelyhood of an outstanding
ps u -C gnome-session | egrep -q ^till offlineimap
Yeah, that would be a hack ;).
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Hello All!
Why we should approve manually requests to watching bugzilla and cvs
changes for packages? I'm sure we need to change policy in order to
automatically approve all such requests.
--
With best regards!
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
2009/7/6 Tom Lane t...@redhat.com:
Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com writes:
Why we should approve manually requests to watching bugzilla and cvs
changes for packages? I'm sure we need to change policy in order to
automatically approve all such requests.
Isn't there a security issue there?
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 02:14:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com writes:
Why we should approve manually requests to watching bugzilla and cvs
changes for packages? I'm sure we need to change policy in order to
automatically approve all such requests.
Isn't
Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com writes:
Why we should approve manually requests to watching bugzilla and
cvs changes for packages? I'm sure we need to change policy in
order to automatically approve all such requests.
Isn't there a security issue there? I'm not sure I want
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 13:56:43 -0400, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com
wrote:
Kevin Fenzi (ke...@scrye.com) said:
- The issue I have with this plan (and the others very like it) is that
if you say we will just do updates for the things we have people
willing to do updates it means the
On 07/06/2009 11:28 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com writes:
Why we should approve manually requests to watching bugzilla and
cvs changes for packages? I'm sure we need to change policy in
order to automatically approve all such requests.
Isn't
Jeroen van Meeuwen (kana...@kanarip.com) said:
These two are my big concerns - doing this badly is worse than not
doing it, IMO. When it comes to user's security, I don't want to give
promises we can't keep, or leave them in a bind.
This has been addressed in another response to the
What I forgot to mention: Obviously it is not enough to know that there
is a gnome session running. My programs should inherit the environment.
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On 07/06/2009 03:58 PM, Christoph Höger wrote:
What I forgot to mention: Obviously it is not enough to know that there
is a gnome session running. My programs should inherit the environment.
I'll point out that upstart will do all this to some point, but I don't expect
you to wait around for
Am Montag, den 06.07.2009, 16:02 -0400 schrieb Casey Dahlin:
On 07/06/2009 03:58 PM, Christoph Höger wrote:
What I forgot to mention: Obviously it is not enough to know that there
is a gnome session running. My programs should inherit the environment.
I'll point out that upstart will do
On 07/06/2009 04:05 PM, Christoph Höger wrote:
Am Montag, den 06.07.2009, 16:02 -0400 schrieb Casey Dahlin:
On 07/06/2009 03:58 PM, Christoph Höger wrote:
What I forgot to mention: Obviously it is not enough to know that there
is a gnome session running. My programs should inherit the
On 07/05/2009 11:46 AM, Jon Stanley wrote:
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Jos Vosj...@xos.nl wrote:
I don't completely agree that desktops tend to need to run the latest and
greatest (when we're talking about business desktops), but desktops
I don't agree with that position either - note
Kevin Kofler writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
How exactly would that violate the GPL?
You aren't patching the actual source code.
Oh, no! You mean, the tarball I downloaded from upstream, labeled source
code, did not actually contain the source code?
Looks like I've been snookered.
On 07/05/2009 08:03 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
They already have 7 months of time to move to the next version. It's just if
they absolutely want to skip a version that they only have 1 month.
In the field I've often found that a Fedora at GA+0 isn't really ready
to deploy. A bunch of fixes
Adam Jackson writes:
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 18:50 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones writes:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 10:45:46AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
What line number changes? You cut a patch against configure, and you're
done. That's it.
And you get a big patch
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 17:53 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
So, the choices are, once it's identified where configure goes wrong are:
1) Fix the configure script, with shellcode whose contents are well
understood
2) Patch configure.ac, and feed it to a code generator that spits out a
On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 23:58 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
I wanted to draw your attention to a feature I've proposed for Fedora
12, mysteriously called Extended Life Cycle.
You can find more details at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Extended_Life_Cycle
When we talked at
On 07/06/2009 02:53 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Adam Jackson writes:
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 18:50 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones writes:
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 10:45:46AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
What line number changes? You cut a patch against configure, and
Josh Boyer wrote:
Fedora Legacy (the original one) failed.
It failed because of excess bureaucracy (they didn't even trust Bugzilla's
authentication, requiring GPG signing of all Bugzilla comments with impact
on the procedures, and QA requirements were also unrealistic given the
manpower).
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
a) it will cause some moderate stir-up to those packages whose upstreams
are still abusing the autotools.
s/ab// ;-)
Why can't we just move to a better build system with higher focus on
backwards compatibility?
Because
a) the
On 07/06/2009 03:07 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
Bugzilla spam. If we keep the release open for random bug filing, we
have no good way of telling bugzilla that only specific users should get
bugs for specific releases of Fedora. Ownership is at a product level,
not at the product version level.
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Oh, no! You mean, the tarball I downloaded from upstream, labeled source
code, did not actually contain the source code?
It contains both the actual source code and some unreadable generated
gibberish which is NOT source code and which is being passed off as such
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:18:51 +0200
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote:
Fedora Legacy (the original one) failed.
It failed because of excess bureaucracy (they didn't even trust
Bugzilla's authentication, requiring GPG signing of all Bugzilla
comments with impact on
On 7/6/09 6:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
[snip]
Introducing side-effects is something to watch out for but
patching configure instead of the true source is a short term fix, not a
long term solution.
*Any* patch should be viewed as a short-term fix. A patch that needs to
persist
Kevin Kofler writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Oh, no! You mean, the tarball I downloaded from upstream, labeled source
code, did not actually contain the source code?
It contains both the actual source code and some unreadable generated
gibberish which is NOT source code and which is being
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 12:43 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
I'm not sure how distributable the KJV is or isnt'
It's been out of copyright for some little time, now. Probably.(*)
* Of course, one could potentially make some quite interesting legal
arguments about the
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:20:50 +0200
Jeroen van Meeuwen kana...@kanarip.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 10:57:34 -0600, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com
wrote:
...snip...
- The issue I have with this plan (and the others very like it) is
that if you say we will just do updates for the things we
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
Up'ing to GraphicsMagick-1.3.x in rawhide, which involves an ABI break.
I'll take care of (re)building dependant apps, dvdauthor and koffice.
Issue tracked here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487605
If you're aware of any other deps I missed, please comment or block the
Please see below from our fabulous releng team!
-- Forwarded message --
From: Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 6:24 PM
Subject: Last call for F9 updates
To: fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
F9 will be EOL'd very very soon. This is probably the last call for
Hi, folks.
We in the QA and BugZappers groups have been working for a while on a
proposal to use the severity and priority fields in Bugzilla. With the
help of various groups, and after considerable feedback both within our
groups and from the development group, we're ready to put this into
place
The logist...@lists.fedoraproject.org mailing list has been created to
meet the requirements discussed here:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-July/msg0.html
Anyone is welcome to join the list at:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/logistics and
One thing we overlooked by dropping the Alpha Release (as we knew it in
Fedora 11 and before) is the built-in feature check at Alpha freeze. As
a result we need all feature owners to update their feature pages with
current completion information by July 14, 2009.
I'll be forwarding a list of
Greetings.
I have setup some machines/virtual instances here to assist maintainers
that might not have access to all versions/arches Fedora runs on.
Please see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers
For more information on the instances, how to use
Braden McDaniel wrote:
The number of people chiming in on this thread to the effect, I've
regenerated configure/Makefile.in for years and I've never had a
problem, is testament to the fact that backward compatibility of
autotools releases has gotten a lot better in recent years. The
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Just because you can't read it, it's not gibberish.
It's not that *I* can't read it, it's that it is just plain hard to read,
especially because it contains workarounds for bazillions of broken
proprietary *nix shells (trying to use Bourne-style shell code as a portable
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Gee, I didn't know that rediffing is a mandatory step.
It is when your patch no longer applies after you upgraded the package to a
new upstream version.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
John Poelstra wrote:
This checkpoint is important to know if currently accepted features are
on track for a successful Fedora 12 landing or if contingency plans need
to be considered at Feature Freeze as we prepare for the Alpha release.
… for the what? ;-)
Kevin Kofler
--
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 02:23 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
John Poelstra wrote:
This checkpoint is important to know if currently accepted features are
on track for a successful Fedora 12 landing or if contingency plans need
to be considered at Feature Freeze as we prepare for the Alpha
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 12:18:51AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote:
Without a concrete group of people large enough to make this wory saying
that they are signing up to do that work, I don't have high hopes for this
succeeding in the long run.
We'd just need some minimal
Jesse Keating wrote:
Per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Milestone_Adjustment_Proposal what
used to be called Beta is now called Alpha. This matches industry
nomenclature for what we were actually producing.
Uh, I kinda recalled that the feedback on the mailing list for this renaming
On 07/06/2009 09:19 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Jeroen van Meeuwen (kana...@kanarip.com) said:
These two are my big concerns - doing this badly is worse than not
doing it, IMO. When it comes to user's security, I don't want to give
promises we can't keep, or leave them in a bind.
This has been
Kevin Kofler writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Just because you can't read it, it's not gibberish.
It's not that *I* can't read it, it's that it is just plain hard to read,
especially because it contains workarounds for bazillions of broken
proprietary *nix shells (trying to use Bourne-style
Kevin Kofler writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Gee, I didn't know that rediffing is a mandatory step.
It is when your patch no longer applies after you upgraded the package to a
new upstream version.
Which, as I pointed out, is still the case if you were to patch configure.ac
instead.
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
go wrong unnoticed if one uses autotools in a specfile.
I already
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 21:24 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Yes, well, that might be one of the reasons why KDE is sweeping over the
Linux desktop, and Gnome is just a fading memory for most.
Please don't claim such obviously fallacious things. Like it or not,
GNOME has been - and continues to
Peter Gordon writes:
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 21:24 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Yes, well, that might be one of the reasons why KDE is sweeping over the
Linux desktop, and Gnome is just a fading memory for most.
Please don't claim such obviously fallacious things. Like it or not,
GNOME has
Just a reminder that we are kicking off our 'fit and finish' initiative
with a test day on display configuration tomorrow, in
#fedora-fit-and-finish. If you go to
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-07-07_Fit_and_Finish:Display_Configuration
you'll find more information. We will
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 16:36 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On 07/06/2009 03:57 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
On 7/6/09 6:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
[snip]
Introducing side-effects is something to watch out for but
patching configure instead of the true source is a short term fix, not
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 02:02 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Braden McDaniel wrote:
The number of people chiming in on this thread to the effect, I've
regenerated configure/Makefile.in for years and I've never had a
problem, is testament to the fact that backward compatibility of
autotools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503430
--- Comment #8 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-07-06
02:09:32 EDT ---
Hi Fyva, could you test again with
Author: cchance
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv30762
Modified Files:
.cvsignore liberation-fonts.spec sources
Log Message:
- Updated to upstream 1.05.1.20090706.
- Reconverted from original TTF with traditional kern
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487581
--- Comment #10 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-07-06
02:27:13 EDT ---
Hi Adam, could you test again with
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508899
--- Comment #6 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-07-06
02:53:24 EDT ---
Tested on F11 with:
$ pango-view
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455510
Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508899
Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508899
Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428389
Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504270
Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487061
Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 03:20:43PM -0400, David Juran wrote:
Hello!
Would it be possible to add a new category for new packages to the
fedora-package-announce list?
I'm interested in seeing what new packages are released to Fedora but I
don't have the time/patience to wade through the
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 10:01 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
Would prepending something like [NEW] to the subject (similar to how we
add [SECURITY]) suffice? This would be a fairly trivial change to
bodhi.
Sure, that would make it easy enough to filter (-:
--
David Juran
Sr. Consultant
Red Hat
Luke Macken wrote:
Would prepending something like [NEW] to the subject (similar to how
we add [SECURITY]) suffice? This would be a fairly trivial change
to bodhi.
If that's done, making a 'New' topic in the mailman list should be
trivial as well. Then folks could subscribe and choose to
On Jul 6, 2009, at 7:09, David Juran dju...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 10:01 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
Would prepending something like [NEW] to the subject (similar to
how we
add [SECURITY]) suffice? This would be a fairly trivial change to
bodhi.
Sure, that would make it
So we've got some ongoing issues in our environment right now. Some of
them are unrelated. All are being worked on but one in particular I want
to discuss on the list here because I just don't know what changed.
The problem:
When one of the fas servers goes offline, most of our other apps get
Hi,
Here is the details for the RFR of global ambassadors map project.
I have also updated the ticket #1514.
Thanks.
-
Project Sponsor
-
Name:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello f-i-l!
If you're on the websites team, you may know me already, and if you're
in #fedora-admin frequently on freenode you might also know me.
So, I'm 14 years old (might be scary for some of you to find out), and
I'm mostly working with
1 - 100 of 338 matches
Mail list logo
