On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Dirk Mueller wrote:
On Tuesday 29 January 2008, Stephan Kulow wrote:
But the warning is not fatal. It would mean way too many fallouts for false
positives.
Well, it was just a general topic, but while we're talking on this
specifically: by definition there can't
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am Mittwoch 23 Januar 2008 schrieb Pavol Rusnak:
Richard Guenther wrote:
We will include -Wstrict-prototypes in RPM_OPT_FLAGS via enabling
it for -Wall soon, which will warn about non-prototypes like
Will there also be a rpmlint check
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Bernhard Walle wrote:
* Dirk Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-01-03 14:19]:
osc build for building opensuse packages.
Just a side question: Is it possible to use osc build without
importing that package into the Build Service?
Only if you fix osc.
Richard.
these issues
back to me or file a bugzilla for them.
Builds with a slightly newer version of GCC for x86_64 and i586 are
also available in the home:rguenther:playground build service project.
Thanks,
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG
for x86_64 and i586 are
also available in the home:rguenther:playground build service project.
Thanks,
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Cristian Rodriguez wrote:
Richard Guenther escribió:
Hi,
this is a reminder for you to have a look at your packages that fail
in the BETA distribution (which has GCC 4.3 as its compiler)
and it is quite a bit of work ;-) 438 packages fails atm at least on x86
only a warning ;) (for now!)
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
of the differing names.)
Btw, I only see libelf0 in 10.3.
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
The upcoming transition to GCC 4.3 will cause some common problems
in C and C++ source to become compile-time errors. You investigate
if your Factory package is affected by looking at the
home:dirkmueller:playground:gcc43 project which is currently rebuilding
(most of) Factory with GCC 4.3.
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Richard Guenther wrote:
The upcoming transition to GCC 4.3 will cause some common problems
in C and C++ source to become compile-time errors. You investigate
if your Factory package is affected by looking at the
home:dirkmueller:playground:gcc43 project which
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Francis Giannaros wrote:
On 9/2/07, Bernhard Walle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Alberto Passalacqua [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-09-02 17:52]:
during a discussion on IRC it emerged that GNOME still has a very high
number of blockers and critical bugs.
GNOME will be
On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:
I suppose for the quality of GNOME it would be more helpful if people
would report issues upstream. At least if the perception is correct
that bugs in openSUSE GNOME are only fixed by pulling new releases
from upstream.
That's ok, but it
On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Juergen Weigert wrote:
On Aug 31, 07 15:04:30 +0200, Dirk Mueller wrote:
On Friday, 31. August 2007, Philipp Thomas wrote:
How about this (untestet):
a) buildrequires licenses missing
b) the %doc macro runs after postinstall scripts, so one still has to
On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Dirk Mueller wrote:
On Monday, 3. September 2007, Juergen Weigert wrote:
Does anybody know if the licenses package had a space
saving effect on the media?
Well, the GPL roughly takes 3kb of space per rpm on the media. out of a
default KDE installation, exactly 256
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Dirk Mueller wrote:
On Tuesday, 21. August 2007, JP Rosevear wrote:
2) No reference to .la files
Do we finally want to kill those as a matter of policy? If so, should we
write a macro to do it?
There is a build and a rpmlint check to discover unneccessary .la
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Dirk Mueller wrote:
On Wednesday, 22. August 2007, Richard Guenther wrote:
Though in general we do not want to ship static libraries, so .la files
without a static library should be avoided.
its imho fine shipping them in the -devel subpackage *if* its
inconsistent here, both with respect
to licenses and other stuff. (At least Debian duplicates a set of
standard files including the license and the package changelog in every
sub-package)
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG
.i586.rpm
libfoo-devel-1.2.3.i586.rpm
libfoo-1.2.3.src.rpm
Just to add my 2 cents - the proposed way is the way I suggested it
done. Even further I thought to avoid renaming the source rpm at all
(which would most of the time result in the above proposed scheme).
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am Samstag 07 Juli 2007 schrieb Bernhard Walle:
I'm sure there are KDE and GNOME toys on the CD which have less users.
Definitly! But they might not take 300MB. In that sense TeX is far from being
a toy.
Eh. While including all of TexLive on
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Donn Washburn wrote:
Question was: So why do we have KOffice on the DVD?
koffice is needed by kmymoney. Because likdchart is in koffice
Another words - dependences for at least one example.
So fix the packaging instead. Or, who needs kmymoney?
Richard.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Thanks a lot for your feedback on TeXLive, this was valuable.
I discussed further with Michael and we will do the following:
* The 1 CD GNOME/KDE will not include TeXLive (definitely not enough
space)
* During installation the ftp tree
On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Bernhard Walle wrote:
* Andreas Jaeger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-05 09:09]:
* Improve debuginfo packages
To get a complete stack trace, we need several debuginfo packages.
The simple idea would be to copy dependencies from the main package to
the debuginfo
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
On 2007-06-19 13:47:51 +0200, Klaus Singvogel wrote:
Therefore we are doing a switch in openSUSE 10.3 RSN:
- gpg will be dropped
- gpg2 will be renamed to gpg
why renaming it?
to fullfil old Requires a simple:
Provides: gpg =
case is that with a shared libaray package there
comes at least a -devel package which is another appropriate place
to put documentation in.
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex
.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or will each package have to require
the licenses package?
My understanding is that this will be somehow automated and the licenses
package will be in the base system patter.
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB
On Tue, 22 May 2007, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2007, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Stanislav Brabec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
* Shared library policy
see: http://en.opensuse.org/Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy
.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL
: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby
vendorlibdir: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/1.8
vendorarchdir: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
Architecture independent files must go in /usr/share
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg
On Wed, 16 May 2007, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
On 2007-05-16 13:35:58 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2007, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
On 2007-05-16 11:40:13 +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
Actually unlike python, the perl directory layout doesn't prevent you
from creating
/ld.so.conf.d/foo with the path (/usr/lib/foo)
as the content.
I agree. Still for programs which come with their own shared libraries
installed in /usr/lib/$program/ rpath is a reasonable setup - this also
avoids polluting the global soname namespace for purely internal shlibs.
Richard.
--
Richard
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Richard Guenther wrote:
And the biggest file in the 48MB of i585 installed dependencies of
aaa_base are
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 308151 May 13 14:01 coreutils.mo
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 324200 May 13 13:23
.
uhh - thanks for the hint!
It's working now :)
Actually, gcc-32bit is the correct package to install (it will pull in
all required dependencies).
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Dirk Mueller wrote:
On Tuesday, 3. April 2007, Richard Guenther wrote:
the filelist check for a better structured verification. Maybe a rpmlint
check is better for now.
Might be a good idea, except that it is already done:
$ grep -rl devel-file-in-non-devel
have conforming packages!
~/bin/filelist-10.3 /work/built/dists/all/x86_64/packs-x86_64/libapr1
... checking filelist
Can we enable this in BETA now and STABLE soon?
Thanks,
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Michal Marek wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Michal Marek wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
The library packaging policy forces you to split off a libcurl4 package
with just the libcurl.so.4* shared libraries.
While you're at it, cosider splittig
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
On 2007-04-03 11:48:25 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
I have splitted off a curl-ca-bundle package and depend on that from
libcurl4 now. For old compat libraries like libcurl3 I'll just depend
on /usr/share/curl/curl-ca-bundle.crt instead
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Michal Marek wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
For the library packaging policy as discussed previously this is an
example on how to fix an offending package. We take the example of
curl, as we have (ick) compat-curl2 and compat-curl3 packages alread,
which is a mess
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Reinhard Max wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 at 15:22, Richard Guenther wrote:
Now we did it. The following packages are no longer installed in
the default build environment:
- vim
can we have that back, please, at least when the build command is
invoked
-x86_64
~/compare-log.sh libzio
libzio
===
/work/built/dists/all/x86_64/packs-x86_64/libzio/libzio-0.4
No reference for libzio
(there's no
/work/built/dists/all/x86_64/packs-x86_64/libzio/libzio-0.4/OLD/ log)
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell / SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Richard Guenther wrote:
Hi,
as a heads-up (and for those curious why your package may be / has been
touched) there is an upcoming change in the set of packages installed
by default in the build environments. This can affect your packages
BuildRequires as well
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Packagers should have a clue what they're doing or document they have none
is as good as it gets for me :)
Well - if we need such a policy there's something wrong. Can you spot
the mistake? ;)
Richard.
--
Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Robert Schiele wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 10:08:07AM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
So, unfortunately a automated tool for reducing BuildRequires is hard
because it actually needs to check if building is still possible.
If it was only that it wouldn't be that hard
43 matches
Mail list logo
