https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2024-9b1ce9a1c9 (clifm-1.19-2.el10_0) has been pushed to the Fedora
EPEL 10.0 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are rece
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2024-9b1ce9a1c9 (clifm-1.19-2.el10_0) has been submitted as an
update to Fedora EPEL 10.0.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-9b1ce9a1c9
--
You are receiving th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Status|MODIFI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|MODIFIED
--- Comment #12 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #11 from Tomas Hrcka ---
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/clifm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about ch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Carl George 🤠changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
Status|NEW
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wright ---
Fixed the completion sub-packages. Docs weren't clear on that.
Pushed version up to pre-1.7 commit so that we can release this to EPEL/Fedora
stable and not have to worry about the backwards-incompatib
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Carl George 🤠changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||c...@redhat.com
--- Comment #8 from C
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wright ---
Upstream has acknowledged the issue and will get it fixed.
https://github.com/leo-arch/clifm/issues/154
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wright ---
That is beyond my level of expertise in C so I opened an issue upstream.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this produ
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #5 from Benson Muite ---
For memory overflows, possibly the code can be patched to ensure the warnings
are removed - this would likely require changing array bounds.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notifie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wright ---
> a) Packaging qsort separately as a header only library would be helpful. It
> would make it easier to find. It is also in a separate repository,
> https://github.com/svpv/qsort and seems to be devel
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Jonathan Wright changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On|2120099 |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzil
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Jonathan Wright changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||2120099
Referenced Bugs:
https:/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Benson Muite changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(benson_muite@emai |
|lplus.org)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Jonathan Wright changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(benson_muite@emai
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wright ---
Clarified licenses.
Documented why qsort.h is packaged and also ensured system printf is used
(added an rm).
Spec URL: https://jonathanspw.fedorapeople.org/clifm.spec
SRPM URL: https://jonathanspw.fedo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118835
Benson Muite changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
18 matches
Mail list logo
