On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 08:30:25PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> just thought I write down a rough list of things that I plan to do for
>> RPM Fusion over the next couple of weeks. I'm sending it here in the
>> hope that some people help me with some of those task; then we
>> hopefully ge
On 14.10.2008 23:45, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 14.10.2008 00:05, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
[...]
It would be good if maintainers could create a wiki page with info on
how to get the info they want ( debug output ) and which files (
logfiles etc )
they want on
On 15.10.2008 04:18, Stewart Adam wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
- are the nvidia bits sane? There were some mails about the 177series,
but seems some questions were not answered yet
As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong Nicolas), we're dropping 177 for
Livna F-8/9 and focus on the move to
On 15.10.2008 00:19, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 October 2008 at 19:05, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Brought over there from fedora-devel; see
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-October/msg01408.html
for details.
On 14.10.2008 18:49, Dmitry Butskoy wrote
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 22:11 +, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Your following packages in the repository suffer from broken dependencies:
>
> ==
> The results in this summary consider Test Updates!
>
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
- are the nvidia bits sane? There were some mails about the 177series,
but seems some questions were not answered yet
As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong Nicolas), we're dropping 177 for
Livna F-8/9 and focus on the move to RPM Fusion and provide it there
inst
Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 06:45:09PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
>> k, so how important do we consider sl? And how fast can the review be
>> done in Fedora?
>>
>> Or, IOW: Is the consensus then to not import the package to RPM Fusion,
>> even if that means that use
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>
>> The author answered that debian license is right, I have put the mail
>> at > http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/sl-license-mail.txt
>>
>> So this is definitely for fedora.
>
> k, so how important do we consider sl? And how fast can the review be
> done in Fe
On Tuesday, 14 October 2008 at 19:05, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Brought over there from fedora-devel; see
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-October/msg01408.html
> for details.
>
> On 14.10.2008 18:49, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> >Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >>Note, nearly all o
==
The results in this summary consider Test Updates!
==
Summary of broken packages (by owner):
James.Bottomley AT hansenpartnership.com
rt2860
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 14.10.2008 00:05, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
I've been thinking if there's any interest in creating a testing
community within rpmfusion
>
If there is any interest
Hows accessible is wiki?
I can't remember exactly, but I think you can edit if once you
regi
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 06:45:09PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
> k, so how important do we consider sl? And how fast can the review be
> done in Fedora?
>
> Or, IOW: Is the consensus then to not import the package to RPM Fusion,
> even if that means that users then have no update/install
==
The results in this summary consider Test Updates!
==
Summary of broken packages (by owner):
James.Bottomley AT hansenpartnership.com
rt2860
==
The results in this summary consider Test Updates!
==
Summary of broken packages (by owner):
James.Bottomley AT hansenpartnership.com
rt2860
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:49:13 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > * There are entries in owners.list with no bz account.
> > [...]
>
> This list should be a lot shorter now:
fedora, free:
* entry for libmms is duplicate
* for the following entries the email addr doesn't match with bugzilla:
au
On 14.10.2008 20:56, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis pisze:
On 14.10.2008 11:57, Xavier Lamien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I skimmed through owners.list for my packages and it seems the setup is
not entirely right. Since the pack
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34
--- Comment #3 from NicolasChauvet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-14 21:10:30 ---
SRPM:
http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/xmltv/xmltv-0.5.53-1.fc8.kwizart.src.rpm
SPEC:
http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/xmltv/xmltv.spec
Summary: A set of
Thorsten Leemhuis pisze:
> On 14.10.2008 11:57, Xavier Lamien wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> I skimmed through owners.list for my packages and it seems the setup is
>>> not entirely right. Since the packages I maintain in nonfree are al
On 12.10.2008 10:19, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
--- On Tue, 10/7/08, Orcan Ogetbil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
orphaned | KmPg2 | Not found in free-devel
orphaned | KmPg2 | Not found in free-F-8
orphaned | KmPg2 | Not found in free-F-9
orphaned | mamory | Not found in free-devel
orphaned | mamory | Not
Hi!
just thought I write down a rough list of things that I plan to do for
RPM Fusion over the next couple of weeks. I'm sending it here in the
hope that some people help me with some of those task; then we hopefully
get RPM Fusion running quite soon.
Here is a updated version; most importan
On 14.10.2008 00:05, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
I've been thinking if there's any interest in creating a testing
community within rpmfusion
>
If there is any interest
Hows accessible is wiki?
I can't remember exactly, but I think you can edit if once you
registered (and if not then it
Brought over there from fedora-devel; see
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-October/msg01408.html
for details.
On 14.10.2008 18:49, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Note, nearly all of livna's packages have been imported and build for
RPM Fusion, but a few are
On 14.10.2008 11:21, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 05:30:12PM +1100, Marc Bradshaw wrote:
The packaged version uses the same upstream as the debian package. The
deb copyrights file states "Everyone is permitted to do anything on this
program including copying, modifying, and i
On 14.10.2008 11:57, Xavier Lamien wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I skimmed through owners.list for my packages and it seems the setup is
not entirely right. Since the packages I maintain in nonfree are also
comaintained by Chris Stone, I beli
Hi!
Find below a cut'n'pasted and slightly enhanced version of a post from
my blog FYI:
As you'll likely have heard by now: RPM Fusion ( http://rpmfusion.org ),
the merger of Dribble, Freshrpms and Livna gets closer to its official
release/start. Most of the packages from Livna have been im
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Julian Sikorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I skimmed through owners.list for my packages and it seems the setup is
> not entirely right. Since the packages I maintain in nonfree are also
> comaintained by Chris Stone, I believe for qmc2 and sdlmame* he sh
On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 05:30:12PM +1100, Marc Bradshaw wrote:
> >
> The packaged version uses the same upstream as the debian package. The
> deb copyrights file states "Everyone is permitted to do anything on this
> program including copying, modifying, and improving, unless you try to
> prete
Hi,
I skimmed through owners.list for my packages and it seems the setup is
not entirely right. Since the packages I maintain in nonfree are also
comaintained by Chris Stone, I believe for qmc2 and sdlmame* he should
be added to initialcc, and in the case where Chris is the primary
maintainer (sdl
28 matches
Mail list logo
