On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 06:50:56PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 21:53 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
It happens too often in
Rawhide, and a simple test (in %check or elsewhere) could fix it.
You can't really test a system boot in a package's %check. That's very
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 08:09 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 06:50:56PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 21:53 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
It happens too often in
Rawhide, and a simple test (in %check or elsewhere) could fix it.
You
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 11:46 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 11:17 +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
Don't try to be smart to everyone, it does not work. IMHO all you
need is to support one or a very few scenarios (complete scenarios
without customization) and a way how to
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 09:17 +0100, Vratislav Podzimek wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 11:46 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 11:17 +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
Don't try to be smart to everyone, it does not work. IMHO all you
need is to support one or a very few scenarios
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:12:59AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 08:09 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 06:50:56PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 21:53 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
It happens too often in
На 26.02.2014 15:56, David Howells написа:
Alexander Todorov atodo...@redhat.com wrote:
How about making %check a packaging requirement in all cases - run tests or
add a comment explaining why not, how to run them (e.g. make test) or why
there are no tests for this package.
Does %check
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Alexander Todorov atodo...@redhat.com wrote:
На 26.02.2014 15:56, David Howells написа:
Alexander Todorov atodo...@redhat.com wrote:
How about making %check a packaging requirement in all cases - run tests
or
add a comment explaining why not, how to run
Hi,
at yesterday's FESCo meeting, it was agreed on setting deadlines
for Change submission for Fedora 21 [1] and to process PRDs into
Change proposals.
AGREED: Fedora Changes Process submission deadline for system-wide
changes is April 7th. Deadline for true standalone changes will be
sometime
Hey everyone,
my name is Till Hofmann and I'm a student working for the Knowledge
Based Systems Group ( http://kbsg.rwth-aachen.de/ ) at RWTH Aachen
University in Germany. Since we are packaging the robotics software
framework Fawkes ( http://fawkesrobotics.org/ ) for Fedora, I joined the
project
Hi David,
On Friday, 2014-02-14 17:48:42 +0100, David Tardon wrote:
It was mainly a communication problem: I was prepared to handle the
rebuilds, but when Eike did not ping me that he built new ICU, I assumed
that he got hold of some other provenpackager :-(
Ok, next time I'll explicitly
Hi Jakub,
On Friday, 2014-02-14 13:40:26 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
upstream to consider providing stable API/ABI, symbol versioning etc.?
I mean, if a shared library has 1-2 users, we can still live with it being
in constant flux, but for a widely used shared library stable public ABI is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/27/2014 12:18 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 26, 2014, at 5:33 PM, Josef Bacik jo...@toxicpanda.com
mailto:jo...@toxicpanda.com wrote:
Just popping in here to say that btrfs is not ready to be default
in Fedora yet. Optional is fine
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:12:59AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 08:09 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 06:50:56PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/27/2014 07:53 AM, Rui Tiago Cação Matos wrote:
On 27 February 2014 13:43, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com
wrote:
Formal proposal (for discussion): All three products agree to use
ext4 for /boot and XFS-on-LVM for all other partitions
Fortunately for me, I set it
up on LVM. I went out, bought a new hard drive, inserted it, added it
to the volume group and then ran 'pvmove' to migrate all of the
sectors off of the original drive to the new one.
What did you do with your /boot partition?
-Jacob
--
devel mailing list
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 08:04:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
The kernels that are built are tested at a minimum on 3 machines
before I even put them to git.
I didn't realize this happened, so my apologies for making claims
about testing which aren't true. Is it possible you can boot them in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/27/2014 08:10 AM, Jacob Yundt wrote:
Fortunately for me, I set it up on LVM. I went out, bought a new
hard drive, inserted it, added it to the volume group and then
ran 'pvmove' to migrate all of the sectors off of the original
drive to the
commit c5b20c8480106ec8a4336facddceadb794bcb1a8
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Thu Feb 27 13:17:45 2014 +
Fix bogus date in %changelog
perl-MooseX-GlobRef.spec |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-MooseX-GlobRef.spec
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 08:04:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
The kernels that are built are tested at a minimum on 3 machines
before I even put them to git.
I didn't realize this happened, so my apologies for making
Hi folks,
thanks for your feedback in the last few days. I've created two wiki pages about
packages which don't execute their tests in %check:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Testing_in_check
and another one for packages which don't seem to have test suites at all:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:55:02PM +0200, Alexander Todorov wrote:
Hi folks,
thanks for your feedback in the last few days. I've created two wiki
pages about packages which don't execute their tests in %check:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Testing_in_check
Of the two packages that have
= Proposed System Wide Change: Remove python-setuptools-devel =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_Python-setuptools-devel
Change owner(s): Toshio Kuratomi tos...@fedoraproject.org
The python-setuptools package has carried a virtual Provide for python-
setuptools-devel since 2009 for
На 27.02.2014 16:18, Richard W.M. Jones написа:
Attached is a proposed patch to the spec file. I ran this under
auto-buildrequires to see if it would need any extra BRs, but auto-br
didn't find any.
Richard,
can you point me to what auto-buildrequires is, where it lives and how do I use
commit 683abcf3da2f31f072b9868faebdb3d9d1b7a80a
Author: lbazan lba...@fedoraproject.org
Date: Thu Feb 27 10:50:36 2014 -0500
new upstream version
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Perlbal-XS-HTTPHeaders.spec |7 +--
sources |2 +-
3 files
= Proposed System Wide Change: Access control in PCSC =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PcscAccessControl
Change owner(s): Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos n...@redhat.com
Add access control to PC/SC smart cards available in the system. Adding access
control would (a) prevent unauthorized
= Proposed System Wide Change: Ruby 2.1 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.1
Change owner(s): Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com
Ruby 2.1 is the latest stable version of Ruby, with major increases in speed,
memory efficiency and reliability. With this major update from Ruby 2.0.0 in
Interesting :
fedora-release-notes
***-fonts
Can someone point me how to test them?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:49:05PM +0200, Alexander Todorov wrote:
На 27.02.2014 16:18, Richard W.M. Jones написа:
Attached is a proposed patch to the spec file. I ran this under
auto-buildrequires to see if it would need any extra BRs, but auto-br
didn't find any.
Richard,
can you
= Proposed System Wide Change: System-wide crypto policy =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CryptoPolicy
Change owner(s): Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos n...@redhat.com
Unify the crypto policies used by different applications and libraries. That is
allow setting a consistent security level for
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com
wrote:
and being applied after executing update-crypto-profiles.
(Note: it would be better to have a daemon that watches those files
and
runs update-crypto-profiles automatically)
Was the option of patching the libraries
On Feb 27, 2014 8:25 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: System-wide crypto policy =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CryptoPolicy
== Detailed Description ==
The idea is to have some predefined security levels such as LEVEL-80,
LEVEL-128,
Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
= Proposed System Wide Change: System-wide crypto policy =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CryptoPolicy
Change owner(s): Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos n...@redhat.com
Unify the crypto policies used by different applications and libraries. That
Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) said:
Directed more broadly at all three products:
Formal proposal (for discussion): All three products agree to use ext4
for /boot and XFS-on-LVM for all other partitions in the guided
mode. All is fair game in the custom mode.
Also, for the sake
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 02:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Miloslav Trmač wrote:
I fully agree with you testers giving +1 is not even close to proper
validation, but what alternative to get proper validation do you propose
as an improvement? Dropping autokarma would replace broken validation
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: System-wide crypto policy =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CryptoPolicy
Change owner(s): Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos n...@redhat.com
Unify the crypto policies used by different
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 16:35 +, Colin Walters wrote:
wrote:
and being applied after executing update-crypto-profiles. (Note: it
would be better to have a daemon that watches those files and runs
update-crypto-profiles automatically)
Was the option of patching the libraries to *directly*
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 08:42 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
After that the administrator should be assured that any application
that uses the system settings will follow a policy that adheres to
the configured profile.
Ideally setting a profile should be setting:
* the acceptable TLS/SSL
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 10:12 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
== Detailed Description ==
The idea is to have some predefined security levels such as LEVEL-80,
LEVEL-128, LEVEL-256,
or ENISA-LEGACY, ENISA-FUTURE, SUITEB-128, SUITEB-256. These will be the
security levels
that the
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
Unify the crypto policies used by different applications and libraries. That
is
allow setting a consistent security level for crypto on all applications in a
Fedora system.
As others have noted, crypto tech
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
n...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 10:12 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
== Detailed Description ==
The idea is to have some predefined security levels such as LEVEL-80,
LEVEL-128, LEVEL-256,
or ENISA-LEGACY,
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:52:01AM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
= Proposed System Wide Change: System-wide crypto policy =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CryptoPolicy
Change owner(s): Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos n...@redhat.com
Unify
On 27 February 2014 10:58, Andrew Lutomirski l...@mit.edu wrote:
We have to document that, but there will be always ways to shoot
someones foot. There are legitimate uses of increasing a security level
(if one for example sets up machines to be used in a LAN).
If someone sets
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 February 2014 10:58, Andrew Lutomirski l...@mit.edu wrote:
We have to document that, but there will be always ways to shoot
someones foot. There are legitimate uses of increasing a security level
(if
On Feb 27, 2014, at 5:43 AM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:
Question for the cloud folks:
I realize that XFS is a difficult pill to swallow for /boot, due to
your use of syslinux instead of GRUB2. If the Server and Workstation
groups decide to settle on both using
Hi,
I am Julien Enselme, a French student in engineering. I have been a
Linux user for 5 years and a fedora user for ~4 years.
Some of the packages I need are not yet available in Fedora. Thus I
would like to become a package maintainer.
I have submitted two reviews :
- python-svgwrite to
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:43:53AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I realize that XFS is a difficult pill to swallow for /boot, due to
your use of syslinux instead of GRUB2. If the Server and Workstation
groups decide to settle on both using XFS-on-LVM for the main
partitions, we could
On Feb 27, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 5:43 AM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:
Question for the cloud folks:
I realize that XFS is a difficult pill to swallow for /boot, due to
your use of syslinux instead of GRUB2.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2014-02-27/fedora-meeting-1.2014-02-27-15.00.log.html
OK super, pretty much all Server WG questions are answered. That was easy.
Summary is they are going to go with
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 13:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 5:43 AM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:
Question for the cloud folks:
I realize that XFS is a difficult pill to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:01:47 -0500
Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:43:53AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I realize that XFS is a difficult pill to swallow for /boot, due to
your use of syslinux instead
Hello! My name is James Wilson Harshaw IV. I have been using Fedora for
a few years now, but recently really wanted to get more involved.
I have a pretty good amount of knowledge in C, C++, PHP, Perl, Golang,
and Java. I hope to use this knowledge to benefit the project.
A little about me: I
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:01:47 -0500
Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:43:53AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I realize that XFS is a
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:03:06PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
Or, as an alternative, XFS support could be added to u-boot and/or
syslinux. Never eliminate the possibility of actually writing code to
fix problems. All it takes is someone willing to do work ;).
Right, and as I understand it,
A question I have is XFS worth it?
On 02/27/2014 04:06 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:03:06PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
Or, as an alternative, XFS support could be added to u-boot and/or
syslinux. Never eliminate the possibility of actually writing code to
fix problems.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:47:21PM -0800, Les Howell wrote:
My question may seem dumb, but will the systems still function without
the net? Cloud services are wonderful in their promise, but my
experience with availability of the net lead me to be suspicious, and
I don't see how this is
Summary of changes:
79265c5... 0.20 bump (*)
7fe63ab... 0.21 bump (*)
cc37780... Perl 5.18 rebuild (*)
15f3e4b... Disable the SO_REUSEPORT test; koji builders don't support (*)
f50cbc9... 5.18 rebuild merge (*)
66589ad... 0.22 bump (*)
ca163a1... - Rebuilt for
Summary of changes:
b624230... 0.27 bump, test suite enhancements only (*)
b700fd5... 0.28 bump (*)
8b1293e... 0.29 bump (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel
On Feb 27, 2014, at 1:13 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2014-02-27/fedora-meeting-1.2014-02-27-15.00.log.html
OK super, pretty much all Server WG
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 09:07 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 02:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Miloslav Trmač wrote:
I fully agree with you testers giving +1 is not even close to proper
validation, but what alternative to get proper validation do you propose
as an
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065043
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
perl-IO-Socket-IP-0.29-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-IO-Socket-IP-0.29-1.fc19
--
You are receiving
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:08:46PM -0500, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
A question I have is XFS worth it?
I have done some testing with RHEL 7 Beta which use XFS as a default file
system.
I have to recorgnize, that the -r switch of the lvresize command doesn't
cooperate
with xfs in oppoiste
Interesting. If someone could confirm that this remains true with Fedora
20, it would be extremely beneficial.
On 02/27/2014 05:02 PM, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:08:46PM -0500, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
A question I have is XFS worth it?
I have done some testing
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:08:46PM -0500, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
A question I have is XFS worth it?
I have done some testing with RHEL 7 Beta which use XFS as a default file
system.
I have to recorgnize,
On 2/27/14, 4:08 PM, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
Interesting. If someone could confirm that this remains true with Fedora 20,
it would be extremely beneficial.
With details, please, as Chris requested. doesn't cooperate is not enough to
go on. ;)
Thanks,
-Eric
On 02/27/2014 05:02 PM,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:08:46PM -0500, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
A question I have is XFS worth it?
I have done some testing with
So far my small of research shows it isn't that big of a problem. We should
look more into it thought.
On Feb 27, 2014 5:41 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Jochen Schmitt
On 2/27/14, 4:40 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:08:46PM -0500, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
A question I have is XFS
Haha! Error: stuff happened.
On Feb 27, 2014 6:02 PM, Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote:
On 2/27/14, 4:40 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com
wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de
wrote:
On 27 February 2014 15:02, Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:08:46PM -0500, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
A question I have is XFS worth it?
I have done some testing with RHEL 7 Beta which use XFS as a default file
system.
I have to recorgnize, that
Server Technical Specification Working Session
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2014-02-27/fedora-meeting-1.2014-02-27-15.00.log.html
16:06:36 sgallagh simo: To answer your question about overcommit: that is
*possible*, but we can be smarter about it in the default
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 16:03:06 -0500
Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:01:47 -0500
Matthew
Christopher Meng wrote:
Kevin, I think you are talking about releasing models...
I'm talking about having the maintainer actually OK the push to stable after
having checked the situation (or at least he/she is supposed to have checked
it!), rather than letting the update go out automatically
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 02:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
But again, I think that even with no other policy change, just
removing the
karma automatism misfeature from Bodhi would be an improvement.
Or requiring min time in updates-testing (2-3 days) before an
autokarma-assisted push.
Am 28.02.2014 03:54, schrieb Michael Catanzaro:
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 02:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
But again, I think that even with no other policy change, just
removing the
karma automatism misfeature from Bodhi would be an improvement.
Or requiring min time in updates-testing (2-3
On Feb 26, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
by default we put ext4 on LVM
The tool works in this use-case unless something has broken it recently.
It can be done, the convert tool should work, and Btrfs should work on any
device mapper
On 02/27/2014 11:20 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 26, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
by default we put ext4 on LVM
The tool works in this use-case unless something has broken it recently.
It can be done, the convert tool should work, and
On 2/27/14, 10:53 PM, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
On 02/27/2014 11:20 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 26, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
by default we put ext4 on LVM
The tool works in this use-case unless something has broken it
On 02/28/2014 12:41 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 2/27/14, 10:53 PM, James Wilson Harshaw IV wrote:
On 02/27/2014 11:20 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 26, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
by default we put ext4 on LVM
The tool works in this
On Feb 27, 2014, at 9:53 PM, James Wilson Harshaw IV jwhars...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 02/27/2014 11:20 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
In the context of the default ext4+LVM layout the conversion still means
separate /boot, /, and /home file systems. A major benefit of the Btrfs
layout is these
On 02/28/2014 12:57 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
All I mean is, you can't do an ext4-Btrfs conversion and get the Btrfs preset
the installer offers. You get something really different that not many people will
likely have. So if you're the audience who wants a recommended layout by using
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:56 PM, James Wilson Harshaw IV jwhars...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yet what was the main point that it wasn't ready yet?
It was easy to miss if you don't know the name Josef Bacik, but he's one of the
upstream Btrfs maintainers. He said here in this thread yesterday that it's
On 02/28/2014 01:03 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:56 PM, James Wilson Harshaw IV jwhars...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yet what was the main point that it wasn't ready yet?
It was easy to miss if you don't know the name Josef Bacik, but he's one of the
upstream Btrfs maintainers. He
On Feb 27, 2014, at 11:07 PM, James Wilson Harshaw IV jwhars...@gmail.com
wrote:
I apologize, I guess I did not get the whole background out of it.
What filesystems are we considering?
It's XFS vs ext4 and Server WG has agreed on XFS on LVM.
There's 92 messages in this thread, and they're
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Symbol-Global-Name:
95e374d0f0df78d593de208f651391d6 Symbol-Global-Name-0.05.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit 7e78b2611682e9eb97aca77c75b6d7429e98e778
Author: Ralf Corsépius corse...@fedoraproject.org
Date: Thu Feb 27 09:38:16 2014 +0100
Upstream update.
.gitignore |2 +-
perl-Symbol-Global-Name.spec |5 -
sources |2 +-
3 files
perl-PDL has broken dependencies in the epel-7 tree:
On ppc64:
perl-PDL-2.7.0-2.el7.1.ppc64 requires perl(PDL::Slatec)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
Summary of changes:
36a21b5... Perl 5.18 rebuild (*)
a933106... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Mass (*)
c5b20c8... Fix bogus date in %changelog (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
commit 400d3a777d5a4025b904cad8df8f00efcba12d40
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Thu Feb 27 14:05:47 2014 +
This package is intended for F-20 and EPEL-7 only
.gitignore |1 +
dead.package | 10 ++
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
---
diff
Package perl-TAP-Harness-Env in Fedora devel has been retired by pghmcfc
To make changes to this package see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/perl-TAP-Harness-Env
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
Summary of changes:
acd05f2... Update to 0.030 (*)
7b2a31a... Update to 0.032 (*)
8c1a5f1... Update to 0.033 (*)
d536e90... Update to 0.034 (*)
c80d397... Update to 0.035 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
The lightweight tag 'perl-MooseX-GlobRef-0.0701-9.el7' was created pointing to:
c5b20c8... Fix bogus date in %changelog
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The lightweight tag 'perl-MooseX-InsideOut-0.106-6.el7' was created pointing to:
b86b149... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_19_Mass
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Summary of changes:
acd05f2... Update to 0.030 (*)
7b2a31a... Update to 0.032 (*)
8c1a5f1... Update to 0.033 (*)
d536e90... Update to 0.034 (*)
c80d397... Update to 0.035 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1056343
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
perl-TAP-Harness-Env-3.30-3.fc20,perl-Module-Build-Tiny-0.035-1.fc20 has been
submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1056343
Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |MODIFIED
The lightweight tag 'perl-Module-Build-Tiny-0.035-1.fc20' was created pointing
to:
c80d397... Update to 0.035
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The lightweight tag 'perl-Module-Build-Tiny-0.035-1.el7' was created pointing
to:
c80d397... Update to 0.035
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The lightweight tag 'perl-Test-Prereq-1.037-11.el7' was created pointing to:
b5d28c9... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_19_Mass
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064689
Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|
commit 5b018c5df05229e84f8fd28948488565ffb8bcde
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Thu Feb 27 14:56:28 2014 +
We have Test::CheckDeps now
perl-MooseX-Role-WithOverloading.spec | 17 -
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
---
diff --git
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
