Re: Pushing the extra AppData files into Rawhide

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:34 AM, David Timms dti...@iinet.net.au wrote: On 01/04/15 12:54, Bill Nottingham wrote: David Timms (dti...@iinet.net.au) said: ... I thought about trying to reliably parse major/minor/subminor versions in bash, and track it against where things were implemented.

Re: To Whomever: You Made My Day

Sweetness! On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Máirín Duffy du...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On 02/26/2015 08:31 AM, John Florian wrote: Yesterday I was browsing the Fedora pkgdb/git/bohdi pages and this morning I returned to go backwards thru my web browser history when I stumbled upon a real

Re: qt5 as default?

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:33 PM, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote: Obviously upstream support will mainly dictate this, but is there any distro wide sense yet if one should consider Qt5 as the preferred default over Qt4 for a given Fedora release? -- Orion Poplawski Technical

Re: F23 System Wide Change: Mono 4

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Moez Roy moez@gmail.com wrote: Mono is updated in Rawhide. Can a proven-packager run a script to rebuild

Re: F23 System Wide Change: Mono 4

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Mono is updated in Rawhide. Can a proven-packager run a script to rebuild all the packages that require mono. -Thanks. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F23 System Wide Change: Mono 4

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Moez Roy moez@gmail.com wrote: Mono is updated in Rawhide. Can a proven-packager run a script to rebuild all the packages that require mono. -Thanks. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Unresponsive maintainer for libiscsi

Hello all, I've been trying to get in touch with Paulo Bonzini (bonzini) about the version of libiscsi in Fedora. I've not been able to get ahold of him by his Red Hat email address, Bugzilla, or IRC. Has anyone been able to contact him? -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel

Re: fedup for F23 and beyond

Uhh, this might be a stupid question, but what actually prevents us from integrating the FedUp process into install media (that is, not live images)? I mean, yeah, it's nice that we can do upgrades online, but what about when the system we need to upgrade doesn't necessarily have online access?

Re: fedup for F23 and beyond

On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Will Woods wwo...@redhat.com wrote: On Sun, 2015-06-07 at 07:41 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: Uhh, this might be a stupid question, but what actually prevents us from integrating the FedUp process into install media (that is, not live images)? I mean, yeah, it's nice

Re: git perl-less build?

Has anyone written a Python git client based on dulwich https://www.samba.org/~jelmer/dulwich/ that could be used in Atomic? If I remember correctly, we still include Python in Atomic images... On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 3, 2015, at 05:23

Re: virt-manager - libappindicator-gtk3 - remmina

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - On 3 June 2015 at 11:28, Pavel Alexeev pa...@hubbitus.info wrote: ​snip​ If I remember correctly there was a time when people were discussing about bringing Unity in Fedora. This did

DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package

Hey all, I've noticed that when dkms is installed, it's not grabbing the right kernel-devel package as a dependency. Instead, it grabs kernel-debug-devel. This occurs on Fedora 21 and 22, and I'm not sure why. If I install kernel-devel first, everything is fine. Otherwise, it grabs the wrong

Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?

Hey all, Over the last few months (since Fedora 22 beta's release), I've been using Btrfs as my daily driver filesystem across a multitude of machines. After Fedora 22 released, I tried it with RAID 5 and RAID 6 enabled on a few machines with fantastic success (there aren't even any scary

Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Gerald B. Cox gb...@bzb.us wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014

Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 June 2015 at 18:40, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: That is precisely why I'm asking on this list. I don't know who those people are, and this is really the best place I know of to start contact

Re: F23 Self Contained Change: Cloud Systemd Networkd

I know this is a little off-topic, but why don't we use systemd-networkd in Fedora proper as a replacement for the ifcfg scripts when NetworkManager isn't desired? Or at least provide it as an alternative option to NetworkManager and ifcfg scripts in general? On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:34 AM, Jan

Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 June 2015 at 14:15, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Gerald B. Cox gb...@bzb.us wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: As I

Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: What about some kind of virtual provides defined in repos/rpm/somewhere that would automatically grab the kernel-devel package associated

Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: What about some kind of virtual provides defined in repos/rpm/somewhere

Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package

kernel-PAE-devel matching kernel-PAE, in this fantasy land I invented. [...] CU thl -Dan On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis fed...@leemhuis.info mailto:fed...@leemhuis.info wrote: On 09.06.2015 21:04, Neal Gompa wrote: I've noticed that when dkms

Re: Can soft dependencies help to get the proper kernel-devel packages? (Was: Soft- Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package)

dependencies help to get the proper kernel-devel packages? (Was: Soft- Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package) Josh Boyer wrote on 12.06.2015 13:55: On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: [...] As I said, there are no great solutions here

Re: Can soft dependencies help to get the proper kernel-devel packages? (Was: Soft- Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote: On 06/12/2015 02:48 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: Soft/weak dependencies are allowed, according to FESCo It doesn't matter much what FESCO says of believes in this case. ATM, neither is the technical infrastructure

Re: Can soft dependencies help to get the proper kernel-devel packages? (Was: Soft- Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote: On 06/12/2015 03:23 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote: On 06/12/2015 02:48 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: Soft/weak dependencies are allowed, according to FESCo

Re: RFC: LiveUSB Creator Revamped

It's not nonsense to be able to put Server Product on USB. I've installed Fedora Server on servers that way myself. Not so sure about Cloud images, though. Those generally get uploaded to somewhere else to be used. On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Martin Bříza mbr...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu,

Re: Reviving Fedora MIPS

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Michal Toman michal.to...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings everyone, you might know me from my former work on ABRT, or later Power and s390. For the last few months however, I have been collaborating with Imagination Technologies to bring back Fedora for MIPS. A

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Is it time to allow Chromium in Fedora?

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:11:39PM -0400, Gary Gatling wrote: I realize we have our guidelines and we're not Debian, Suse or Ubuntu... and that's a good thing. But, if we're making exceptions for Firefox

Re: Rawhide plans

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Bill Nottingham nott...@splat.cc wrote: Rex Dieter (rdie...@math.unl.edu) said: Kevin Fenzi wrote: * Matt opened a thread on the marketing list about renaming rawhide. It sounds like most people would prefer us to make the changes first, then and

Re: Build root prepared by DNF is way larger

Do we have a switch or configuration option for that yet? On Aug 18, 2015 5:27 PM, Heiko Adams m...@fedora-blog.de wrote: Am Dienstag, den 18.08.2015, 14:54 -0400 schrieb Matthew Miller: Hmmm. I think that for the buildroot case, we probably want DNF to _not_ installer Recommended packages.

Re: bodhi 2 now live

On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote: On 23/08/15 16:36 -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Hi On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: No, sorry, but that is not true. I wrote those update notes in the Bodhi 1 web interface, so of course I looked

Re: Do you know how many 64-bit architectures Fedora has?

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz mjuszkiew...@redhat.com wrote: W dniu 24.08.2015 o 15:18, Neal Gompa pisze: ​ Oh, yes! I was trying to find something like this all weekend for my Copr for reprepro. I have to make a patch to access apt-methods in /usr/lib64 on 64-bit

Re: Do you know how many 64-bit architectures Fedora has?

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote: On 24/08/15 14:39 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 24/08/15 09:31 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: ​Well, the problem is that ​the path to apt-methods is hardcoded in reprepro itself. Thankfully, it's in a #define, but I

Re: Do you know how many 64-bit architectures Fedora has?

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz mjuszkiew...@redhat.com wrote: Hi During last few days I fetched over 26 thousand of Fedora package repositories. Plan to go though all spec files and submit some patches mainly related to my aarch64 work. We live in a world where most

Re: Do you know how many 64-bit architectures Fedora has?

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote: On 24/08/15 10:06 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote: Oops, to keep the quotes it would be -DSTD_METHOD_DIR='%{_libdir}/apt/methods' ​Would

Re: Do you know how many 64-bit architectures Fedora has?

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 24.08.2015 um 16:27 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com mailto:jwak...@redhat.comwrote: On 24/08/15 10:06 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: On Mon, Aug

Re: Same comand names in /usr/bin and /usr/sbin

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 17.08.2015 um 01:22 schrieb Nico Kadel-Garcia: On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am

Re: [HEADS UP] rpm-4.12.90 in rawhide

On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 5:37 AM, Florian Festi ffe...@redhat.com wrote: On 07/28/2015 09:43 AM, Lubos Kardos wrote: Support in rpm is not enough but libsolv supports rich deps since the version 0.6.9 too thus rich deps work also in hawkey and dnf if the version 0.6.9 or a newer version

Re: gpg keys of older/newer fedora versions

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Ryan S. Brown rya...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/01/2015 03:25 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 10:40:45AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 17:28:48 + Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote: [In

Re: Heads up: F23 products/spins, weak rpm dependencies, and you

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Adam Jackson a...@redhat.com wrote: In Fedora 23, rpm has grown support for weak dependencies (Recommends: and Suggests: tags). However, the compose tools have not been ported to dnf/libsolv yet, which means these tags will have no effect at image compose

Re: Heads up: F23 products/spins, weak rpm dependencies, and you

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Brian C. Lane b...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 10:38:07AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: In Fedora 23, rpm has grown support for weak dependencies (Recommends: and Suggests: tags). However, the compose tools have not been ported to dnf/libsolv

Re: Is it time to allow Chromium in Fedora?

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Gerald B. Cox gb...@bzb.us wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote: What packaging exceptions are being made for Firefox? They can be found here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries -- devel

Metadata signing for rawhide

In the rpm-ecosystem mailing list, Michael Schroeder from SUSE brought up that we don't sign the metadata for the rawhide repository http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-ecosystem/Week-of-Mon-20150803/000193.html and it would be nice if it was signed so that he could be sure that the mirrors didn't

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Petr Stodulka pstod...@redhat.com wrote: On 14.8.2015 14:38, Wei-Lun Chao wrote: Hi, Is there already any discussion about: rename arch name noarch to all rename arch name x86_64 to amd64 rename package name kernel-PAE to kernel and even rename package

Re: noarch vs. all, x86_64 vs. amd64, kernel vs. linux and PAE

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Sérgio Basto ser...@serjux.com wrote: On Sáb, 2015-08-15 at 21:22 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: On 8/14/15, Wei-Lun Chao blue...@member.fsf.org wrote: Hi, Is there already any discussion about: rename arch name noarch to all rename arch name

Re: Is it time to allow Chromium in Fedora?

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote: Once upon a time, Gerald B. Cox gb...@bzb.us said: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote: What packaging exceptions are being made for Firefox? They can be found here:

Re: ncurses update to 6.0

On Aug 5, 2015 2:55 AM, Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:09:34AM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On 4 August 2015 at 04:33, Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote: As for updating the ncurses package, my current plan is to build the libs in

Re: Improving our processes for new contributors.

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote: On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:23:34 +0200 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 21.7.2015 v 15:23 Neal Gompa napsal(a): It's extraordinarily slow right now, and builders don't have the level of availability needed

Re: Improving our processes for new contributors.

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 21.7.2015 v 19:28 Neal Gompa napsal(a): ​ Accessing the Copr site is as slow as trying to search our Bugzilla (which is very slow indeed). Opening up pages describing Copr repos is slow too. I occasionally get

Re: Is %autosetup another unwanted baby of Fedora?

of inadequate documentation and lack of mentorship. The latter is a people problem that's difficult to solve, but the former is much more easily solved once we actually know *what* RPM can do and how to illustrate it. -- Neal Gompa (FAS: ngompa) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https

Re: Proposal: Drop comps

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote: Dne 14.7.2015 v 11:49 Neal Gompa napsal(a): On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com mailto:vondr...@redhat.com vondr...@redhat.comwrote: Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them

Re: Proposal: Drop comps

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Can we just drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down significantly)? I know that this will not happen from day to day, but I see the comps just as an ugly

Re: Fedora developer portal - proof of concept

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote: On 21/07/15 15:45 +0200, Petr Hracek wrote: Feel free to send us any comment or improvements. We would like to improve Fedora for developers. Just contents are missing. Under The latest stable runtimes and

Re: Improving our processes for new contributors.

. -- Neal Gompa (FAS: ngompa) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Hosting End-Of-Life Fedora Base images?

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: Isn't it true the install media ISOs are available indefinitely? And if so the security cat is already out of the bag, so that's not a very good argument. I'd say if we wanted to do something better it would be an

Re: Self Introduction: Dutch Lamberson

Welcome Chris! While unfortunately I cannot do anything about sponsorship/formal review, I did leave a few notes on your Bugzilla that you can chew over. Also, I strongly suggest you use Copr[0] to continuously test your build changes. It makes it much easier to see results and do more immediate

Re: make unmaintained ??

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:21 PM, drago01 wrote: > On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > > > On Oct 25, 2015 12:53, "Jan Kratochvil" > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew

Re: make unmaintained ??

On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > I built 4.1 for rawhide. If that checks out to be OK, I can push > > an update for F23 also. > > I do not understand why a major rebase

Re: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

Hey Jason, In regards to boolean/rich dependencies, DNF should support them fine, because libsolv (the depsolver library) does. During the F23 development cycle, libsolv's support for them was switched on, and as of F23 release, they should work. As for the build system, Koji should be able to

Re: Freerdp update with bundle in guacamole-server

On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Pavel Alexeev wrote: > Hello. > > More than half year in the past freerdp was updated and then reverted > version to current present [1], mostly to allow built guacamole-server [2]. > > As I see it still stick with that version. > Meantime

python3-libs and python3-devel both provide libpython3.5m.so.1.0 in rawhide?

Hello, I started trying to build packages for Fedora rawhide using various build environments (mock, obs-build, etc.), and I found an odd problem: some build environments (such as the openSUSE Build Service) cannot build to rawhide anymore since the python35 merge because both python3-devel and

Re: Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Petr Hracek wrote: > Hello folks, > > I am happy to announce that Fedora Developer Portal is released. > Official web address is http://developer.fedoraproject.org. > > ​Great! Though it seems that developer.fedoraproject.org seems to have a

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 01:28:07 + > Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > On Dom, 2015-11-01 at 17:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Sérgio Basto > > > wrote: >

Re: COPR for ARM?

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 11:19:00 -0600 (CST) > Jerry Vonau wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > I really like being able to use COPR to build rpms, what a great > > tool. Be nice to have a one stop shop under one roof for

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 07.11.2015 um 19:01 schrieb Kevin Kofler: > >> Reindl Harald wrote: >> >>> well, who's to say that we stay forever on a level of CPU >>> feature-support while there are instruction sets available for a whole

Re: COPR for ARM?

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 7, 2015 13:50, "Neal Gompa" <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > ​Why don't we do emulated builds (like how OBS does it for ARM)?​ > > > > > > The

Re: Fedora Developer Portal - released !!!!

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Petr Hracek <phra...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 11/02/2015 02:46 PM, Petr Hracek wrote: > > On 11/02/2015 02:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Petr Hracek < <phra...@redhat.com> > phra...@redhat.com> wrote

Re: What license is this?

Err, to answer your question, the License tag should read "BSD". On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > 3-clause BSD. https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Neal Becker <ndbeck...@gmail

Re: What license is this?

3-clause BSD. https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Neal Becker wrote: > I'm trying to package python-cycler for matplotlib. It has the attached > LICENSE file. What should I put for license: tag? > -- > devel mailing list >

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 8:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > drago01 wrote: > > They might compile something and send it to someone that happens to > > use a different distro ... > > … which 99% of the time will not work anyway no matter what we do because > glibc has only

Re: Recommended way of proposing changes in someone else Fedora packages configuration

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Marcin Zajączkowski wrote: > Thanks for your responses, guys! > > On 2015-10-18 16:57, Christopher wrote: > > To support this, I try to keep a mirror in GitHub for my packages... But > > it's hard to stay in sync sometimes and nobody really knows

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Jared K. Smith wrote: > > I think this strikes a fair balance between promoting packaging hygiene > > and recognizing that not all upstream communities feel the same way > Fedora > > packagers do about bundled

Re: New package distribution-gpg-keys

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 15.10.2015 v 23:23 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a): > > Hello, > > > > Please forgive my ignorance, but how is this supposed to be used? I > > guess it's handy to keep track of all the current keys, but unlike, > >

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjo...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 03:54:41PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjo...@redhat.com> > > wrote: > > > Are we using a b

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:58:39PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 10:47:22AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > > as of this morning US time we have changed the way rawhide buildroots >

Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

Hello all, Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that use CMake for the build system for various distros, and I've noticed something rather peculiar. Of all the distros I've built packages for (Fedora/CentOS, openSUSE, Mageia, Debian, and Ubuntu), only Fedora/CentOS

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Orion Poplawski <or...@cora.nwra.com> wrote: > On 10/10/2015 02:25 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that >> use CMake for the build system f

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Haïkel <hgue...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > 2015-10-11 2:14 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com>: > > > > I pretty much wound up doing that, but I wanted to know if there was a > > reason for not having it built into

Re: rawhide buildroot creation changes

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 15:54:41 -0400 > Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones > > <rjo...@redhat.com> wrote: > > ...

Re: Query: %cmake not doing out-of-tree builds?

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Haïkel <hgue...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > 2015-10-10 22:25 GMT+02:00 Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com>: > > Hello all, > > > > Over the last few weeks, I've been working on a number of packages that > use > > CMak

Re: repodata size

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 09.10.2015 um 21:41 schrieb Orion Poplawski: > >> On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> >>> >>> From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata >>> pulled down so DNF can

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek < zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:38:30AM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > On 10/09/2015 10:27 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 09:46:11AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > >> On

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kof...@chello.at> wrote: > Neal Gompa wrote: > > ​At this point in time, Fedora is the only major distribution I know of > > that doesn't use versioned shared library package names. Both SUSE and > > Mageia do, and

Re: Best practice to determine which packages need to be rebuilt

Ideally, Koschei[0] should be doing this for us, right? [0]: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > I frequently see various incantations that people use to determine what > packages need to be rebuilt based on an

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Haïkel wrote: > 2015-10-09 1:17 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kofler : > > Haïkel wrote: > >> Not that I'm 100% happy with the way it happened but this has been a > >> very long-lived topic. To some, it'll be a hasty decision,

Re: RPM Weak Dependencies and the install media compose process

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote: From my perspective, there are three ways that we could choose to go: 1) Follow the default DNF behavior: Requires: and Recommends: packages are included on the install media (and therefore also installed together

Re: [RFC] Switching to SPDX in license tags

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Hi, I would like to get feedback from Fedora Legal and also my fellow contributors about considering SPDX. SPDX (Software Package Data

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Vít Ondruch <vondr...@redhat.com> wrote: > Dne 18.11.2015 v 15:53 Neal Gompa napsal(a): >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Panu Matilainen >> <pmati...@laiskiainen.org> wrote: >>> Right. Only took eight years for anybody

Re: Freerdp update with bundle in guacamole-server

;fo...@hubbitus.com.ru> wrote: > Hello Neal. > If I right understand you are maintainer of guacamole? Do you wish proceed > with freerdp-compat package only? > > 09.11.2015 13:11, Pavel Alexeev пишет: > > 08.11.2015 23:38, Neal Gompa пишет: > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Pav

Re: when DEP-3 compliant patches in Fedora?

On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/28/2015 02:11 PM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: Hi I am building software for misc distributions for over 11 years. And so far Fedora packages are the worst of those I played with (mostly OpenEmbedded and

Re: Sane ownCloud alternatives (was: Re: Looking for new maintainer: ownCloud (Fedora / EPEL))

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Martin Kolman wrote: > On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 12:13 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote: > > On 2015-08-31, 07:05 GMT, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > Again, if it works for Adam (or anybody else) it is awesome, but > > > > I would strongly discourage

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Adam Williamson < adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2015-09-10 at 11:02 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > > > > > > "SG" == Stephen Gallagher writes: > > > > SG> Right now, we have a policy that essentially forbids source

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Sex, 2015-09-11 at 22:41 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: > > > > On 09/11/2015 09:09 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > > What does Fedora users gain with "dnf > > > install rails" or "dnf install ipython" versus "gem

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > Dne 11.9.2015 v 14:46 Germano Massullo napsal(a): > >> I have read the whole discussion and I would like to share my opinion, >> even if I think it could be a bit off-topic. >> Given that Fedora community alone, cannot

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Ian Malone wrote: > On 15 September 2015 at 10:11, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson > wrote: > > > > > > On 09/15/2015 08:41 AM, Ian Malone wrote: > >> > >> On 14 September 2015 at 16:47, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson < > johan...@gmail.com>

Re: dnf is completly broken

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: > > > Am 27.09.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Neal Gompa: > >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 27.09.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones: >&g

Re: dnf is completly broken

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 27.09.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones: > >> This is quite tiresome. dnf clearly isn't "completely broken". It >> may have a bug, but the correct place to put that is in Bugzilla. >> > > a package

Re: dnf is completly broken

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Germano Massullo < germano.massu...@gmail.com> wrote: > In past days I experienced the following problem > "dnf install" exits if there is a non existing package in the requested > packages list" > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268606 > > ​Do you

createrepo_c and DeltaRPMs...

Hello all, I don't know if many have actually tried to use createrepo_c to generate repositories with DeltaRPMs in it, but it hasn't actually been working (much to my surprise when trying to use the tool for some repositories at work). So, I filed a bug about it, like any responsible user of

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > Just to circle around here (in case people don't read my reply to the > FESCo meeting agenda), I'm making the following revised proposal[1] to > FESCo which may or may not be discussed at today's meeting (given that

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 09/30/2015 04:25 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> the opposite is more likely: people trying to avoid the FPC burden now >> > can declare it without fearing somebody takes notice and points out a >> violation >> > If

Orphaning tinymce, tinymce-spellchecker

I packaged tinymce and tinymce-spellchecker years ago in an effort to get another package in. That effort was unsuccessful and I don't really have the desire to continue "owning" them, as I cannot make sense of it enough to keep maintaining them. I should have done this a long time ago. If anyone

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >