On 09/21/2011 05:33 PM, Till Maas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 04:43:38PM +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
And that's always fine and dandy if these issues are resolved in a
reasonable amount of time. Right now Rawhide has packages with
dependencies broken since pre-F15. This isn't acceptable.
On 09/21/2011 04:49 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:23:52 -0600
Jerry Jamesloganje...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 6:50 AM, Bruno Wolff IIIbr...@wolff.to
wrote:
Chain building is allowed for rawhide to help get groups of packages
built.
The chain-build facility
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 09:05:19PM -0700, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
Given the grub1/grub2 discussion that is going on, I could use some info
about the state of grubby's support for grub1. The virtual machine
images that the Cloud SIG publishes on Amazon EC2 do not require
bootloaders, but
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 09:58:53AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
(In short, pvgrub! I thought that was dead and buried a long time ago ..)
Of course I'm confusing this with PyGrub, that was the old horrible
thing. PvGrub is the shiny new thing.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Branched Report wrote:
Compose started at Tue Sep 20 08:15:41 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
This breakage is weird:
hosts3d-1.13-2.fc15.x86_64 requires libglfw.so.2.6()(64bit)
In Fedora 16, libglfw
On 09/22/2011 12:05 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Branched Report wrote:
Compose started at Tue Sep 20 08:15:41 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
This breakage is weird:
hosts3d-1.13-2.fc15.x86_64 requires
On 09/22/2011 11:31 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 09/22/2011 12:05 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Branched Report wrote:
Compose started at Tue Sep 20 08:15:41 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
This breakage is weird:
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 15:54 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
On 09/21/2011 03:39 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 18:48 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Remember that the incompatibility isn't between libguestfs and the
guest, it's between the host grub and the guest grub. Both of
On 09/22/2011 11:31 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 09/22/2011 12:05 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Branched Report wrote:
Compose started at Tue Sep 20 08:15:41 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
This breakage is weird:
On 09/22/2011 12:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/22/2011 11:31 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
Depends on how you want to resolve this. If you are going for
resurrecting the packages, then fix them up to build again and submit
new package review requests.
I have a version of libglfw which is
On 09/22/2011 01:11 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 09/22/2011 12:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 09/22/2011 11:31 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
Depends on how you want to resolve this. If you are going for
resurrecting the packages, then fix them up to build again and submit
new package review
On 09/20/2011 05:32 PM, Matthias Runge wrote:
Hi,
just a short status update:
* multi-registry
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739904
* python-wordpress-xmlrpc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739908
* python-import-utils (already reviewed and approved)
*
I was hoping to be able to work on a forked version of chess and have it
replace chess in Fedora, but I haven't had time to learn enough about
ogre to do this, and chess is broken enough now that there is no point
in including it any more. So I am looking at retiring it in f16+.
The current
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-9.fc16.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
On i386:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-9.fc16.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
Please resolve this as soon
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:27:35AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Sigh. I was joking. Obviously, if maintainers went around inserting
Conflicts with other packages because they don't like how the other
package works, then there'd be an order of magnitude more unpleasantness
on fedora-devel.
Late yesterday at the Go/No-Go meeting it was decided to slip the Beta
release of F16 by one week [1]. Minutes follow below.
There are numerous unresolved blockers at this time [2], resulting in
the inability to compose a viable release candidate.
As a result, ALL MAJOR MILESTONES, and their
On 09/22/2011 12:05 AM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
Given the grub1/grub2 discussion that is going on, I could use some info
about the state of grubby's support for grub1. The virtual machine
images that the Cloud SIG publishes on Amazon EC2 do not require
bootloaders, but they do require
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:32:11 +0100
Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org wrote:
...snip...
The first package is already in the build root.
Yes, but there's still a wait until it's actually available to build
against, though it's usually a wait of less than an hour rather than
the next day.
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 14:05 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:27:35AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Sigh. I was joking. Obviously, if maintainers went around inserting
Conflicts with other packages because they don't like how the other
package works, then there'd be
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 09:15:38AM +0200, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
I hope you don't suggest for every rebuild of few dependent packages one
FESCo ticket.
This is what is currently required to ask FES for help. It is certainly
a lot better and more efficient to open one FESCo and one FES
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 04:50:16PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 14:05 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The grub maintainer is telling you that the way in which you're trying
to use grub is broken. You *need* to use the grub files that are in
guest, not the host. This
On 09/22/2011 05:58 PM, Till Maas wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 09:15:38AM +0200, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
I hope you don't suggest for every rebuild of few dependent packages one
FESCo ticket.
This is what is currently required to ask FES for help. It is certainly
a lot better and more
# F16 Beta Blocker Review meeting #5
# Date: 2011-09-23
# Time: 17:00 UTC [1] (13:00 EDT, 10:00 PDT)
# Location: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
The fifth (and hopefully final) Fedora 16 beta blocker bug review
meeting will be this Friday at 17:00 UTC in #fedora-bugzappers. We'll
be
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 04:50:16PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 14:05 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The grub maintainer is telling you that the way in which you're trying
to use grub is broken. You *need* to
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 11:23 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, Tomas Mraz wrote:
solve a part of the problem how can you even consider removing the
ability for disabling dnssec when implementing and deploying and running
dnssec increases the complexity times hundred and
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
grub provides no mechanism for you to know that, which means you can't
reliably know that. Which means relying on them being compatible is
incorrect.
You described
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 12:37 +0200, Adam Tkac wrote:
On 09/20/2011 05:19 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 14:00 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
Hi developers of NM and Fedora,
We are trying to get DNSSEC validation on the end nodes. One way of doing
that is to run a caching
Hi,
Owing to limited time recently I have been unable to look into my
packages and so I am orphaning the following packages:
agave
gnujump
mausezahn
moe
peppy
gnurobots
It would be nice if someone can pick them up.
Thanks and Regards,
Vivek
--
devel mailing list
On 2011/09/22 17:37 (GMT+0100) Matthew Garrett composed:
There is no rational reason to have grub and grub2 installed on the same
system at once, and having them both there increases the complexity of
the system.
For which definition of system? My systems typically contain 20 or more
Here are the latest changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
---
The section of the Packaging Guidelines regarding Compiler Flags has
been updated and improved, most notably, to document handling of PIE
enabled packages.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags
---
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 01:06:51PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
Here are the latest changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
---
The section of the Packaging Guidelines regarding Compiler Flags has
been updated and improved, most notably, to document handling of PIE
enabled packages.
On 09/22/2011 01:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
That should be ... adds -fPIE (if -fPIC is not already present) ...
I'd say. At least I hope that's what the spec change does, the initial
version did that.
No, I'm fairly sure that it only adds -fPIC in scenarios where -fPIE is
not already passed.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
grub provides no mechanism for you to know that, which means you
can't
reliably know that. Which means relying on them being compatible
is
incorrect.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 01:59:33PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
On 09/22/2011 01:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
That should be ... adds -fPIE (if -fPIC is not already present) ...
I'd say. At least I hope that's what the spec change does, the initial
version did that.
No, I'm fairly sure
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 20:05 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
%rename cc1_options rh_cc1_options_old
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:02:15PM -0400, David Airlie wrote:
you run rpm -q grub in the guest and on the host, if they are the same nvr,
then they are the same package, where's the rocket science here.
No, that's not good enough. You need to know the version installed on
the system, not the
On 09/22/2011 02:02 PM, David Airlie wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
grub provides no mechanism for you to know that, which means you
can't
reliably know that. Which means relying on them being
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:18:10PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
%rename cc1_options rh_cc1_options_old
- Original Message -
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:19:29 -0400 (EDT)
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
Which rpmdiff are we talking about here?
The free/included in fedora one is not that great... it gives you
files
and deps that changed, but that doesn't help you
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Dan Williams wrote:
But I'm not really familiar with unbound. Is it a long-running service?
Yes, It's a fully dnssec validating caching resolver. You start it at boot
and leave it running.
What does its config file look like? Does it re-read config data on
SIGHUP?
You
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 20:22 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Such packages would be broken and would fail to link without hardening
or at least have text relocations too. Packagers shouldn't rely on
this spec hack to fix up their packaging bugs (or upstream bugs), the hack
should be just about
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:18 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
You described yourself how libguestfs could check it. And failing
libguestfs doing it, the user could be warned to check it.
'check' it? And what's the user expected to do if they're incorrect?
Crowbar Ubuntu's grub2 into Fedora, or
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:37:39PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
grub provides no mechanism for you to know that, which means you can't
reliably know that. Which
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 06:47, Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
I was hoping to be able to work on a forked version of chess and have it
replace chess in Fedora, but I haven't had time to learn enough about
ogre to do this, and chess is broken enough now that there is no point
in
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 07:38:54PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:37:39PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
I described something that is, practically speaking, impossible.
We allow you to inspect the guest to find the OS version, and even
versions of individual
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:18:48PM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
On 09/22/2011 02:02 PM, David Airlie wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
grub provides no mechanism for you to know that, which means
I think that's largely because we don't have a community of
engineers. We have a community of /packagers/ who are able to cause
packages to be built, and are able to do some measure of QA to see
if those builds work, but do not have the skill set to look at a
code diff and give a honest
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.atwrote:
(And besides, your example is about the worst you could pick, since if
somebody is skilled enough with package management to remove the PackageKit
frontend, surely he or she knows what to do if zif wants to pick the
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:02:15PM -0400, David Airlie wrote:
you run rpm -q grub in the guest and on the host, if they are the
same nvr,
then they are the same package, where's the rocket science here.
No, that's not good enough. You need to know the version installed on
the system,
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:38:26AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:18 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
You described yourself how libguestfs could check it. And failing
libguestfs doing it, the user could be warned to check it.
'check' it? And what's the user expected
On Sep 22, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Doug Ledford wrote:
- Original Message -
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:19:29 -0400 (EDT)
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
Which rpmdiff are we talking about here?
The free/included in fedora one is not that great... it gives you
files
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:45:11AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sep 22, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 09/22/2011 02:02 PM, David Airlie wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
grub
- Original Message -
I'm
just trying to test how well zif handles the multple provider case
and understand how it makes the judgment on what is installed.
There's probably a pretty strong argument to be made that if package A requires
foo, and packages B, C, and D all provide foo,
On 09/22/2011 02:41 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:18:48PM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
On 09/22/2011 02:02 PM, David Airlie wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
grub provides
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 07:38:54PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:37:39PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
We allow you to inspect the guest to find the OS version, and even
versions of
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
Oh, my mistake. That being beside the point, it pretty much means
any VM created in a previous OS release won't work. In any case I
totally disagree with your idea of security, as I mentioned at the
time. It makes things worse, not
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 19:47 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I hate to say it, but honestly, this thread looks pretty clear-cut to an
outsider: pjones and mjg59 are correct, and you and rwmj are incorrect.
Their arguments that it is fundamentally unsafe to use the host's grub
or, even
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:44:00PM -0400, David Airlie wrote:
Nicely editing out of the other use-case I supplied. grub and grub2
*packages* don't install into the same few bytes.
I thought you were good at backing up arguments with technical reasons, not
strawmen.
The argument is
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:33:07PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 20:22 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Such packages would be broken and would fail to link without hardening
or at least have text relocations too. Packagers shouldn't rely on
this spec hack to fix up their
snip
If people are testing this it would be good if they could test the unit
files for this too on F15+ hosts.
Afaik I have already converted the whole xelerance.com stuff and it's
just laying there in bugzilla.
Create the relevant files in there relevant paths then run...
systemctl
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 07:58:35PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:44:00PM -0400, David Airlie wrote:
Nicely editing out of the other use-case I supplied. grub and grub2
*packages* don't install into the same few bytes.
I thought you were good at backing up
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
I'm
just trying to test how well zif handles the multple provider case
and understand how it makes the judgment on what is installed.
There's probably a pretty strong argument to be made
On 09/22/2011 03:27 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
Oh, my mistake. That being beside the point, it pretty much means
any VM created in a previous OS release won't work. In any case I
totally disagree with your idea of security, as I
- Original Message -
Wow... just wow.
-jefplease hold while koji asks you a series of questions concerning
multiple provider cascades to pre-populate the build environment for
your rawhide scratch build that you have just requestedspaleta
You can always have a switch to provide the
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 14:26 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Dan Williams wrote:
But I'm not really familiar with unbound. Is it a long-running service?
Yes, It's a fully dnssec validating caching resolver. You start it at boot
and leave it running.
What does its
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 13:43, Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
Wow... just wow.
-jefplease hold while koji asks you a series of questions concerning
multiple provider cascades to pre-populate the build environment for
your rawhide scratch build that you
- Original Message -
Having more things installed on the host means a larger attack
surface.
Not if the host is properly locked down. And given that guests typically have
more open services, and therefore a larger remote attack surface, the more
there is in the guest, the less secure
- Original Message -
I can understand in the case where you have some knowledge of what
the
various package chains do.
Such cases do exist. The libibverbs package requires a libibverbs-driver in
order to run. Which driver you want depends on hardware, and we don't normally
install
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:27:41AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
right. the big problem is not working around a broken network or a network
with an attacker. The problem is false positives due to the pletora of
hotspot mangling techniques out there. Ideally, NetworkManager would deal
with
On 09/22/2011 09:09 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
Grubby will continue to support the grub 1 style config file.
Just to confirm ...
Does this mean that a RHEL 6/Fedora dual-boot system using grub 1 will
continue to work (i.e. Fedora kernel updates will properly update the
grub 1 configuration)?
--
On 09/22/2011 02:47 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
There is a further issue #2, quite orthogonal, which is that grub
(upstream) doesn't support offline installation. This is a bug in
grub 1 2 which really should be taken upstream.
You're still missing the point here. This wasn't a design
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Dan Williams wrote:
You properly talk to it via unbound-control, which uses SSL certs between
it and the daemon. No need to re-write config files or send it weirdo
signals.
Ok, this part mystifies me. I assume it just has a TCP socket listening
that you talk to it on?
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 09:23:40PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 07:38:54PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:37:39PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
We allow you to
On 09/22/2011 04:07 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
Fedora ships a virtualization environment, so while grub1 should go away as
soon as possible in terms of Fedora's own use, having it around for
situation 3 is not outside the scope of a reasonable request in support of
Fedora's own virtualization
On 09/23/2011 01:39 AM, Doug Ledford wrote:
- Original Message -
I can understand in the case where you have some knowledge of what
the
various package chains do.
Such cases do exist. The libibverbs package requires a libibverbs-driver in
order to run. Which driver you want
On 09/22/2011 04:31 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 09/22/2011 09:09 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
Grubby will continue to support the grub 1 style config file.
Just to confirm ...
Does this mean that a RHEL 6/Fedora dual-boot system using grub 1 will
continue to work (i.e. Fedora kernel updates will
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 22:29 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:27:41AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
right. the big problem is not working around a broken network or a network
with an attacker. The problem is false positives due to the pletora of
hotspot mangling
Peter Jones wrote:
You're basically arguing that we should never remove any software from
Fedora in case it's used in a virtual machine hosted on a Fedora machine.
This is not a workable scenario.
Why, if the virtualization folks are willing to pick up maintainership? You
won't have to
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
If it is broken.. why not retire it now so that people don't download
it, find it broken and then find out when no bugzilla reports are
fixed it was dead?
Packages can only be retired from upcoming releases (i.e. currently Fedora
16 and newer, as he said), not from
Jef Spaleta wrote:
I fully admit that this case is meant to be indicative of a class of
transactions and not a smoking gun. I was reaching for a simple to
understand virtual provides scenario, in the same vein as the test cases
that zif's compile time make check does already. I believe it is
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729504
Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-boolean:
488916ac0aa8be172460e896a8a9977a boolean-0.28.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit 17a97f64deccefeb9ba7546edc4aa812b5ecee77
Author: Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Sep 22 09:43:47 2011 +0200
update to 0.28
.gitignore|1 +
perl-boolean.spec | 11 ---
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
---
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-XML-RSS-LibXML:
9fbc00ce70c200a22dd6438e8679d174 XML-RSS-LibXML-0.3102.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit b5cb391318ceec1214cc335b0ba4be3afd4b3d04
Author: Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Sep 22 09:48:40 2011 +0200
update to 0.3102
.gitignore |1 +
perl-XML-RSS-LibXML.spec |7 +--
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Perl-PrereqScanner:
456e62bbdd384b38a0f99b8580f27b78 Perl-PrereqScanner-1.007.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit 00e24f09443dccf98d91e216d834bef1d8e5d90b
Author: Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Sep 22 09:52:52 2011 +0200
update to 1.007
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Perl-PrereqScanner.spec |5 -
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 6
commit 20afaf2117c42cbfde24741ab3c248ae6032a541
Author: Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Sep 22 09:55:06 2011 +0200
update to 1.003014
.gitignore|1 +
perl-Parse-Method-Signatures.spec | 13 -
sources |2 +-
3
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Parse-Method-Signatures:
d56784f59a827b58e65144778955676d Parse-Method-Signatures-1.003014.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-9.fc16.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
On i386:
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-9.fc16.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
Please resolve this as soon as
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8 has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03-2.fc15.x86_64 requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4)
On i386:
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03-2.fc15.i686 requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4)
Please resolve this as soon as
perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLinks-AndTables has broken dependencies in the F-16
tree:
On x86_64:
perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLinks-AndTables-0.01-2.fc15.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4)
On i386:
perl-HTML-FormatText-WithLinks-AndTables-0.01-2.fc15.noarch requires
perl-Test-Version has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc15.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4)
On i386:
perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc15.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
perl-NOCpulse-Gritch has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9-1.fc16.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
On i386:
perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9-1.fc16.noarch requires
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
Please resolve this as soon as
The following packages in the repository suffer from broken dependencies:
==
The results in this summary consider Test Updates!
==
package:
Late yesterday at the Go/No-Go meeting it was decided to slip the Beta
release of F16 by one week [1]. Minutes follow below.
There are numerous unresolved blockers at this time [2], resulting in
the inability to compose a viable release candidate.
As a result, ALL MAJOR MILESTONES, and their
96 matches
Mail list logo
