On 04/01/10 21:47, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/04/2010 04:25 PM, Ian Weller wrote:
I know Gwibber is widely used by Fedora users because there are a
crapton of abrt reports for it and I just can't keep up with it. :)
If no one else wants it, I will take it. I'd prefer to
I'm about to build PackageKit 0.6.0 into rawhide, which bumps the
soname. I'll take care of rebuilding gnome-packagekit and kpackagekit
which is (I think) are the only users of the low level library API.
The other applications using the _session_ DBus connections should
continue to work as this
Hello,
I'd like to take over the libssh2 package according to
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers
all reasonable efforts have been made to contact the maintainer:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/523796
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/539444
These still need upstream attention. I'll badger them but it might
take a while:
cduce
ocaml-camlp5
The following should be fixed in tomorrow's report:
ocaml-ocamlnet
ocaml-json-wheel
ocaml-preludeml
ocaml-pxp
ocaml-xmlrpc-light
I intend to give up the following packages:
fedorainfinity-backgrounds
libbeagle
libcroco
libexif
libspectre
preferences-menus
Any takers ?
Matthias
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 15:37, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote:
I intend to give up the following packages:
fedorainfinity-backgrounds
I've been using it since Fedora 8 (never liked any other Fedora
wallpaper as much as this one), so I can't let it be retired. :)
I'll take it.
Hello.
Does Fedora dead? I have submit new qstat packages and filed bugs
against applications which are using its [qstat] old binary name.
There were several weeks when qstat update on hold due to bug #533777
Should we obsolete blocking pacakge(s)?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
How much do we adhere to our Packaging Guidelines for static libraries?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
What had started with a few Yum queries for corner-cases (see
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-December/msg00012.html )
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 15:54 +0100, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 15:37, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote:
I intend to give up the following packages:
fedorainfinity-backgrounds
I've been using it since Fedora 8 (never liked any other Fedora
wallpaper as much as
Jon Ciesla wrote:
Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 16:35 +0530, Huzaifa Sidhpurwala wrote:
Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Even though any proven packager could do the change, that bug does not
fall in the items listed in the proven packager policy [1]. You
haven't
listed any problems
Am Dienstag, den 05.01.2010, 10:33 + schrieb Richard Hughes:
I'm about to build PackageKit 0.6.0 into rawhide, which bumps the
soname. I'll take care of rebuilding gnome-packagekit and kpackagekit
which is (I think) are the only users of the low level library API.
Plus
Matthias Clasen wrote:
I intend to give up the following packages:
libspectre
I can help out here.
-- Rex
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Matthias Clasen wrote:
I intend to give up the following packages:
[snip]
FYI:
libexif
This is used by a lot of stuff, including kdegraphics (but also WINE and
several GNOME packages).
libspectre
This one is used by Okular (kdegraphics) and Evince.
I guess one of us KDE SIG folks might
2010/1/5 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com:
I intend to give up the following packages:
libexif
I will take this one.
--
LG Thomas
Dubium sapientiae initium
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 13:37:17 -0800,
John Reiser jrei...@bitwagon.com wrote:
On 01/04/2010 10:18 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 07:57:54 -0600,
Jon Cieslal...@jcomserv.net wrote:
I've actually come across this WRT UPX as well.
Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com writes:
How much do we adhere to our Packaging Guidelines for static libraries?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
Mispackaged -static libraries:
mysql-devel from mysql-5.1.42-2.fc13.src.rpm
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 09:46 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
Matthias Clasen wrote:
I intend to give up the following packages:
libspectre
I can help out here.
Already sold to Marek, but I'm sure he'll welcome you as a comaintainer
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Kamil Dudka kdu...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to take over the libssh2 package according to
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers
all reasonable efforts have been made to contact the maintainer:
For the impatient:
Starting with today's rawhide, the these kind of constructs in specs
no longer work:
%{?!foo: %define foo bar}
For the generally desired effect, the above simply becomes:
%{?!foo: %global foo bar}
This is already recommended by the Fedora guidelines, but
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Matthias Clasen wrote:
I intend to give up the following packages:
[snip]
FYI:
libexif
This is used by a lot of stuff, including kdegraphics (but also WINE and
several GNOME packages).
indeed, I missed that, can jump on that one too.
-- Rex
--
On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, with the
guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to
comply with it ...
Isn't that a chicken/egg problem?
It really is. I mean, we could create the
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 06:34:12PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
For the impatient:
Starting with today's rawhide, the these kind of constructs in specs
no longer work:
%{?!foo: %define foo bar}
For the generally desired effect, the above simply becomes:
%{?!foo: %global foo
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 11:48:47AM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, with the
guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to
comply with it ...
Isn't
Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, with the
guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to
comply with it ...
Isn't that a chicken/egg problem?
On 01/05/2010 11:50 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
What exactly do you mean 'no longer work' ? Can we expect to get a formal
RPM build error for this bogus construct, or will it silently build and
do the wrong thing ? From your long description, it sounds like the latter,
which means
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 12:16:13PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 12:08 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Not for all packaging policies, but for some I think that would be a
good idea. Pick a set of policies we think are particularly important
to enforce can be automatically
Tom \spot\ Callaway tcall...@redhat.com writes:
On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, with the
guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to
comply with it ...
Isn't that a chicken/egg
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 02:28:28PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
These still need upstream attention. I'll badger them but it might
take a while:
cduce
ocaml-camlp5
Wow, upstream fixed them just after I posted. I'll try to have these
done before tomorrow's Rawhide build too.
On 01/05/2010 12:08 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Not for all packaging policies, but for some I think that would be a
good idea. Pick a set of policies we think are particularly important
to enforce can be automatically checked, and declare any non-compliant
ones will be dropped in the next
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 16:59 +0100, Thomas Janssen wrote:
2010/1/5 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com:
I intend to give up the following packages:
libexif
I will take this one.
Thanks, its yours if you take it:
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/libexif
--
On 01/05/2010 12:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
But there's a general issue that new things keep getting added
to the packaging guidelines and there's no very good mechanism to
detect whether existing packages ever get updated to comply.
You're right. I'm hopeful that the items which can be checked
On 01/05/2010 12:23 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 12:16:13PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 12:08 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Not for all packaging policies, but for some I think that would be a
good idea. Pick a set of policies we think are
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 10:38:50AM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
That sounds good as long as AutoQA is reliable, not generating false
positives. I'd still also suggest that we have a rule drop all
packages reported
The alloc function in the LZMA SDK allows you to pass it a pointer to
your own allocater function. (I don't know whether or not the xz library works
like that. [Ed: Yes, it does.]) Would that be enough for UPX?
Maybe. Some changes would be required to UPX, on both the compression
and
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 12:27 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Tom \spot\ Callaway tcall...@redhat.com writes:
On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, with the
guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work
On 01/05/2010 05:48 PM, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, with the
guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to
comply with it ...
Isn't that a chicken/egg
Hi,
A news of a new calculation of PI is on the net. Should we digg
(http://digg.com/d31EgvV) the article in order to promote the fact that
the author used Fedora 10 for he's success ?
Best regards,
Adrian
--
:: http://fedoraproject.ro :: http://forum.fedoraproject.ro ::
--
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
That sounds good as long as AutoQA is reliable, not generating false
positives. I'd still also suggest that we have a rule drop all
packages reported by the FTBFS tests which aren't fixed by time of
Beta.
What
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Adrian adrian.jo...@fedoraproject.ro wrote:
Hi,
A news of a new calculation of PI is on the net. Should we digg
(http://digg.com/d31EgvV) the article in order to promote the fact that the
author used Fedora 10 for he's success ?
Best regards,
Adrian
--
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 20:22 +0200, Adrian wrote:
Hi,
A news of a new calculation of PI is on the net. Should we digg
(http://digg.com/d31EgvV) the article in order to promote the fact that
the author used Fedora 10 for he's success ?
This sounds like a question about Fedora advocacy, not
On Tuesday 05 of January 2010 17:24:46 Chris Weyl wrote:
Well, it's post-holiday season now and I'm starting to catch up on my
mail/bugs... These should be taken care of this week. Feel free to
ping me via email/bugzilla if you need anything before then.
Glad to see you alive! Please grant
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:57:31 +0200
Andy Shevchenko andy.shevche...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
Does Fedora dead? I have submit new qstat packages and filed bugs
against applications which are using its [qstat] old binary name.
There were several weeks when qstat update on hold due to bug #533777
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 06:34:12PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
For the impatient:
Starting with today's rawhide, the these kind of constructs in specs
no longer work:
%{?!foo: %define foo bar}
For the generally desired effect, the above
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Kamil Dudka kdu...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tuesday 05 of January 2010 17:24:46 Chris Weyl wrote:
Well, it's post-holiday season now and I'm starting to catch up on my
mail/bugs... These should be taken care of this week. Feel free to
ping me via email/bugzilla if
On Tuesday 05 January 2010, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 11:50 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
What exactly do you mean 'no longer work' ? Can we expect to get a formal
RPM build error for this bogus construct, or will it silently build and
do the wrong thing ? From your long
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 11:48:47AM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
On the other hand, with the
guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to
comply with it ...
Isn't
On Tuesday 05 of January 2010 20:55:16 Peter Robinson wrote:
You can request ACL permissions through the Fedora pkgdb here
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/libssh2 and then
the maintainer can grant them
You can see I already did. It was more than a month ago, still waiting
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 09:37:26AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
I intend to give up the following packages:
libcroco
Any takers ?
I'll take this one.
Dodji
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: please branch perl-ExtUtils-Depends for EPEL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=552613
Summary: please branch perl-ExtUtils-Depends for EPEL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: branch perl-Glib for EPEL-5 please
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=552616
Summary: branch perl-Glib for EPEL-5 please
Product: Fedora
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=552616
--- Comment #1 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2010-01-05
12:05:26 EDT ---
Please block this on the bug for
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=552613
Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
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=552616
Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
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=502358
Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
54 matches
Mail list logo
