Re: systemd questions
On 05/20/2011 06:00 AM, Chuck Ebbert wrote: And you're going to go about it by removing something that people have been using for many years, replacing it with a vague promise of a better solution. The ability to run programs before shutdown has not been removed. Looks like you missed all the emails where advice was given about shutdown.target, final.target, system-shutdown/, or priority-99 sysv services. The discussion about the raciness of doing it this way is tangential. Michal -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rpmbuild issue?
On Thu, 19 May 2011 22:34:53 +0100, P wrote: Hi, Would someone mind casting an eye over the attached spec file, please? It doesn't even build (in Plague dist-f15 buildroot) due to missing BuildRequires, checking for LIBGLADE... no configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/gtkpod-2.0.0': configure: error: *** No package 'libglade-2.0' found See `config.log' for more details. RPM build errors: and you haven't quoted any rpmbuild error details. In several places, the spec file does not meet the Fedora Packaging Guidelines (e.g. the explicit Requires: libid3tag and others for webkitgtk3, gstreamer), the library and -devel package are in group Applications/Multimedia by mistake. The %files section are created lots of unowned directories, so they need some love anyway. I am trying to build rpms against it on Fedora 15 beta but it errors saying that Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found. However, all the files listed are those contained in the %files sections for the sub-packages. rpm-check appears to be ignoring them. Adding them to the %files for the package removes them from the error list but this seems wrong. I can run the same spec file on fedora 14, with only rpm build requires and requires versions being different, and it works fine. Likewise, rpmlint seems to have no problems with it. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Take another look at the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT directory contents and make sure that all files and directories are assigned to your various %files sections. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: serial kernel console vs. systemd
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 03:56:58PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: Josh Stone (jist...@redhat.com) said: Anyway, if kmsg msgs are lost for you this probably happens inside of ply or something related, but not systemd. Is ply part of (or short for) plymouth? I took rhgb out of my command line, and it's giving me a lot more on serial now. I don't remember that being necessary before, but I could be mistaken. But I still don't get anything on a hard crash. Any idea where else I could look to improve this? You can set the console loglevel differently with 'dmesg -nnumber'. Outside of that, if you get normal kernel messages but not messages on hard crashes, that may just mean the kernel died before it got a chance to log - in that case, there's not a lot you can do. I really need to fix virt-dmesg ... Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: systemd questions
On 05/20/2011 12:00 AM, Chuck Ebbert wrote: On Thu, 19 May 2011 14:59:57 +0200 Lennart Poetteringmzerq...@0pointer.de wrote: I am sorry that reality bothers you so much, but it is the hard old real world ... See, I am so young, I still have the idealism that we can fix what is broken. And you're going to go about it by removing something that people have been using for many years, replacing it with a vague promise of a better solution. Why are you so dead set against leaving what is there now so that people can continue to run their systems? What are they supposed to use? +1 -- Stephen Clark *NetWolves* Sr. Software Engineer III Phone: 813-579-3200 Fax: 813-882-0209 Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com http://www.netwolves.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
json error from bodhi update
3083146 build (dist-f14-updates-candidate,
/uncrustify:6a8dd0eea2183240177154f27c10a730f20994eb) completed successfully
Creating a new update for uncrustify-0.58-1.fc14
ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save, 200, Error returned
from json module while processing https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save:
No JSON object could be decoded: line 1 column 0 (char 0))
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /usr/bin/bodhi, line 201, in main
data = bodhi.save(**extra_args)
File /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py, line 111, in
save
'bugs': bugs,
File /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/baseclient.py, line
344,
in send_request
auth_params=auth_params, retries=retries)
File /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/proxyclient.py, line
427, in send_request
{'url': to_bytes(url), 'err': to_bytes(e)})
ServerError: ServerError(https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save, 200,
Error returned from json module while processing
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/save: No JSON object could be decoded:
line 1 column 0 (char 0))
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
9base in Fedora?
Hi list,
I've been thinking about packaging 9base [1], a port of Plan 9 userspace tools,
for Fedora. I'm interested in opinions on what style is better and why.
The problem is most of 9base binaries (and their manpages) have the same
name as their coreutils (and other) equivalents, therefore we need to install
them to somewhere else. Upstream suggests installing all its directories (bin,
share, lib, ...) into /usr/local. This is not acceptable for obvious reasons.
Options:
#1, aka the Gentoo way
Gentoo installs its 9base package into /usr/plan9, basically not touching
9base files at all. This collides with FHS and therefore would require an
exception in Packaging Guidelines.
#2, aka the Debian way
Debian installs its 9base package into /usr/lib. Well, most of it. They
also prefix all the manpages with 'plan9-', not the binaries, though.
This placement (provided we use %{_libdir}) introduces issues for Plan
9 rc shell scripts and their shebangs.
#3, aka the Fedora way?
Should we do this in some other way?
I personally like the #1 better since it's more clean (except for the required
FHS exception) and more or less aligned with upstream.
[1] http://tools.suckless.org/9base
--
# Petr Sabata
pgpOPAvwcWaTG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Orphaning my packages...
I need to orphan all of my packages. In most cases, it would be great if someone (or more) could pick them up. Let me know if you'd like any of them and I'll release them to you. cfitsio -- Library for manipulating FITS data files Already has co-maintainers; perhaps they want to step up? getdata -- Library for reading and writing dirfile data An excellent and easy to package data library. Upstream is extremely responsive. hpic -- Healpix manipulation binaries and library Could be orphaned; not used much anymore, but is trivial to maintain. kst -- A data viewing program for KDE A great program for plotting data (especially live data). Currently in Fedora is the 1.x branch of kst; 2.0 has been released; I have a spec file ready but haven't had the time to push it though. slimdata -- Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data This package also gets little use, but it is easy to maintain. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide report: 20110520 changes
On 05/20/2011 05:35 AM, Rawhide Report wrote: kernel-2.6.39-0.fc16 * Thu May 19 2011 Dave Jonesda...@redhat.com - Update to 2.6.39 final. * Sat May 14 2011 Kyle McMartinkmcmar...@redhat.com - Update to v2 of Mel Gorman's SLUB patchset Above didn't update installed 2.6.39-0.rc7.git6.1.fc16.x86_64. Are they the same? TIA -- Regards, OldFart -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide report: 20110520 changes
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 09:51:20 -0400, Clyde E. Kunkel clydekunkel7...@cox.net wrote: On 05/20/2011 05:35 AM, Rawhide Report wrote: kernel-2.6.39-0.fc16 * Thu May 19 2011 Dave Jonesda...@redhat.com - Update to 2.6.39 final. * Sat May 14 2011 Kyle McMartinkmcmar...@redhat.com - Update to v2 of Mel Gorman's SLUB patchset Above didn't update installed 2.6.39-0.rc7.git6.1.fc16.x86_64. Are they the same? I reported this to the fedora kernel list. The problem is that the release should have been 1.fc16 instead of 0.fc16. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rpmbuild issue?
Many thanks for having a look. See comments below.
Cheers
phantomjinx
On Thu, 19 May 2011 22:34:53 +0100, P wrote:
Hi,
Would someone mind casting an eye over the attached spec file, please?
It doesn't even build (in Plague dist-f15 buildroot) due to missing
BuildRequires,
checking for LIBGLADE... no
configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/gtkpod-2.0.0':
configure: error: *** No package 'libglade-2.0' found
See `config.log' for more details.
RPM build errors:
It wouldn't because the spec is designed for gtkpod 2.1.0, which no longer
uses libglade.
and you haven't quoted any rpmbuild error details.
The difficulty is that there are no specific rpmbuild errors, other than
the installed (but unpackaged file(s) found errors. Everything compiles
correctly. See below.
In several places,
the spec file does not meet the Fedora Packaging Guidelines (e.g.
the explicit Requires: libid3tag and others for webkitgtk3, gstreamer),
the library and -devel package are in group Applications/Multimedia
by mistake. The %files section are created lots of unowned directories,
so they need some love anyway.
Quite possibly.
Would you mind explaining why the Requires: libid3tag is not correct,
given that the libgtkpod library does require that as a dependency?
Basically, I am creating 8 distinct rpm packages, single package and
several subpackages:
gtkpod.rpm
libgtkpod.rpm
libgtkpod-devel.rpm
gtkpod-plugin-coverweb.rpm
gtkpod-plugin-media-player.rpm
gtkpod-plugin-flac.rpm
gtkpod-plugin-ogg.rpm
gtkpod-plugin-mp4.rpm
I am trying to build rpms against it on Fedora 15 beta but it errors
saying that Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found. However, all the
files listed are those contained in the %files sections for the
sub-packages. rpm-check appears to be ignoring them. Adding them to the
%files for the package removes them from the error list but this seems
wrong.
I can run the same spec file on fedora 14, with only rpm build
requires and requires versions being different, and it works fine.
Likewise, rpmlint seems to have no problems with it.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Take another look at the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT directory contents and make
sure that all files and directories are assigned to your various %files
sections.
An example of the problem is the file:
/usr/lib/gtkpod/coverweb.plugin
This file is listed under the plugin coverweb %files section:
%files plugin-coverweb
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%{_libdir}/%{name}/coverweb.plugin
Despite this, the file is one of this listed under Installed (but
unpackaged) file(s) found.
Thus, I am really confused and wondering if some vital syntax change is
required in the spec file?
--
Laws are partly formed for the sake of good men, in order to instruct them
how they may live on friendly terms with one another, and partly for the
sake of those who refuse to be instructed, whose spirit cannot be subdued,
or softened, or hindered from plunging into evil. [The Laws, Plato]
You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded
perversity
Have you ever considered a career in the church?
Bishop of Bath and Wells (Blackadder II)
A clear conscience? When did you acquire such luxuries, Bernard? (Sir
Humphrey, Yes Prime Minister)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Orphaning my packages...
I can take cfitsio hpic 2011/5/20 Truch, Matthew m...@truch.net: I need to orphan all of my packages. In most cases, it would be great if someone (or more) could pick them up. Let me know if you'd like any of them and I'll release them to you. cfitsio -- Library for manipulating FITS data files Already has co-maintainers; perhaps they want to step up? getdata -- Library for reading and writing dirfile data An excellent and easy to package data library. Upstream is extremely responsive. hpic -- Healpix manipulation binaries and library Could be orphaned; not used much anymore, but is trivial to maintain. kst -- A data viewing program for KDE A great program for plotting data (especially live data). Currently in Fedora is the 1.x branch of kst; 2.0 has been released; I have a spec file ready but haven't had the time to push it though. slimdata -- Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data This package also gets little use, but it is easy to maintain. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Orphaning my packages...
On 05/20/2011 09:21 AM, Sergio Pascual wrote:
I can take
cfitsio
Thanks. I've added myself to cfitsio as well since some of my packages depend
on it.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane or...@cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
From xorg-devel-bounces+archive=mail-archive@lists.x.org Fri May 20
08:36:26 2011
Return-path: xorg-devel-bounces+archive=mail-archive@lists.x.org
Envelope-to: arch...@mail-archive.com
Delivery-date: Fri, 20 May 2011 08:36:26 -0700
Received: from exprod5mx269.postini.com ([64.18.0.92] helo=psmtp.com)
by mail-archive.com with smtp (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from
xorg-devel-bounces+archive=mail-archive@lists.x.org)
id 1QNRkY-0006ox-1a
for arch...@mail-archive.com; Fri, 20 May 2011 08:36:26 -0700
Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org ([131.252.210.177]) by
exprod5mx269.postini.com ([64.18.4.10]) with SMTP;
Fri, 20 May 2011 08:36:25 PDT
Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A716D9E709
for arch...@mail-archive.com; Fri, 20 May 2011 08:36:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: xorg-de...@lists.x.org
Delivered-To: xorg-de...@lists.x.org
Received: from glenfiddich.mraw.org (glenfiddich.mraw.org [88.191.124.82])
by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4AAA9EAF4
for xorg-de...@lists.x.org; Fri, 20 May 2011 08:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from home.mraw.org ([88.164.242.219] helo=kitty)
by glenfiddich.mraw.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from k...@mraw.org)
id 1QNRjr-0006pH-1B; Fri, 20 May 2011 17:35:43 +0200
Received: from kibi by kitty with local (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from k...@mraw.org)
id 1QNRjq-0005tH-T3; Fri, 20 May 2011 17:35:42 +0200
From: Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org
To: xorg-de...@lists.x.org
Subject: [PATCH 02/30] dix: Stop setting oldMaster for nothing.
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:35:12 +0200
Message-Id: 1305905740-22616-2-git-send-email-k...@debian.org
X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.2.5
In-Reply-To: 20110520153458.ge12...@mraw.org
References: 20110520153458.ge12...@mraw.org
Cc: Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org
X-BeenThere: xorg-de...@lists.x.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11
Precedence: list
List-Id: X.Org development list xorg-devel.lists.x.org
List-Unsubscribe: http://lists.x.org/mailman/options/xorg-devel,
mailto:xorg-devel-requ...@lists.x.org?subject=unsubscribe
List-Archive: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
List-Post: mailto:xorg-de...@lists.x.org
List-Help: mailto:xorg-devel-requ...@lists.x.org?subject=help
List-Subscribe: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel,
mailto:xorg-devel-requ...@lists.x.org?subject=subscribe
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: xorg-devel-bounces+archive=mail-archive@lists.x.org
Errors-To: xorg-devel-bounces+archive=mail-archive@lists.x.org
X-pstn-levels: (S:99.9/99.9 CV:99.9000 FC:95.5390 LC:95.5390
R:95.9108 P:95.9108 M:97.0282 C:98.6951 )
X-pstn-settings: 4 (1.5000:1.5000) s cv gt3 gt2 gt1 r p m c
X-pstn-addresses: from k...@debian.org [294/10]
Signed-off-by: Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org
---
dix/devices.c |2 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dix/devices.c b/dix/devices.c
index 9a4498b..36a3167 100644
--- a/dix/devices.c
+++ b/dix/devices.c
@@ -2415,7 +2415,6 @@ int
AttachDevice(ClientPtr client, DeviceIntPtr dev, DeviceIntPtr master)
{
ScreenPtr screen;
-DeviceIntPtr oldmaster;
if (!dev || IsMaster(dev))
return BadDevice;
@@ -2434,7 +2433,6 @@ AttachDevice(ClientPtr client, DeviceIntPtr dev,
DeviceIntPtr master)
free(dev-spriteInfo-sprite);
}
-oldmaster = GetMaster(dev, MASTER_ATTACHED);
dev-master = master;
/* If device is set to floating, we need to create a sprite for it,
--
1.7.5.1
___
xorg-de...@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: rpmbuild issue?
On Fri, 20 May 2011 15:46:36 +0100, PGR wrote:
It doesn't even build (in Plague dist-f15 buildroot) due to missing
BuildRequires,
checking for LIBGLADE... no
configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/gtkpod-2.0.0':
configure: error: *** No package 'libglade-2.0' found
See `config.log' for more details.
RPM build errors:
It wouldn't because the spec is designed for gtkpod 2.1.0, which no longer
uses libglade.
The last spec %changelog entry only mentioned 2.0.0. If you had hardcoded
the 2.1.0 in the Version tag instead of replacing it with a %{REVISION},
macro. I would not have assumed that the spec is for 2.0.0.
and you haven't quoted any rpmbuild error details.
The difficulty is that there are no specific rpmbuild errors, other than
the installed (but unpackaged file(s) found errors.
Those are specific rpmbuild errors. ;)
In several places,
the spec file does not meet the Fedora Packaging Guidelines (e.g.
the explicit Requires: libid3tag and others for webkitgtk3, gstreamer),
the library and -devel package are in group Applications/Multimedia
by mistake. The %files section are created lots of unowned directories,
so they need some love anyway.
Quite possibly.
Would you mind explaining why the Requires: libid3tag is not correct,
given that the libgtkpod library does require that as a dependency?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
Take another look at the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT directory contents and make
sure that all files and directories are assigned to your various %files
sections.
An example of the problem is the file:
/usr/lib/gtkpod/coverweb.plugin
This file is listed under the plugin coverweb %files section:
%files plugin-coverweb
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%{_libdir}/%{name}/coverweb.plugin
Despite this, the file is one of this listed under Installed (but
unpackaged) file(s) found.
On which platform did you compile it? x86_64 possibly? %{_libdir} expands
to /usr/lib64 there (and on other 64-bit multiarch platforms).
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: 9base in Fedora?
On 5/20/11 8:17 AM, Petr Sabata wrote:
#1, aka the Gentoo way
Gentoo installs its 9base package into /usr/plan9, basically not touching
9base files at all. This collides with FHS and therefore would require an
exception in Packaging Guidelines.
#2, aka the Debian way
Debian installs its 9base package into /usr/lib. Well, most of it. They
also prefix all the manpages with 'plan9-', not the binaries, though.
This placement (provided we use %{_libdir}) introduces issues for Plan
9 rc shell scripts and their shebangs.
#3, aka the Fedora way?
Should we do this in some other way?
I personally like the #1 better since it's more clean (except for the required
FHS exception) and more or less aligned with upstream.
Yeah, #1 sounds less awful.
The other option is /opt/plan9, which might be more in the spirit of
what the FHS says, but the packaging guidelines currently don't mention
/opt at all.
- ajax
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rpmbuild issue?
On Fri, 20 May 2011 15:46:36 +0100, PGR wrote:
It doesn't even build (in Plague dist-f15 buildroot) due to missing
BuildRequires,
checking for LIBGLADE... no
configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/gtkpod-2.0.0':
configure: error: *** No package 'libglade-2.0' found
See `config.log' for more details.
RPM build errors:
It wouldn't because the spec is designed for gtkpod 2.1.0, which no
longer
uses libglade.
The last spec %changelog entry only mentioned 2.0.0. If you had hardcoded
the 2.1.0 in the Version tag instead of replacing it with a %{REVISION},
macro. I would not have assumed that the spec is for 2.0.0.
Yep. Excellent points. To be fair I was never expecting anyone to run it
as I thought there was a syntax error. As background, the revision macro
is due to the rpm spec being run from an auto-build in a hudson system.
Anyway, lesson learned, provide more information ... ;)
and you haven't quoted any rpmbuild error details.
The difficulty is that there are no specific rpmbuild errors, other than
the installed (but unpackaged file(s) found errors.
Those are specific rpmbuild errors. ;)
In several places,
the spec file does not meet the Fedora Packaging Guidelines (e.g.
the explicit Requires: libid3tag and others for webkitgtk3,
gstreamer),
the library and -devel package are in group Applications/Multimedia
by mistake. The %files section are created lots of unowned
directories,
so they need some love anyway.
Quite possibly.
Would you mind explaining why the Requires: libid3tag is not correct,
given that the libgtkpod library does require that as a dependency?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
Right, that helps for future reference and will reduce the size of the
spec. Thanks for the link.
Take another look at the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT directory contents and make
sure that all files and directories are assigned to your various
%files
sections.
An example of the problem is the file:
/usr/lib/gtkpod/coverweb.plugin
This file is listed under the plugin coverweb %files section:
%files plugin-coverweb
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%{_libdir}/%{name}/coverweb.plugin
Despite this, the file is one of this listed under Installed (but
unpackaged) file(s) found.
On which platform did you compile it? x86_64 possibly? %{_libdir} expands
to /usr/lib64 there (and on other 64-bit multiarch platforms).
Definitely, i386. This is the crux of the matter. If I add
'%{_libdir}/%{name}/coverweb.plugin' to the main %files section. Then this
file is no longer reported as a problem.
I will do some cleanup as suggested and maybe post a more explicit version
of the problem. I just wanted confirmation really that the syntax was
wrong in some way or that
rpmbuild -ba fedora-gtk3-gtkpod.spec
was the incorrect way of generating the rpms.
Many thanks
phantomjinx
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rpmbuild issue?
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:21:28 +0100, PGR wrote: Yep. Excellent points. To be fair I was never expecting anyone to run it as I thought there was a syntax error. There's at least one syntax error in the main %files section: %(_datadir}/glib-2.0/schemas/org.gtkpod.gschema.xml ^ (!) Could be that this hides the subpackage %files section somehow. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Retiring from eventlog's EPEL maintainers
Hello! I don't use eventlog directly or indirectly anymore, so I have very little motivation to spend my time on it. I decided to release my ownership of the EPEL branches. Fortunately other co-maintainers are very active so it won't be abandoned completely. -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rpmbuild issue?
On 20/05/11 19:06, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:21:28 +0100, PGR wrote: Yep. Excellent points. To be fair I was never expecting anyone to run it as I thought there was a syntax error. There's at least one syntax error in the main %files section: %(_datadir}/glib-2.0/schemas/org.gtkpod.gschema.xml ^ (!) Could be that this hides the subpackage %files section somehow. Yes... that would be the problem. My thanks to you sir. Much appreciated. phantomjinx -- I know exactly who reads the papers ... The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country. The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country. The Times is read by people who do actually run the country. The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country. The Financial Times is read by the people who own the country. The Morning Star is read by the people who think the country ought to be run by another country. The Daily Telegraph is read by the people who think it is. Jim Hacker, Yes Minister -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Security release criterion proposal
Adam Williamson wrote: # There must be no known remote code execution vulnerability which could be exploited during installation or during use of a live image shipped with the release If the installer would download packages during the installation, and an attacker could trick it into downloading and installing malicious code that would run as root once the installed system booted, would that match this criterion? Because then I'd say yes, let's make this an alpha release criterion – and finally do something about bug 998 before F16 alpha. Björn Persson signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Security release criterion proposal
Kevin Kofler wrote: The heaps of users do not install Fedora the day of the release. Only very few very enthousiastic and very impatient early adopters do that (and I blame them for needlessly swamping our mirrors). If they are so very few, how can they swamp a couple hundred big FTP archives with a collective bandwidth of a few hundred gigabits per second? Björn Persson signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
File Dancer-1.3040.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by mmaslano
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Dancer: aee9a71497f402414bf34964051cf5de Dancer-1.3040.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-Dancer] Initial push of Dancer.
commit 82274f3f7c00dae2d92d076192fc3d6490c9751c
Author: Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com
Date: Fri May 20 08:23:53 2011 +0200
Initial push of Dancer.
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Dancer.spec | 91 ++
sources |1 +
3 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index e69de29..17f779d 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+/Dancer-1.3040.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-Dancer.spec b/perl-Dancer.spec
new file mode 100644
index 000..a7568aa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/perl-Dancer.spec
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+Name: perl-Dancer
+Version:1.3040
+Release:2%{?dist}
+Summary:Lightweight yet powerful web application framework
+License:GPL+ or Artistic
+Group: Development/Libraries
+URL:http://search.cpan.org/dist/Dancer/
+Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/X/XS/XSAWYERX/Dancer-%{version}.tar.gz
+BuildArch: noarch
+BuildRequires: perl(Carp)
+BuildRequires: perl(Clone)
+BuildRequires: perl(CGI)
+BuildRequires: perl(Cwd)
+BuildRequires: perl(Data::Dumper)
+BuildRequires: perl(Encode)
+BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Basename)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Path)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Temp)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Body) = 1.07
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Cookies)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Headers)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Request)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Server::Simple::PSGI) = 0.11
+BuildRequires: perl(IO::Handle)
+BuildRequires: perl(JSON)
+BuildRequires: perl(lib)
+BuildRequires: perl(LWP)
+BuildRequires: perl(LWP::UserAgent)
+BuildRequires: perl(MIME::Types)
+BuildRequires: perl(Plack::Builder)
+BuildRequires: perl(Pod::Coverage)
+BuildRequires: perl(strict)
+BuildRequires: perl(Template)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::CheckManifest)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) = 0.94
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Output)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage)
+BuildRequires: perl(Time::HiRes)
+BuildRequires: perl(URI)
+BuildRequires: perl(XML::Simple)
+BuildRequires: perl(YAML)
+BuildRequires: perl(utf8)
+BuildRequires: perl(vars)
+BuildRequires: perl(warnings)
+Requires: perl(HTTP::Body) = 1.07
+Requires: perl(HTTP::Server::Simple::PSGI) = 0.11
+Requires: perl(LWP)
+Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo
$version))
+
+%global __requires_exclude perl\\(HTTP::Body|HTTP::Server::Simple::PSGI\\)
+
+%description
+Dancer is a web application framework designed to be as effortless as
+possible for the developer, taking care of the boring bits as easily as
+possible, yet staying out of your way and letting you get on with writing
+your code.
+
+%prep
+%setup -q -n Dancer-%{version}
+
+%build
+%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor
+make %{?_smp_mflags}
+
+%install
+make pure_install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+
+find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} \;
+find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2/dev/null \;
+
+%{_fixperms} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/*
+
+%check
+make test
+
+%files
+%doc AUTHORS CHANGES LICENSE README TODO
+%{_bindir}/dancer
+%{perl_vendorlib}/*
+%{_mandir}/man1/dancer.1*
+%{_mandir}/man3/*
+
+%changelog
+* Mon May 16 2011 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 1.3040-2
+- add tests BR: CGI, YAML, Template, Clone
+
+* Fri May 13 2011 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 1.3040-1
+- Specfile autogenerated by cpanspec 1.79.
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index e69de29..b30dc8a 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+aee9a71497f402414bf34964051cf5de Dancer-1.3040.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[Bug 706378] New: perl-Capture-Tiny-0.11 is available
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: perl-Capture-Tiny-0.11 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=706378 Summary: perl-Capture-Tiny-0.11 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: perl-Capture-Tiny AssignedTo: mmasl...@redhat.com ReportedBy: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-perl-devel-l...@redhat.com, mmasl...@redhat.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Latest upstream release: 0.11 Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 0.10 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Capture-Tiny/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[Bug 706378] perl-Capture-Tiny-0.11 is available
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=706378 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|mmasl...@redhat.com |psab...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
File Capture-Tiny-0.11.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by psabata
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Capture-Tiny: afbd9be69e4691ba8316545d216abdc8 Capture-Tiny-0.11.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-Capture-Tiny] 0.11 bump
commit cf847a7aa798cfe2b0c02da799903b14c6f173fe
Author: Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com
Date: Fri May 20 12:57:09 2011 +0200
0.11 bump
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Capture-Tiny.spec |7 +--
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 263b620..d651b22 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
Capture-Tiny-0.08.tar.gz
/Capture-Tiny-0.09.tar.gz
/Capture-Tiny-0.10.tar.gz
+/Capture-Tiny-0.11.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-Capture-Tiny.spec b/perl-Capture-Tiny.spec
index 185e7b7..dce8398 100644
--- a/perl-Capture-Tiny.spec
+++ b/perl-Capture-Tiny.spec
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
Name: perl-Capture-Tiny
-Version:0.10
+Version:0.11
Release:1%{?dist}
Summary:Capture STDOUT and STDERR from Perl, XS or external programs
License:ASL 2.0
@@ -42,12 +42,15 @@ find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -exec rmdir {}
2/dev/null \;
make test
%files
-%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%doc Changes examples LICENSE perlcritic.rc README Todo
%{perl_privlib}/*
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Fri May 20 2011 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com - 0.11-1
+- 0.11 bump
+- Removing defattr
+
* Wed Feb 09 2011 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com - 0.10-1
- 0.10 bump
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 1e642fc..ffe65a2 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-d38c6b83f690dfd35b503ccbfade7558 Capture-Tiny-0.10.tar.gz
+afbd9be69e4691ba8316545d216abdc8 Capture-Tiny-0.11.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[Bug 706378] perl-Capture-Tiny-0.11 is available
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=706378 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Capture-Tiny-0.11-1.fc ||16 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-05-20 07:04:22 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
File Mojolicious-1.33.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by yaneti
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Mojolicious: aee9df6588b49d1928127191a31261c0 Mojolicious-1.33.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-Mojolicious] Upstream update 1.33
commit 7d47869f38674c1270d0e7ed850945455d3670c3
Author: Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com
Date: Sat May 21 06:23:20 2011 +0300
Upstream update 1.33
.gitignore|1 +
perl-Mojolicious.spec |5 -
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index fee2d80..7727aed 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -17,3 +17,4 @@ Mojolicious-0.26.tar.gz
/Mojolicious-1.22.tar.gz
/Mojolicious-1.31.tar.gz
/Mojolicious-1.32.tar.gz
+/Mojolicious-1.33.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-Mojolicious.spec b/perl-Mojolicious.spec
index 87680e6..a3ee8c2 100644
--- a/perl-Mojolicious.spec
+++ b/perl-Mojolicious.spec
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
Name: perl-Mojolicious
-Version:1.32
+Version:1.33
Release:1%{?dist}
Summary:A next generation web framework for Perl
License:Artistic 2.0
@@ -51,6 +51,9 @@ make test
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Sat May 21 2011 Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com 1.33-1
+- Upstream update 1.33.
+
* Wed May 11 2011 Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com 1.32-1
- Upstream update 1.32.
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index ac09307..5d62ea9 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-ac0b7d382b025bb529b047823830b111 Mojolicious-1.32.tar.gz
+aee9df6588b49d1928127191a31261c0 Mojolicious-1.33.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
