Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 10:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Just a quick heads-up that I plan to look unto packaging the gnome shell frippery extensions this weekend, if you've the same plans or are already working on this, please let me know. So we can avoid doing double work. Did you do this? It's the only thing that makes GNOME shell usable for me. I've been holding off on updating too many machines to F15 until it's properly available; I prefer not to install the package from elsewhere. I don't even see a review request in bugzilla yet... -- dwmw2 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On 07/29/2011 07:47 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 10:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Just a quick heads-up that I plan to look unto packaging the gnome shell frippery extensions this weekend, if you've the same plans or are already working on this, please let me know. So we can avoid doing double work. Did you do this? It's the only thing that makes GNOME shell usable for me. I've been holding off on updating too many machines to F15 until it's properly available; I prefer not to install the package from elsewhere. I don't even see a review request in bugzilla yet... There does exit an [1] rpm and an srpm [2] here by the do we have guidelines on how to package additional extensions I guess official and unofficial ones? 1. ftp://ftp.tigress.co.uk/fedora/15/tigress-utils/x86_64/gnome-shell-frippery-0.2.3-1.noarch.rpm 2. ftp://ftp.tigress.co.uk/fedora/15/tigress-utils/SRPMS/gnome-shell-frippery-0.2.3-1.src.rpm JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
Hi, On 07/29/2011 09:47 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 10:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Just a quick heads-up that I plan to look unto packaging the gnome shell frippery extensions this weekend, if you've the same plans or are already working on this, please let me know. So we can avoid doing double work. Did you do this? It's the only thing that makes GNOME shell usable for me. I've been holding off on updating too many machines to F15 until it's properly available; I prefer not to install the package from elsewhere. I don't even see a review request in bugzilla yet... I'm afraid I never got around to it, I still intend to do it, but likely not before LinuxCon Vancouver, so if anyone wants to beat me to the punch that would make me very happy :) I'll gladly review it once packaged. As discussed before I think it would be best to package this with subpackages with each containing one of the frippery extenstions, and then have the main package be an empty package which just requires all the others, so that people who want to can easily install the entire bundle. Regards, Hans -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[perl-Coro] Remove executable bit from internal JIT libraries
commit b5a34fa549039e7f3705bd4cde8849878992cac5
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Fri Jul 29 10:47:56 2011 +0200
Remove executable bit from internal JIT libraries
perl-Coro.spec |2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index 2cf9612..2a3b950 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -72,6 +72,8 @@ programming much safer and easier than using other thread
models.
sed -i -e '/^#!/ s|.*|#!%{__perl}|' %wrong_shbangs
%endif
+chmod -x Coro/jit-*.pl
+
%build
# Interractive configuration. Use default values.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On 07/29/2011 01:57 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: There does exit an [1] rpm and an srpm [2] here by the do we have guidelines on how to package additional extensions I guess official and unofficial ones? The only one we have is at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28gnome_shell_extensions.29 Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com wrote: Hi, On 07/29/2011 09:47 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 10:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Just a quick heads-up that I plan to look unto packaging the gnome shell frippery extensions this weekend, if you've the same plans or are already working on this, please let me know. So we can avoid doing double work. Did you do this? It's the only thing that makes GNOME shell usable for me. I've been holding off on updating too many machines to F15 until it's properly available; I prefer not to install the package from elsewhere. I don't even see a review request in bugzilla yet... I'm afraid I never got around to it, I still intend to do it, but likely not before LinuxCon Vancouver, so if anyone wants to beat me to the punch that would make me very happy :) I'll gladly review it once packaged. As discussed before I think it would be best to package this with subpackages with each containing one of the frippery extenstions, and then have the main package be an empty package which just requires all the others, so that people who want to can easily install the entire bundle. Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click install to install an extension. Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: RPM version goes backward in Rawhide
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 02:29:23 +0300, KL (Kalev) wrote: Bumping epoch in rpm would have made it harder for all other packages to depend on a particular rpm version. Instead of having e.g. Requires: rpm = 4.9.1, they would now also have to remember the put the correct epoch in there. Worth noting is that the rpm* packages currently are still without Epoch, and the second release of 4.9.1 has also been untagged a few days later. That would have resulted in a second Epoch bump then. I think it's reasonable to have a broken package pulled from rawhide for a little while, if it's going to be properly fixed up in a few days. Yes, we should try to avoid such things, but having a hard rule here would be counter-productive. Especially if the breakage didn't cause loss of data or severe damage on users' machines. Just rpm-build was affected, wasn't it? Also, we have a much worse case of versions going backwards. After each Alpha release, lots of people are going to install Branched pre-releases and they automatically get enabled updates-testing repos. And in that updates-testing repo, packages are often pulled out and versions go backwards. Why is such practice allowed in Branched, but not in rawhide? Good question, IMO. ;) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
Hi, On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:57:59 +0200 drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: ... Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. [citation needed] --Stijn -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Stijn Hoop st...@sandcat.nl wrote: Hi, On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 10:57:59 +0200 drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: ... Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. [citation needed] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2011-June/msg00164.html -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On 07/29/2011 08:57 AM, drago01 wrote: Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click install to install an extension. Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. Is it not then better to setup our own instance as in extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org and just point users to that insteand of packaging it? JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
2011/7/29 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com: On 07/29/2011 08:57 AM, drago01 wrote: Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click install to install an extension. Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. Is it not then better to setup our own instance as in extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org and just point users to that insteand of packaging it? What's the point other then duplicated effort? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[perl-Coro] Correct fix_shbang_line detection
commit 986b8135d55cdce15b2bb90e346d897a48de8159
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Fri Jul 29 11:21:54 2011 +0200
Correct fix_shbang_line detection
It does not work anymore (rpm-4.9).
perl-Coro.spec |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index c40fcdc..41edcac 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ for F in Coro/jit-*.pl; do
done
%global wrong_shbangs eg/myhttpd
-%if 0%{?fix_shbang_line}
+%if %{defined fix_shbang_line}
%fix_shbang_line %wrong_shbangs
%else
# at least EL6 doesn't have the %%fix_shbang_line macro
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On 07/29/2011 09:21 AM, drago01 wrote: 2011/7/29 Jóhann B. Guðmundssonjohan...@gmail.com: On 07/29/2011 08:57 AM, drago01 wrote: Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click install to install an extension. Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. Is it not then better to setup our own instance as in extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org and just point users to that insteand of packaging it? What's the point other then duplicated effort? extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org would contain the unofficial ones ... JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
2011/7/29 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com: On 07/29/2011 09:21 AM, drago01 wrote: 2011/7/29 Jóhann B. Guðmundssonjohan...@gmail.com: On 07/29/2011 08:57 AM, drago01 wrote: Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click install to install an extension. Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. Is it not then better to setup our own instance as in extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org and just point users to that insteand of packaging it? What's the point other then duplicated effort? extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org would contain the unofficial ones ... There is no such thing, every non mallware extension should be in extensions.gnome.org (same as addons.mozilla.org). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:31:35AM +0200, drago01 wrote: 2011/7/29 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com: On 07/29/2011 09:21 AM, drago01 wrote: 2011/7/29 Jóhann B. Guðmundssonjohan...@gmail.com: On 07/29/2011 08:57 AM, drago01 wrote: Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click install to install an extension. Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. Is it not then better to setup our own instance as in extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org and just point users to that insteand of packaging it? What's the point other then duplicated effort? extenstion.gnome.fedoraproject.org would contain the unofficial ones ... There is no such thing, every non mallware extension should be in extensions.gnome.org (same as addons.mozilla.org). Same as... Nazwa : mozilla-adblockplus Architektura : noarch Wersja : 1.3.8 Wydanie: 1.fc15 I would strongly prefer third parties not to reinvent whole packaging and repositories concept. Some companies grasp it (I have yum repos provided for Google Earth and Talk Plugin, Dell BIOSes and firmwares, Adobe Flash and Air, Virtualbox...). Actually, if addons.m.o and extensions.g.o provided yum.repo file, my point would be moot. -- Tomasz TorczFuneral in the morning, IDE hacking xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.plin the afternoon and evening. - Alan Cox -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:36:50 +0200 Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl wrote: I would strongly prefer third parties not to reinvent whole packaging and repositories concept. Some companies grasp it (I have yum repos provided for Google Earth and Talk Plugin, Dell BIOSes and firmwares, Adobe Flash and Air, Virtualbox...). This, exactly. Actually, if addons.m.o and extensions.g.o provided yum.repo file, my point would be moot. That would be very nice indeed, and might even be possible to create given that the code for AMO is open (https://github.com/jbalogh/zamboni) Hopefully extensions.gnome.org will at least re-use some of that code instead of doing it yet another way again... --Stijn -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 11:15 +0200, drago01 wrote: Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. [citation needed] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2011-June/msg00164.html Seriously, who cares? Upstream are clearly on crack these days anyway. The best way to discourage people from shipping and installing 'extensions' is to make the basic user interface not suck in the first place. They failed at that. -- dwmw2 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 16 branch today
On 07/26/2011 14:26 UTC, Adam Williamson wrote: Just a heads-up to let everyone know that Fedora 16 is now branched from Rawhide. [snip] Since then, I have seen no nightly rawhide report nor F-16 branched report, nor any relevant news. The last rawhide report was for that same day: Compose started at Tue Jul 26 08:16:29 UTC 2011 which was notable because of this large count: Modified Packages: 1976 The last outage reports were: Outage: Cleanup of Red Hat located systems - 2011-07-11 20:00 UTC and Outage: Server reboots - 2011-08-01 14:00 UTC which do not apply to this week. -- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=256138 does this mean that F15 will get a rebased 2.6.40 sooner or later in stable repos to avoid troubles with the new versioning and will not stuck at 2.6.38 the whole life cycle? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 16 branch today
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 06:07:00 -0700 John Reiser jrei...@bitwagon.com wrote: On 07/26/2011 14:26 UTC, Adam Williamson wrote: Just a heads-up to let everyone know that Fedora 16 is now branched from Rawhide. [snip] Since then, I have seen no nightly rawhide report nor F-16 branched report, nor any relevant news. The last rawhide report was for that same day: Compose started at Tue Jul 26 08:16:29 UTC 2011 which was notable because of this large count: Modified Packages: 1976 Rawhide has failed to compose due to koji tag changes (at least). A fix was hopefully pushed out yesterday, so we will hopefully get a rawhide today. The last outage reports were: Outage: Cleanup of Red Hat located systems - 2011-07-11 20:00 UTC and Outage: Server reboots - 2011-08-01 14:00 UTC which do not apply to this week. Right. This has nothing to do with any infrastructure outage. Branched hopefully will also show up today. There was a delay in getting all the packages signed with the new f16 key. Hope that helps, kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: DHCPv6 support in Network Manager isn't RFC compliant
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Tore Anderson wrote: There's two potential explanations for that that I'm aware of: 1) The «Require IPv4 for this connection to complete» NM setting is unfortunately checked by default, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=538499 and https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/761558. That is still the case for Fedora 14 with all updates :( I had to disable it. That in itself is hard because the connection (since it has only failed) shows up at the BOTTOM of the network manager wireless networks, since it is sorted on last connection which does not take failed connections into account (never is sorted to the bottom) I think it would be much better to keep failed but just attempted connections at the top of the list in network manager, if the sort order is connection time and not alphabetical. 2) Fedora, for some reason I cannot fully comprehend, drops DHCPv6 replies in its default ip6tables ruleset, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=591630 (apparently a WONTFIX). I can confirm this is still an issue and I've updated the bug to reflect that. Stopping the firewall did not help me on ietf-v6ONLY though. I still got not DNS entry in /etc/resolv.conf and on top of that my routing seemed to not have a working default route. [paul@thinkpad ~]$ traceroute6 -n 2001:888:2003:1004:c2ff:eeff:fe00:136 traceroute to 2001:888:2003:1004:c2ff:eeff:fe00:136 (2001:888:2003:1004:c2ff:eeff:fe00:136), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets 1 2001:df8:0:112:221:5cff:fe54:4fe5 3005.373 ms !H 3007.441 ms !H * [paul@thinkpad ~]$ [paul@thinkpad ~]$ ip -6 ro li default default dev wlan0 proto static metric 1024 expires 2147157sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 0 default via fe80::212:1e00:70e7:bc00 dev wlan0 proto kernel metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 default via fe80::205:8500:708e:3c00 dev wlan0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 1716sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 So, IPv6only is better then it was one or two fedora releases ago, but it seems to not be fully working on Fedora-14, and from listening to other people, has not fully been resolved on Fedora-15 either Paul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
* Reindl Harald [29/07/2011 15:58] : does this mean that F15 will get a rebased 2.6.40 sooner or later in stable repos to avoid troubles with the new versioning and will not stuck at 2.6.38 the whole life cycle? Yes. https://plus.google.com/106327083461132854143/posts/SbnL3KaVRtM Emmanuel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
F16 not ready to accept builds?
fedpkg build says ... Could not initiate build: Unknown build target: dist-f16-updates-candidate Is this just a taking-time-to-set-it-up issue, or am I doing something wrong? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#) http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F16 not ready to accept builds?
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:36:00 +0100 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote: fedpkg build says ... Could not initiate build: Unknown build target: dist-f16-updates-candidate Is this just a taking-time-to-set-it-up issue, or am I doing something wrong? Thats the wrong tag... make sure you have the latest fedpkg installed? You need 0.5.9.2-1 (released in May). kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Java 7 for Fedora 16
* Omair Majid oma...@redhat.com [2011-07-29 10:32]: On 07/25/2011 04:04 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote: * Bill Nottinghamnott...@redhat.com [2011-07-25 15:54]: Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said: Robyn and I have talked about how the feature process could be adapted to allow for more late work to occur however none of that talk has turned into anything solid yet. One point that bears on this is that the Feature Owners must be willing to commit to doing all the work involved in coordination when they submit something late. In other words, if Java 7 update went in well before the feature deadline, the expectation would be that packagers whose packages depended on Java would need to adapt to Java 7. The expectation now that the Feature Freeze has passed is that the people pushing Java 7 into the repos would also need to seek out and fix all the packages that depend on them that are broken. Would we actually be shipping only 7, or both 6 and 7? This hasn't been debated yet, but I am very much in favour of having only 7 in Fedora 16. If the reason for asking was w.r.t re-builds, it is unlikely that most applications will need a rebuild -- only those using deprecated APIs (which would have been deprecated for years now) and private APIs would be affected. That would likely be a small subset. Have you seen the list of incompatibilities? http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-417013.html Thanks. I hadn't seen the full list, but I knew it'd fairly small given how much importance compatibility has been given in the past and for 7. Unfortunately it is not possible to gauge how much Fedora will be affected by that :/ My biggest concern would be for apps using sun.* APIs. As mentioned above though, it should be a small percentage. Cheers, Deepak -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F16 not ready to accept builds?
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 08:39:56AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:36:00 +0100 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote: fedpkg build says ... Could not initiate build: Unknown build target: dist-f16-updates-candidate Is this just a taking-time-to-set-it-up issue, or am I doing something wrong? Thats the wrong tag... make sure you have the latest fedpkg installed? You need 0.5.9.2-1 (released in May). That fixed it, thanks! Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into Xen guests. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-p2v -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
systemd automounts
I'm trying to automount /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs for the nfs-idmap.service var-lib-nfs-rpc_pipefs.mount is: [Unit] Description=RPC Pipe File System DefaultDependencies=no [Mount] What=sunrpc Where=/var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs Type=rpc_pipefs var-lib-nfs-rpc_pipefs.automount is: [Unit] Description=RPC Pipe File System DefaultDependencies=no [Automount] Where=/var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs and the nfs-idmap.service is: [Unit] Description=Name to UID/GID mapping for NFSv4. After=syslog.target network.target var-lib-nfs-rpc_pipefs.automount ConditionPathIsDirectory=/sys/module/sunrpc [Service] Type=forking EnvironmentFile=-/etc/sysconfig/nfs ExecStart=/usr/sbin/rpc.idmapd $RPCIDMAPDARGS [Install] WantedBy=multi-user.target Now I know for a fact that /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs is being mount *after* the nfs-idmap.service is run, because: rpc.idmapd is failing because rpc.idmapd[819]: main: open(/var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs//nfs): No such file or directory and the startup message clearly show the service is being run before the mount: Starting Name to UID/GID mapping for NFSv4 Starting OpenSSH server daemon Started OpenSSH server daemon.. Starting RPC bind service... Starting Sendmail Mail Transport Agent... Started LSB: Mount and unmount network filesystems.. [ 25.803165] RPC: Registered named UNIX socket transport module. [ 25.804236] RPC: Registered udp transport module. [ 25.805327] RPC: Registered tcp transport module. [ 25.806283] RPC: Registered tcp NFSv4.1 backchannel transport module. [ 25.889822] SELinux: initialized (dev rpc_pipefs, type rpc_pipefs), uses genfs_contexts So any idea what on what I'm doing wrong? Is this how autmounts are suppose be used? tia... steved. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: DHCPv6 support in Network Manager isn't RFC compliant
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 16:12 +0200, Tore Anderson wrote: * Paul Wouters Stopping the firewall did not help me on ietf-v6ONLY though. I still got not DNS entry in /etc/resolv.conf and on top of that my routing seemed to not have a working default route. [...] [paul@thinkpad ~]$ ip -6 ro li default default dev wlan0 proto static metric 1024 expires 2147157sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 0 This route is bogus, it basically says the entire IPv6 internet is directly attached to the layer 2 LAN segment you're on. I've seen NM create such a route before, but under different circumstances, and besides that bug should be long fixed - see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588560. default via fe80::212:1e00:70e7:bc00 dev wlan0 proto kernel metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 default via fe80::205:8500:708e:3c00 dev wlan0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 1716sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 Here you have another two default routes via two different next-hops. Likely one of them is bogus, perhaps caused by a rogue RA. I find it curious that only one of them is displaying a lifetime counter, too. Are you certain that NM adds all of these? One way to try is to set the IPv4 mode to link-local only, IPv6 mode to disabled/ignored, and then connect to the network. The connection should then «succeed», and you'll be able to see if anything IPv6-related is going on outside of NM's control. Running NM with --no-daemon --log-level=debug is a great way to figure out *exactly* what NM is doing with addressing and the routing table, which people can use as a basis for diagnosing these issues... Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fwd: Rapid DHCP
Interesting message in another list. for me fedora is very slow to get dhcp address. -- Forwarded message -- From: Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au Date: Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 12:51 PM Subject: Rapid DHCP To: OLPC Devel de...@lists.laptop.org, OLPC Australia list olpc...@lists.laptop.org Here's an article that tries to explain why Mac OS is so much faster at connecting to networks than Linux and Windows: http://cafbit.com/entry/rapid_dhcp_or_how_do Could such an implementation be considered for the OLPC OS? XOs go on and off the network all the time, as power management kicks in and the machines move in and out of AP range (or switch to a different AP). This is a disruptive process, and speeding it up would be welcome. Sridhar Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia M: +61 425 239 701 E: srid...@laptop.org.au A: G.P.O. Box 731 Sydney, NSW 2001 W: www.laptop.org.au ___ Devel mailing list de...@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Itamar Reis Peixoto msn, google talk: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br +55 11 4063 5033 (FIXO SP) +55 34 9158 9329 (TIM) +55 34 8806 3989 (OI) +55 34 3221 8599 (FIXO MG) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 06:28, David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org wrote: On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 11:15 +0200, drago01 wrote: Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. [citation needed] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2011-June/msg00164.html Seriously, who cares? Upstream are clearly on crack these days anyway. The best way to discourage people from shipping and installing 'extensions' is to make the basic user interface not suck in the first place. They failed at that. Please refrain from insults. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=256138 does this mean that F15 will get a rebased 2.6.40 sooner or later in stable repos to avoid troubles with the new versioning and will not stuck at 2.6.38 the whole life cycle? There should be a 2.6.40 in the F15 updates-testing after the next updates push. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: rawhide report: 20110729 changes
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Rawhide Report rawh...@fedoraproject.org wrote: kernel-3.1.0-0.rc0.git9.1.fc17 -- * Wed Jul 27 2011 Josh Boyer jwbo...@redhat.com - Linux 3.0-git9 - Move CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL to config-generic now that powerpc has it too This is probably broken on several kinds of setups. The uname returned is incorrect, which causes modprobe to not be able to find any modules. Skip this and wait for the next build. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
2011-07-29 - F16 Alpha blocker bug review #3 - recap
Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-bugzappers/2011-07-29/f16-alpha-blocker-review.2011-07-29-17.00.html Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-bugzappers/2011-07-29/f16-alpha-blocker-review.2011-07-29-17.00.txt Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-bugzappers/2011-07-29/f16-alpha-blocker-review.2011-07-29-17.00.log.html #fedora-bugzappers: F16-Alpha-blocker-review Meeting summary --- * Roll Call (jlaska, 17:00:22) * Why are we here? (jlaska, 17:03:21) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting (jlaska, 17:03:48) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers (jlaska, 17:04:02) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Alpha_Release_Criteria (jlaska, 17:04:29) * LINK: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=723475 (jlaska, 17:06:04) * anaconda-16.12 - Unable to activate networking in anaconda (stage2) (jlaska, 17:06:09) * AGREED: 723475 - pending updated testing from TC1, issue may have magically fixed itself (jlaska, 17:11:29) * will address additional possible bugs when TC1 arrives (jlaska, 17:11:44) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726744 (jlaska, 17:12:17) * at-spi-python has broken deps (jlaska, 17:12:22) * AGREED: 726744 - AcceptedBlocker for Alpha - impacts Alpha repoclosure criteria and preventing ISO compose (jlaska, 17:14:39) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=723526 (jlaska, 17:14:46) * firstboot always runs even with RUN_FIRSTBOOT=NO in /etc/sysconfig/firstboot (jlaska, 17:14:51) * firstboot-16.1-2.fc16 destined for TC1 compose ... should resolve this issue (jlaska, 17:18:09) * AGREED: 723526 - Move to VERIFIED, leave open pending TC1 branch compose (jlaska, 17:18:14) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725566 (jlaska, 17:18:21) * firstboot doesn't default to enabled after rawhide/F16 install (jlaska, 17:18:25) * impacts alpha criteria - In most cases (see Blocker_Bug_FAQ), a system installed according to any of the above criteria (or the appropriate Beta or Final criteria, when applying this criterion to those releases) must boot to the 'firstboot' utility on the first boot after installation, without unintended user intervention. This includes correctly accessing any encrypted partitions when the correct passphrase is supplied. The (jlaska, 17:20:07) * AGREED: 725566 - AcceptedBlocker for Alpha - impacts Alpha firstboot criteria, fix VERIFIED, will move to CLOSED when TC1 arrives (jlaska, 17:21:33) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725040 (jlaska, 17:21:39) * rawhide installs generic-release package, instead of fedora-release (jlaska, 17:21:44) * AGREED: 725040 - move to VERIFIED, will move to CLOSED pending TC1. Unclear impact on Alpha, but a valid rawhide fix (jlaska, 17:25:09) * while the impact to the Alpha isn't fully understood ... since the issue is resolved the group decided acceptance as a blocker isn't required (jlaska, 17:26:17) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726743 (jlaska, 17:26:22) * gnome-python2-bonobo has missing deps (jlaska, 17:26:26) * Alpha criteria affected - There must be no file conflicts (cases where the files in some packages conflict but the packages have explicit Conflicts: tags are acceptable) or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (DVD) install (jlaska, 17:27:29) * AGREED: 726743 - AcceptedBlocker for Alpha - preventing ISO creation (jlaska, 17:28:20) * ACTION: adamw [was] volunteered to contact desktop@ regarding 726743 (jlaska, 17:28:57) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=723160 (jlaska, 17:29:01) * Gnome-shell presents enormous warning dialog (jlaska, 17:29:06) * if we can't get a reliable reproducer of some kind, we nack it as a blocker (jlaska, 17:42:14) * AGREED: 723160 - Unable to determine full impact, leave in proposed pending additional testing to isolate failure scenario (jlaska, 17:42:21) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711489 (jlaska, 17:42:29) * atl1c: transmit queue timeout (ASUS 522) (jlaska, 17:42:33) * AGREED: 711489 - RejectedBlocker - nasty, but impacts limited hardware and has a workaround. May re-evaluate if new information surfaces (jlaska, 17:48:14) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=723901 (jlaska, 17:48:34) * pre-release anaconda compose is disabling 'rawhide' repo ... leaves no repos available for install (jlaska, 17:48:38) * AGREED: 723901 - AcceptedBlocker for Alpha based on perceived impact to branched composes - fix available, pending TC1 testing (jlaska, 17:52:20) * http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=724928 (jlaska, 17:52:30) * Reboot ends with kernel panic on systemd abort()
Re: Unresponsive maintainer: cvsgraph
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:10:29 +1000 Bojan Smojver bo...@rexursive.com wrote: On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 19:16 +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote: Hi folks, Anyone knows how to contact cvsgraph maintainer (Marek Mahut)? Bug is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709923 I already built the package for EL6, but don't have enough karma to put it in bodhi. It's a requirement for viewvc, which I maintain. Having no luck with this. Could someone from FESCO please approve my request here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/cvsgraph I just want to have this included in EL6, so that viewvc can go in too. Done. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Unresponsive maintainer: cvsgraph
Kevin Fenzi kevin at scrye.com writes: Done. Thank you. I'm guessing these things take time to propagate: $ bodhi --new -t newpackage -N Initial package for EL6. cvsgraph-1.6.1-8.el6 Creating a new update for cvsgraph-1.6.1-8.el6 bojan does not have commit access to cvsgraph -- Bojan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
Am 29.07.2011 19:39, schrieb Josh Boyer: On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=256138 does this mean that F15 will get a rebased 2.6.40 sooner or later in stable repos to avoid troubles with the new versioning and will not stuck at 2.6.38 the whole life cycle? There should be a 2.6.40 in the F15 updates-testing after the next updates push sounds good i have running 2.6.40-4.fc15.x86_64 #1 SMP in my testing-virtual-machine since some minutes, boot looked fine, after a minute a got a btrfs-stack-trace hope this helps (no i do not tend use btrfs in production *gg*) [ cut here ] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/tree-log.c:1742! invalid opcode: [#1] SMP CPU 0 Modules linked in: usb_storage xt_limit xt_state xt_multiport iptable_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_conntrack nf_defrag_ipv4 snd_ens1371 gameport snd_rawmidi snd_ac97_codec ac97_bus snd_seq snd_seq_device snd_pcm snd_timer snd soundcore vmw_balloon vmxnet3 snd_page_alloc shpchp raid10 btrfs zlib_deflate libcrc32c vmw_pvscsi [last unloaded: scsi_wait_scan] Pid: 786, comm: btrfs-transacti Not tainted 2.6.40-4.fc15.x86_64 #1 VMware, Inc. VMware Virtual Platform/440BX Desktop Reference Platform RIP: 0010:[a005cf08] [a005cf08] walk_down_log_tree+0x1ce/0x2c1 [btrfs] RSP: 0018:8800451c3bc0 EFLAGS: 00010282 RAX: ffa1 RBX: 8800451c3c5c RCX: 0001 RDX: 0100 RSI: 1000 RDI: 8800376595d0 RBP: 8800451c3c20 R08: a0062784 R09: 0002 R10: 0002 R11: 000d R12: 880046c68090 R13: 8800459ac800 R14: 880039627980 R15: 8800451c3ca0 FS: () GS:88004ac0() knlGS: CS: 0010 DS: ES: CR0: 8005003b CR2: 01955298 CR3: 47fe5000 CR4: 06f0 DR0: DR1: DR2: DR3: DR6: 0ff0 DR7: 0400 Process btrfs-transacti (pid: 786, threadinfo 8800451c2000, task 880046771730) Stack: 8800451c3c10 880046e48000 fffa a1fd1000 1000451c3c00 6afd 8800459ac800 880046c68090 8800459ac800 8800451c3ca0 Call Trace: [a005d07a] walk_log_tree+0x7f/0x19e [btrfs] [a005f021] free_log_tree+0x3e/0x9d [btrfs] [a005f249] ? wait_for_writer+0xc5/0xc5 [btrfs] [a005f804] btrfs_free_log+0x1d/0x2c [btrfs] [a00325ee] commit_fs_roots+0x8b/0x14b [btrfs] [81041325] ? should_resched+0xe/0x2d [814b5abc] ? _cond_resched+0xe/0x22 [a00339d9] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x3e0/0x706 [btrfs] [810703fa] ? remove_wait_queue+0x3a/0x3a [a0034180] ? start_transaction+0x20a/0x262 [btrfs] [81041325] ? should_resched+0xe/0x2d [a002e25c] transaction_kthread+0x167/0x21e [btrfs] [a002e0f5] ? btrfs_congested_fn+0x86/0x86 [btrfs] [8106fd0b] kthread+0x84/0x8c [814be8e4] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 [8106fc87] ? kthread_worker_fn+0x148/0x148 [814be8e0] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13 Code: 48 83 7d b0 fa 74 11 be cb 06 00 00 48 c7 c7 7f 9b 07 a0 e8 b1 7d ff e0 8b 55 c4 48 8b 75 b8 4c 89 ef e8 99 a4 fc ff 85 c0 74 02 0f 0b 4c 89 f7 e8 9b 3d ff ff eb 70 48 8b 75 c8 48 89 c7 e8 91 RIP [a005cf08] walk_down_log_tree+0x1ce/0x2c1 [btrfs] RSP 8800451c3bc0 ---[ end trace b6bdf8e508b8fce0 ]--- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:16:43AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: i have running 2.6.40-4.fc15.x86_64 #1 SMP in my testing-virtual-machine since some minutes, boot looked fine, after a minute a got a btrfs-stack-trace hope this helps (no i do not tend use btrfs in production *gg*) hmm, doesn't look like that one has been reported before. Can you file this in bugzilla please ? I expect Josef will want to take a look at it next week. thanks, Dave -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
On 07/29/2011 10:16 PM, Dave Jones wrote: On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:16:43AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: i have running 2.6.40-4.fc15.x86_64 #1 SMP in my testing-virtual-machine since some minutes, boot looked fine, after a minute a got a btrfs-stack-trace hope this helps (no i do not tend use btrfs in production *gg*) hmm, doesn't look like that one has been reported before. Can you file this in bugzilla please ? I expect Josef will want to take a look at it next week. thanks, Dave wasn't there some kind of issue in vm's ? Maybe I'm not remembering correctly. Dave - how is the 2.6.40 code different or not from 3.0.0-2 ? gene -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:29:58PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote: wasn't there some kind of issue in vm's ? Maybe I'm not remembering correctly. too vague to comment. there are always 'issues in vm's :) Dave - how is the 2.6.40 code different or not from 3.0.0-2 ? pretty much the same thing. Josh added a udl patch to f16 after I kicked off the f15 build. Likewise I added a scsi patch to f15 but didn't get around to adding it to 16. they'll sync up soon. Dave -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: koji: kernel-2.6.40-3.fc15
On 07/29/2011 10:41 PM, Dave Jones wrote: On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:29:58PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote: wasn't there some kind of issue in vm's ? Maybe I'm not remembering correctly. too vague to comment. there are always 'issues in vm's :) Ha ha .. actually I have a feeling now it was a performance issue w btrfs in vm's ... but that is a vague thought ... :-) Dave - how is the 2.6.40 code different or not from 3.0.0-2 ? pretty much the same thing. Josh added a udl patch to f16 after I kicked off the f15 build. Likewise I added a scsi patch to f15 but didn't get around to adding it to 16. they'll sync up soon. Dave Cool thanks! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree] added file
commit b43795bb7f3e1f743bf61413d8fc9af568da310f Author: Jan Klepek jan.kle...@gmail.com Date: Fri Jul 29 08:33:24 2011 +0200 added file perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree.email | 94 + 1 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree.email b/perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree.email new file mode 100644 index 000..faaeaf2 --- /dev/null +++ b/perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree.email @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ +Return-Path: chan...@otg-nc.com +X-Original-To: jan.kle...@brandforge.sk +Delivered-To: jan.kle...@brandforge.sk +X-Greylist: delayed 15877 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at mail.brandforge.sk; + Mon, 21 Mar 2011 18:17:12 CET +Received: from mail-gx0-f169.google.com (mail-gx0-f169.google.com + [209.85.161.169]) by mail.brandforge.sk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3921C36A1E + for jan.kle...@brandforge.sk; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 18:17:02 +0100 (CET) +Received: by gxk23 with SMTP id 23so3167747gxk.0 for + jan.kle...@brandforge.sk; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:17:00 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.100.214.1 with SMTP id m1mr2965045ang.30.1300727818503; + Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:16:58 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from Chander-Ganesans-MacBook-Pro.local + (cpe-065-190-053-026.nc.res.rr.com [65.190.53.26]) by mx.google.com with + ESMTPS id b28sm3133184anb.48.2011.03.21.10.16.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 + cipher=OTHER); Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:16:57 -0700 (PDT) +Message-ID: 4d878807.2070...@otg-nc.com +Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:16:55 -0400 +From: Chander Ganesan chan...@otg-nc.com +Organization: Open Technology Group, Inc. +User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; + rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 +MIME-Version: 1.0 +To: jan.klepek jan.kle...@brandforge.sk +Subject: Re: perl netpacket::spanningtree module +References: 1300710338.2498.10.camel@piko + 26dec522-c26c-4b04-b0d2-a825fd35d...@otg-nc.com + 1300725821.2498.12.camel@piko +In-Reply-To: 1300725821.2498.12.camel@piko +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +X-Evolution-Source: imap://jan.klepek%40brandforge...@mail.brandforge.sk/ + +That's fine with me. However, I don't have the time (nor do I remember +the credentials ;-)) to apply those changes. However, you're more than +welcome to (with my consent...) + +thanks + +Chander + +On 3/21/11 12:43 PM, jan.klepek wrote: + Hi + + I did try to contact you over email which is in CPAN however it returned + with error message that mailbox is no longer active. + + I have packaged your NetPacket::SpanningTree however, I see that you + have licensed it under Artistic license 1.0. This license is very vague + (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ArtisticLicense) and is + not allowed for Fedora packages. Would it be possible to re-license it + under Artistic or GPL (ie, the same as Perl itself) and add copy of + GPL to package which is on CPAN? + + Thank you + Regards, + Jan + + On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 08:44 -0400, Chander Ganesan wrote: + I am the author of that module... + + -- + Chander Ganesan + Open Technology Group, Inc. + One Copley Parkway, Suite 210 + Morrisville, NC 27560 + 919-463-0999/877-258-8987 + http://www.otg-nc.com + + On Mar 21, 2011, at 8:25 AM, jan.klepekjan.kle...@brandforge.sk wrote: + + Hi Chander, + + Are you author of Netpacket::SpanningTree perl module + ( http://search.cpan.org/~cganesan/NetPacket-SpanningTree-0.01/SpanningTree.pm )? + If yes, please let me know, I have licensing question related to this + module which needs to be clarified before I could add this perl module + into Fedora repository. + + Thank you for your time and help. + + Kind Regards, + Jan Klepek + + + + +-- +Chander Ganesan +Open Technology Group, Inc. +1 Copley Parkway, Suite 210 +Morrisville, NC 27560 +919-463-0999/877-258-8987 +http://www.otg-nc.com -- 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-NetPacket-SpanningTree/f15] added file
Summary of changes: b43795b... added file (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree/f14] added file
Summary of changes: b43795b... added file (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree/el5] added file
Summary of changes: b43795b... added file (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree/el6] added file
Summary of changes: b43795b... added file (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
File Coro-6.02.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by ppisar
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Coro: 583d40bdf913103e5d9fa20fb2065404 Coro-6.02.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-Coro] Convert JIT scripts to libraries
commit 11fca9d50236917708eff847d2d7f416d6beac9f
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Fri Jul 29 10:53:53 2011 +0200
Convert JIT scripts to libraries
perl-Coro.spec |9 ++---
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index 2a3b950..2a76667 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -64,7 +64,12 @@ programming much safer and easier than using other thread
models.
%patch0 -p1 -b .ucontext-default
%endif
-%global wrong_shbangs eg/myhttpd Coro/jit-*.pl
+for F in Coro/jit-*.pl; do
+sed -i -e '/^#!/d' $F
+chmod -x $F
+done
+
+%global wrong_shbangs eg/myhttpd
%if 0%{?fix_shbang_line}
%fix_shbang_line %wrong_shbangs
%else
@@ -72,8 +77,6 @@ programming much safer and easier than using other thread
models.
sed -i -e '/^#!/ s|.*|#!%{__perl}|' %wrong_shbangs
%endif
-chmod -x Coro/jit-*.pl
-
%build
# Interractive configuration. Use default values.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-Coro] Add RPM 4.9 style filters
commit 70e131cbee4d6cdd4b17b9e2223fd03744fca116
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Fri Jul 29 11:12:47 2011 +0200
Add RPM 4.9 style filters
perl-Coro.spec | 16
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index 2a76667..c40fcdc 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
+# RPM 4.8 style:
# Filter underspecified dependencies
%filter_from_requires /^perl(AnyEvent)$/d
%filter_from_requires /^perl(AnyEvent) = 4.81$/d
@@ -44,8 +45,23 @@ Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
%filter_from_provides /^perl(Coro)$/d
# Version unversioned Provides
%filter_from_provides s/^\(perl(Coro\[^=]*\)$/\1 = %{version}/
+
%{?perl_default_filter}
+# RPM 4.9 style:
+# Filter underspecified dependencies
+%global __requires_exclude
%{?__requires_exclude:__requires_exclude|}^perl\\(AnyEvent\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(AnyEvent\\) = 4.81$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(AnyEvent::AIO\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(AnyEvent::BDB\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(EV\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Event\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Guard\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Storable\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Coro\\)$
+%global __provides_exclude
%{?__provides_exclude:__provides_exclude|}^perl\\(Coro\\)$
+
+
%description
This module collection manages continuations in general, most often in the
form of cooperative threads (also called coros, or simply coro in the
--
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 718190] perl-Coro-6.02 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=718190 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Coro-6.02-1.fc17 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-07-29 05:33:22 -- 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
[perl-Coro/f16] Add RPM 4.9 style filters
commit db38abfba1eecd69ab79b50e231d90b46abf4a48
Author: Petr Písař ppi...@redhat.com
Date: Fri Jul 29 11:12:47 2011 +0200
Add RPM 4.9 style filters
perl-Coro.spec | 21 -
1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Coro.spec b/perl-Coro.spec
index 3d3fa44..1695810 100644
--- a/perl-Coro.spec
+++ b/perl-Coro.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Coro
Version:5.372
-Release:4%{?dist}
+Release:5%{?dist}
Summary:The only real threads in perl
License:GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ Requires: perl(Event) = 1.08
Requires: perl(Guard) = 0.5
Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
+# RPM 4.8 style:
# Filter underspecified dependencies
%filter_from_requires /^perl(AnyEvent)$/d
%filter_from_requires /^perl(AnyEvent) = 4.81$/d
@@ -44,8 +45,23 @@ Requires: perl(Storable) = 2.15
%filter_from_provides /^perl(Coro)$/d
# Version unversioned Provides
%filter_from_provides s/^\(perl(Coro\[^=]*\)$/\1 = %{version}/
+
%{?perl_default_filter}
+# RPM 4.9 style:
+# Filter underspecified dependencies
+%global __requires_exclude
%{?__requires_exclude:__requires_exclude|}^perl\\(AnyEvent\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(AnyEvent\\) = 4.81$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(AnyEvent::AIO\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(AnyEvent::BDB\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(EV\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Event\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Guard\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Storable\\)$
+%global __requires_exclude %__requires_exclude|^perl\\(Coro\\)$
+%global __provides_exclude
%{?__provides_exclude:__provides_exclude|}^perl\\(Coro\\)$
+
+
%description
This module collection manages continuations in general, most often in the
form of cooperative threads (also called coros, or simply coro in the
@@ -96,6 +112,9 @@ make test
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Fri Jul 29 2011 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com - 5.372-5
+- Add RPM 4.9 filters
+
* Tue Jun 21 2011 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com - 5.372-4
- Perl mass rebuild
--
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 726647] New: perl-POE-1.312 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-POE-1.312 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726647 Summary: perl-POE-1.312 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: perl-POE AssignedTo: cw...@alumni.drew.edu ReportedBy: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: cw...@alumni.drew.edu, fedora-perl-devel-l...@redhat.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Latest upstream release: 1.312 Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 1.289 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/POE/ 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 726648] New: perl-POE-Component-IRC-6.69 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-POE-Component-IRC-6.69 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726648 Summary: perl-POE-Component-IRC-6.69 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: perl-POE-Component-IRC AssignedTo: cw...@alumni.drew.edu ReportedBy: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: cw...@alumni.drew.edu, fedora-perl-devel-l...@redhat.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Latest upstream release: 6.69 Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 6.52 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/POE-Component-IRC/ 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
Broken dependencies: perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule
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 as possible. -- 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
Broken dependencies: perl-NOCpulse-Gritch
perl-NOCpulse-Gritch has broken dependencies in the rawhide 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 possible. -- 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-NetPacket-LLC/el6] Initial import #573918
Summary of changes: 5a72471... Initial import #573918 (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket-LLC/f15] update
commit cf2074221593e5e3f7a3d8115d8cad0e4fae4a1e
Author: Jan Klepek jan.kle...@gmail.com
Date: Fri Jul 29 18:53:02 2011 +0200
update
perl-NetPacket-LLC.spec |5 -
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-NetPacket-LLC.spec b/perl-NetPacket-LLC.spec
index d1f46d3..398e592 100644
--- a/perl-NetPacket-LLC.spec
+++ b/perl-NetPacket-LLC.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-NetPacket-LLC
Version:0.01
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Release:3%{?dist}
Summary:Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets
License:Artistic clarified
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Fri Jul 29 2011 Jan Klepek jan.klepek at, gmail.com - 0.01-3
+- update
+
* Tue Jan 11 2011 Jan Klepek jan.klepek at, gmail.com - 0.01-2
- fixed license
--
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-NetPacket-LLC] (2 commits) ...update
Summary of changes: cf20742... update (*) a8c096c... update (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket-LLC: 2/2] update
commit a8c096cdf981a80dd3eabbb0dd6d852e7987a584 Merge: cf20742 54606f0 Author: Jan Klepek jan.kle...@gmail.com Date: Fri Jul 29 18:55:37 2011 +0200 update perl-NetPacket-LLC.spec |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- -- 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 NetPacket-1.2.0.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by jpo
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-NetPacket: c3a09b48bc55cf366b594e30860d0a82 NetPacket-1.2.0.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-NetPacket] Update to 1.2.0.
commit e1cc1f6409402fdcbf749bc8c26e238f7a473445
Author: Jose Pedro Oliveira j...@di.uminho.pt
Date: Sat Jul 30 03:07:56 2011 +0100
Update to 1.2.0.
.gitignore |1 +
perl-NetPacket.spec |7 +--
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index d40646d..2895e84 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
/NetPacket-1.0.1.tar.gz
/NetPacket-1.1.0.tar.gz
/NetPacket-1.1.1.tar.gz
+/NetPacket-1.2.0.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-NetPacket.spec b/perl-NetPacket.spec
index 18ca5e2..2e15913 100644
--- a/perl-NetPacket.spec
+++ b/perl-NetPacket.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-NetPacket
-Version:1.1.1
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Version:1.2.0
+Release:1%{?dist}
Summary:Assemble/disassemble network packets at the protocol level
License:Artistic 2.0
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -50,6 +50,9 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Sat Jul 30 2011 Jose Pedro Oliveira jpo at di.uminho.pt - 1.2.0-1
+- Update to 1.2.0.
+
* Fri Jun 17 2011 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com - 1.1.1-2
- Perl mass rebuild
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 38b52aa..03d38f9 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-545776de880ee92586afe8ffe9f67e2a NetPacket-1.1.1.tar.gz
+c3a09b48bc55cf366b594e30860d0a82 NetPacket-1.2.0.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-NetPacket] Created tag perl-NetPacket-1.2.0-1.fc17
The lightweight tag 'perl-NetPacket-1.2.0-1.fc17' was created pointing to: e1cc1f6... Update to 1.2.0. -- 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-NetPacket/f16] Update to 1.2.0.
Summary of changes: e1cc1f6... Update to 1.2.0. (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket/f15] (2 commits) ...Update to 1.2.0.
Summary of changes: d21330c... Perl mass rebuild (*) e1cc1f6... Update to 1.2.0. (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket/el6] (2 commits) ...Update to 1.2.0.
Summary of changes: d21330c... Perl mass rebuild (*) e1cc1f6... Update to 1.2.0. (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket/el5] (2 commits) ...Update to 1.2.0.
Summary of changes: d21330c... Perl mass rebuild (*) e1cc1f6... Update to 1.2.0. (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
[perl-NetPacket/f14] (5 commits) ...Update to 1.2.0.
Summary of changes: 2599dca... * Update to 1.1.0. (*) bab460b... - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_Mass (*) f4795a8... * Update to 1.1.1. (*) d21330c... Perl mass rebuild (*) e1cc1f6... Update to 1.2.0. (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
