Re: GDBM upgrade in F17
On 2011-09-21, Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com wrote: On 2011-09-21, Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com wrote: That means Perl, Pyhon and other default-build-root packages will disable support for GDBM temporarily. So if your package needs GDBM support in those languages, please wait until new GDMB and other packages (Perl, Python and similar) get recompiled again against this new GDBM. I will send another notification once pruned Perl reaches F17 build root. Perl has been rebuilt _without_ GDBM in F17 as perl-5.14.1-191.fc17 and it's available in build root now. -- Petr -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: unison formal review
On 09/28/2011 11:00 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I checked the source code, and unison sends a header which contains the current major version number of the software (where major version is a string, currently 2.40). If the major versions of each end don't exactly match, unison aborts. It would be possible, albeit complicated, to combine all versions of unison together somehow and switch on the major version. Well, while I admit that merging all the various unison protocols into a single binary is a non-trivial task, especially if upstream isn't interested in that level of change, it might be possible to do something like this: Write a simple program which simply asks the other end to establish a connection for the sole purpose of detecting the major version string, then attempts to call out for a binary that could be used to actually establish that connection. It could also do connection caching so that only the first query attempt is necessary, future attempts would simply pull the known type from the cache and use that, only if that failed would it fall back to running detection. This way, we could continue with the separate packages for older versions of unison, with this smart binary in the main, current package. If the smart binary can't find a compat version that it needs, it can prompt the user to install unisonNNN. ~tom == Fedora Project -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
Hi, I'm working on bringing OLPC up-to-date with all the great efforts with GNOME 3, systemd, etc. On the OLPC XO laptops we have quite a strange screen - it is small (152mm x 114mm) but very high resolution (1200x900 i.e. 201 dots per inch). Previously, on Fedora 14, we had to adjust the default GNOME font sizes since they didn't look right on the screen (I think they were too big). Now I'm looking at applying the same set of customisations to Fedora 16 since the default fonts are uncomfortably small on our display. However, I've noticed a fundamental difference in the sizing of fonts between Fedora 14 and Fedora 16. This is visible with a simple experiment: 1. Open gedit 2. Change document font size to Sans 72 3. Write the capital letter I and measure the height of the printed character with a ruler I do this on two laptops side by side, one running Fedora 14 and the other running Fedora 16. On F14 the height of the I character is 1.9cm, and on Fedora 16 it is 0.9cm. That is quite a difference. On both laptops, xdpyinfo correctly prints the screen resolution, DPI and display size, which have not changed. From a typographic standpoint, F14 seems to be correct here. As 1pt is (approx) 1/72 of an inch, size 72 should produce characters of around 1 inch in size - and 1.9cm (the F14 measurement) is about an inch. Also, Cantarell seems to play by its own rules. On F16, the I in Cantarell 72 is 0.8cm, not too different from Sans 72, but the difference between Sans 11 and Cantarell 11 is more significant - at size 11, Cantarell is tiny. Can anyone help me understand this behaviour? Thanks, Daniel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On 2011/09/30 11:00 (GMT+0100) Daniel Drake composed: I'm working on bringing OLPC up-to-date with all the great efforts with GNOME 3, systemd, etc. On the OLPC XO laptops we have quite a strange screen - it is small (152mm x 114mm) but very high resolution (1200x900 i.e. 201 dots per inch). Previously, on Fedora 14, we had to adjust the default GNOME font sizes since they didn't look right on the screen (I think they were too big). Now I'm looking at applying the same set of customisations to Fedora 16 since the default fonts are uncomfortably small on our display. However, I've noticed a fundamental difference in the sizing of fonts between Fedora 14 and Fedora 16. This is visible with a simple experiment: 1. Open gedit 2. Change document font size to Sans 72 3. Write the capital letter I and measure the height of the printed character with a ruler I do this on two laptops side by side, one running Fedora 14 and the other running Fedora 16. On F14 the height of the I character is 1.9cm, and on Fedora 16 it is 0.9cm. That is quite a difference. On both laptops, xdpyinfo correctly prints the screen resolution, DPI and display size, which have not changed. From a typographic standpoint, F14 seems to be correct here. As 1pt is (approx) 1/72 of an inch, size 72 should produce characters of around 1 inch in size - and 1.9cm (the F14 measurement) is about an inch. Also, Cantarell seems to play by its own rules. On F16, the I in Cantarell 72 is 0.8cm, not too different from Sans 72, but the difference between Sans 11 and Cantarell 11 is more significant - at size 11, Cantarell is tiny. Can anyone help me understand this behaviour? Sounds to me like your F14 is using correct DPI while your F16 is forced to 96. Does your F14 have /etc/X11/xorg.conf file or a non-empty /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/? Can you try opening Firefox 3.x with hidden (about:config) pref layout.css.dpi set to 0, and again set to 201, and loading http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/dpi-screen-window.html to see what DPI it reports? Same in Konqueror? (other/newer browsers lock to 96). -- The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive. Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
File YAML-LibYAML-0.37.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by psabata
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-YAML-LibYAML: 8ce120ca473c58eb0abf28fa19fdb460 YAML-LibYAML-0.37.tar.gz -- 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
[perl-YAML-LibYAML] 0.37 bump
commit 3638c5f428d5ae33d0a1d35ae8166288b0eddf77
Author: Petr Sabata con...@redhat.com
Date: Fri Sep 30 13:15:07 2011 +0200
0.37 bump
.gitignore |1 +
perl-YAML-LibYAML.spec | 40 +++-
sources|2 +-
3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index e185c01..e3e1e3d 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
/YAML-LibYAML-0.34.tar.gz
/YAML-LibYAML-0.35.tar.gz
+/YAML-LibYAML-0.37.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-YAML-LibYAML.spec b/perl-YAML-LibYAML.spec
index 5874c53..26fc219 100644
--- a/perl-YAML-LibYAML.spec
+++ b/perl-YAML-LibYAML.spec
@@ -1,13 +1,31 @@
Name: perl-YAML-LibYAML
-Version:0.35
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Version:0.37
+Release:1%{?dist}
Summary:Perl YAML Serialization using XS and libyaml
License:GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
URL:http://search.cpan.org/dist/YAML-LibYAML/
Source0:
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/I/IN/INGY/YAML-LibYAML-%{version}.tar.gz
+BuildRequires: perl(B::Deparse)
+BuildRequires: perl(base)
+BuildRequires: perl(constant)
+BuildRequires: perl(Cwd)
+BuildRequires: perl(Exporter)
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Find)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Path)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Builder)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Builder::Module)
BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
+# Tests only
+BuildRequires: perl(Devel::Peek)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Path)
+BuildRequires: perl(Scalar::Util)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Base)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Base::Filter)
+BuildRequires: perl(Tie::Array)
+BuildRequires: perl(Tie::Hash)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo
$version))
%{?perl_default_filter}
@@ -22,27 +40,31 @@ bound to Ruby.
%setup -q -n YAML-LibYAML-%{version}
%build
-%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=perl OPTIMIZE=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=perl OPTIMIZE=%{optflags}
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 -type f -name '*.bs' -size 0 -exec rm -f {} \;
-find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2/dev/null \;
-%{_fixperms} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/*
+make pure_install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} \;
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -size 0 -exec rm -f {} \;
+find %{buildroot} -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2/dev/null \;
+%{_fixperms} %{buildroot}/*
%check
make test
%files
-%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%doc Changes README
%{perl_archlib}/auto/*
%{perl_archlib}/YAML*
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Fri Sep 30 2011 Petr Sabata con...@redhat.com - 0.37-1
+- 0.37 bump
+- Remove defattr
+- Correct BR
+
* Fri Jun 17 2011 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com - 0.35-2
- Perl mass rebuild
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 6580b71..d0d476b 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-9e047b14578aefd467d13aa612e6765b YAML-LibYAML-0.35.tar.gz
+8ce120ca473c58eb0abf28fa19fdb460 YAML-LibYAML-0.37.tar.gz
--
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: unison formal review
Am Freitag, 30. September 2011, 11:10:27 schrieb Tom Callaway: On 09/28/2011 11:00 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I checked the source code, and unison sends a header which contains the current major version number of the software (where major version is a string, currently 2.40). If the major versions of each end don't exactly match, unison aborts. It would be possible, albeit complicated, to combine all versions of unison together somehow and switch on the major version. Well, while I admit that merging all the various unison protocols into a single binary is a non-trivial task, especially if upstream isn't interested in that level of change, it might be possible to do something like this: Write a simple program which simply asks the other end to establish a connection for the sole purpose of detecting the major version string, then attempts to call out for a binary that could be used to actually establish that connection. It could also do connection caching so that only the first query attempt is necessary, future attempts would simply pull the known type from the cache and use that, only if that failed would it fall back to running detection. so many creative ideas ;) But I think such a program would be confusing to users: When someone wants to install unison, he expects the package will install unison and a menu entry. And not a unison version guessing tool. Also I can't imagine what will the user interface look like. This way, we could continue with the separate packages for older versions of unison, with this smart binary in the main, current package. If the smart binary can't find a compat version that it needs, it can prompt the user to install unisonNNN. ~tom == Fedora Project Greg 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: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote: Sounds to me like your F14 is using correct DPI while your F16 is forced to 96. Does your F14 have /etc/X11/xorg.conf file or a non-empty /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/? Bad DPI could certainly be a cause. However, xdpyinfo reports the correct value (201) on both platforms. We use a config file in /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d which specifies DisplaySize - needed for the correct DPI value to be computed. Can you try opening Firefox 3.x with hidden (about:config) pref layout.css.dpi set to 0, and again set to 201, and loading http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/dpi-screen-window.html to see what DPI it reports? Same in Konqueror? (other/newer browsers lock to 96). Sure, I'll try this. Do I run these tests on F14 or F16? (do you really mean Firefox 3.x?) cheers Daniel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On 2011/09/30 13:14 (GMT+0100) Daniel Drake composed: Felix Miata wrote: Sounds to me like your F14 is using correct DPI while your F16 is forced to 96. Does your F14 have /etc/X11/xorg.conf file or a non-empty /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/? Bad DPI could certainly be a cause. However, xdpyinfo reports the correct value (201) on both platforms. There is actually a possibility for 3 different DPIs to be recognized by various apps on a single X desktop. xdpyinfo only reports one of the 3, which is why I asked to open that URL in Firefox. We use a config file in /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d which specifies DisplaySize - needed for the correct DPI value to be computed. Check if your F14 /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/ has valid device and screen specified while your F16 does not. I think post-F14 Xorg behavior in this regard and/or default files and/or docs about them changed. Can you try opening Firefox 3.x with hidden (about:config) pref layout.css.dpi set to 0, and again set to 201, and loading http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/dpi-screen-window.html to see what DPI it reports? Same in Konqueror? (other/newer browsers lock to 96). Sure, I'll try this. Do I run these tests on F14 or F16? Both, if device and screen in xorg.conf.d/ aren't your F16 problem, otherwise neither. Might be easier to do in F14 unless you're familiar with using the mozilla.org static binaries. Oh, and don't use your regular profile(s). Start FF with -profilemanager and create a new one to use. I think you can damage your 4/5/6/7 profile by using it for an older version and then going back to 4/5/6/7. I'm not sure which of the post-3.x versions is responsible for the to/fro incompatibility. Or else backup first, run the tests, then restore. (do you really mean Firefox 3.x?) other/newer browsers lock to 96, which means they will only report 96 (or maybe 192?, since you have an actual 201 DPI) unless you've altered layout.css.devPixelsPerPx, in which case desktop DPI reported DPI won't likely correlate positively. -- The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive. Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
rawhide report: 20110930 changes
Compose started at Fri Sep 30 08:16:02 UTC 2011 Broken deps for x86_64 -- 389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 requires libicuuc.so.46 389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 requires libicui18n.so.46 389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 requires libicudata.so.46 389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.46()(64bit) 389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.46()(64bit) 389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.x86_64 requires libicudata.so.46()(64bit) 389-adminutil-1.1.14-1.fc16.i686 requires libicuuc.so.46 389-adminutil-1.1.14-1.fc16.i686 requires libicui18n.so.46 389-adminutil-1.1.14-1.fc16.i686 requires libicudata.so.46 389-adminutil-1.1.14-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.46()(64bit) 389-adminutil-1.1.14-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.46()(64bit) 389-adminutil-1.1.14-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicudata.so.46()(64bit) 389-dsgw-1.1.7-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.46()(64bit) 389-dsgw-1.1.7-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.46()(64bit) 389-dsgw-1.1.7-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicudata.so.46()(64bit) OpenSceneGraph-libs-3.0.1-3.fc17.i686 requires libpoppler.so.17 OpenSceneGraph-libs-3.0.1-3.fc17.x86_64 requires libpoppler.so.17()(64bit) R-core-2.13.1-4.fc17.i686 requires libicuuc.so.46 R-core-2.13.1-4.fc17.i686 requires libicui18n.so.46 R-core-2.13.1-4.fc17.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.46()(64bit) R-core-2.13.1-4.fc17.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.46()(64bit) acheck-0.5.1-4.fc15.noarch requires perl(Text::Aspell) 1:anerley-0.3.0-3.fc17.i686 requires libcogl.so.2 1:anerley-0.3.0-3.fc17.x86_64 requires libcogl.so.2()(64bit) apvlv-0.0.9.8-6.fc17.x86_64 requires libpoppler.so.17()(64bit) assogiate-0.2.1-5.fc15.x86_64 requires libgnomevfsmm-2.6.so.1()(64bit) bibletime-2.8.1-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.46()(64bit) bibletime-2.8.1-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.46()(64bit) bibletime-2.8.1-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libclucene.so.0()(64bit) calibre-0.8.20-1.fc17.x86_64 requires libpoppler.so.17()(64bit) cluster-snmp-0.18.7-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libnetsnmp.so.25()(64bit) coda-backup-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires libse.so.5()(64bit) coda-backup-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires librpc2.so.5()(64bit) coda-backup-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires liblwp.so.2()(64bit) coda-client-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires libseglwp.so.1()(64bit) coda-client-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires libse.so.5()(64bit) coda-client-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires librvmlwp.so.1()(64bit) coda-client-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires librpc2.so.5()(64bit) coda-client-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires librdslwp.so.1()(64bit) coda-client-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires liblwp.so.2()(64bit) coda-server-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires rvm-tools coda-server-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires libseglwp.so.1()(64bit) coda-server-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires libse.so.5()(64bit) coda-server-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires librvmlwp.so.1()(64bit) coda-server-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires librpc2.so.5()(64bit) coda-server-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires librdslwp.so.1()(64bit) coda-server-6.9.5-6.fc16.x86_64 requires liblwp.so.2()(64bit) comoonics-cdsl-py-0.2-18.noarch requires comoonics-base-py comoonics-cluster-py-0.1-24.noarch requires comoonics-base-py contextkit-0.5.15-2.fc15.i686 requires libcdb.so.1 contextkit-0.5.15-2.fc15.x86_64 requires libcdb.so.1()(64bit) couchdb-1.0.3-2.fc16.x86_64 requires libicuuc.so.46()(64bit) couchdb-1.0.3-2.fc16.x86_64 requires libicui18n.so.46()(64bit) couchdb-1.0.3-2.fc16.x86_64 requires libicudata.so.46()(64bit) dh-make-0.55-3.fc15.noarch requires debhelper ease-0.4-8.fc17.i686 requires libpoppler.so.17 ease-0.4-8.fc17.i686 requires libcogl.so.2 ease-0.4-8.fc17.x86_64 requires libpoppler.so.17()(64bit) ease-0.4-8.fc17.x86_64 requires libcogl.so.2()(64bit) emacs-spice-mode-1.2.25-5.fc15.noarch requires gwave eog-plugins-3.1.2-2.fc16.x86_64 requires libcogl.so.2()(64bit) eog-plugins-3.1.2-2.fc16.x86_64 requires libchamplain-gtk-0.10.so.0()(64bit) eog-plugins-3.1.2-2.fc16.x86_64 requires libchamplain-0.10.so.0()(64bit) epdfview-0.1.8-3.fc17.x86_64 requires libpoppler.so.17()(64bit) evince-libs-3.2.0-1.fc17.i686 requires libpoppler.so.17 evince-libs-3.2.0-1.fc17.x86_64 requires libpoppler.so.17()(64bit) fawkes-core-0.4.2-4.fc16.i686 requires libopencv_video.so.2.2 fawkes-core-0.4.2-4.fc16.i686 requires libopencv_objdetect.so.2.2 fawkes-core-0.4.2-4.fc16.i686 requires libopencv_ml.so.2.2 fawkes-core-0.4.2-4.fc16.i686 requires libopencv_legacy.so.2.2
Re: GDBM upgrade in F17
On 09/30/2011 11:07 AM, Petr Pisar wrote: Perl has been rebuilt _without_ GDBM in F17 as perl-5.14.1-191.fc17 and it's available in build root now. -- Petr The new gdbm-1.9.1-1 has just landed in Fedora Rawhide. Please, re-build your package(s) if depends on gdbm. Also python and perl can be re-build with gdbm support again. Note, that some changes can be needed to build against the new version, like: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742242 Feel free to contact me if something goes wrong. Honza -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: unison formal review
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/30/2011 01:38 PM, Gregor Tätzner wrote: so many creative ideas ;) But I think such a program would be confusing to users: When someone wants to install unison, he expects the package will install unison and a menu entry. And not a unison version guessing tool. Eh, I suppose I wasn't thinking of the GUI side of things. Arguably the user isn't expecting to deal with Unison Protocol Hell either. Also I can't imagine what will the user interface look like. Well, it could be minimal, but I'm not volunteering to do it. ~tom == Fedora Project -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk6Fx2AACgkQPF6ZrZMFQmCXsQCeMIpJvknLS2Lu4zPzW8C0aQnP iaUAn1kY8sRXGA7F804+YUgcyAc/gclV =YuY7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
Le Ven 30 septembre 2011 12:00, Daniel Drake a écrit : Can anyone help me understand this behaviour? rant There's nothing to understand – this is a new major GNOME release, with developers that know better than everyone else, and solve problems by ignoring past experience and hardcoding their own preferences Someone Gnome-side decided to not trust xorg dpi and added a new heuristic to 'correct' it (the last time this occurred, it took several years of user complains before it was reverted; I'm quite sure there will be a new round of excuses why it is a good idea to try to second-guess xorg hardware detection instead of fixing the eventual xorg bugs. What it boils down to is some people GNOME-side have less work to configure their hardware – around which the new heuristic has been constructed — everyone else gets weird unwelcome side-effects, and apps using other toolkits won't agree on what font sizes mean) Another someone decided DejaVu (what you call Sans) was too old and tired, and preempted it with a new unfinished font. It seems people do not understand UI fonts are there to display text, and a font people do not notice at all is a good UI font. Mind you, Cantarell is a nice free and open font, but did it really need showing down people's throats to be advertised? Especially considering its coverage is too small to support a lot of languages, and its metric is too different from the available fall-back fonts for the fall-backs to be graceful? There's nothing to do apart from waiting for enough complains to pile up the people in charge get past their reality denial phase. /rant -- Nicolas Mailhot -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote: Someone Gnome-side decided to not trust xorg dpi and added a new heuristic to 'correct' it I know this is part of a rant.. but any chance you could quantify that point with a link to a commit, blog post, mailing list discussion, something like that? cheers Daniel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Test-Announce] 2011-09-30 @ 17:00 UTC - F16 Final Blocker Bug Review #1
# F16 Final Blocker Review meeting #1 # Date: 2011-09-30 # Time: 17:00 UTC [1] (13:00 EDT, 10:00 PDT) # Location: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net I apologize for the late notice on this - we usually don't start on the blocker review meetings until the week after beta. However, we already have a long list of proposed blockers and it would be nice to not leave them ALL for next week. So, the first Fedora 16 final blocker bug review meeting will be this Friday at 17:00 UTC in #fedora-bugzappers. We'll be running through the final blockers and nice-to-haves. An updated list of blocker bugs is available at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers. We'll be reviewing the bugs to determine ... 1. Whether they meet the final release criteria [2] and should stay on the list 2. Whether they are getting the attention they need For guidance on Blocker and Nice-to-have (NTH) bugs, refer to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_nth_bug_process For the blocker review meeting protocol, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting . Thanks, Tim [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Final_Release_Criteria signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 15:47 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: There's nothing to do apart from waiting for enough complains to pile up the people in charge get past their reality denial phase. /rant This thread could have let to something constructive... but not so much anymore now, I guess. Good going, getting down to the rant level in less than 10 mails :-( -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Is there a mono developer in the house? Need help building moonlight.
I'm trying to package moonlight for possible inclusion at RPM Fusion but I'm having some issues. 1. pkg-config problem: I'm currently working on version 2.4.1 moonlight since it's the latest stable. It apparently is supposed to work with mono 2.6 but 2.10 is what F15 has, hopefully 2.6 is only a minimum. I've already had to hack the main Makefile because of what I think is a pkg-config issue with mono. By default, the moonlight Makefile uses: $ pkg-config --cflags mono which returns nothing, while: $ pkg-config --cflags mono-2 -D_REENTRANT -I/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/../../include/mono-2.0 ^ returns what I need. ^ 2. After that I'm getting most of the way though the compile but it's failing looking for Mono.Cecil.dll. It's looking for it in a rather strange place so I may have to hack the Makefile a bit to get it to find it in the right place. Here's the error I'm getting: make[3]: Entering directory `/home/build/rpmbuild/moonlight/BUILD/moonlight-2.4.1/class' make[3]: *** No rule to make target `/usr/bin/class/lib/net_1_1/Mono.Cecil.dll', needed by `copy-mcs-assemblies'. Stop. I don't have a problem hacking the makefile to look in the right place except the file (assuming I found the right one) is in an odd directoy: $ locate Mono.Cecil.dll /usr/lib64/mono/gac/Mono.Cecil/0.9.4.0__0738eb9f132ed756/Mono.Cecil.dll I can manually put that in the makefile but it seems that location is likely to change on an update of mono... Any ideas? Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Is there a mono developer in the house? Need help building moonlight.
There's also a mono list:: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono -Toshio On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 09:53:02AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: I'm trying to package moonlight for possible inclusion at RPM Fusion but I'm having some issues. 1. pkg-config problem: I'm currently working on version 2.4.1 moonlight since it's the latest stable. It apparently is supposed to work with mono 2.6 but 2.10 is what F15 has, hopefully 2.6 is only a minimum. I've already had to hack the main Makefile because of what I think is a pkg-config issue with mono. By default, the moonlight Makefile uses: $ pkg-config --cflags mono which returns nothing, while: $ pkg-config --cflags mono-2 -D_REENTRANT -I/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/../../include/mono-2.0 ^ returns what I need. ^ 2. After that I'm getting most of the way though the compile but it's failing looking for Mono.Cecil.dll. It's looking for it in a rather strange place so I may have to hack the Makefile a bit to get it to find it in the right place. Here's the error I'm getting: make[3]: Entering directory `/home/build/rpmbuild/moonlight/BUILD/moonlight-2.4.1/class' make[3]: *** No rule to make target `/usr/bin/class/lib/net_1_1/Mono.Cecil.dll', needed by `copy-mcs-assemblies'. Stop. I don't have a problem hacking the makefile to look in the right place except the file (assuming I found the right one) is in an odd directoy: $ locate Mono.Cecil.dll /usr/lib64/mono/gac/Mono.Cecil/0.9.4.0__0738eb9f132ed756/Mono.Cecil.dll I can manually put that in the makefile but it seems that location is likely to change on an update of mono... Any ideas? Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel pgpyN0tcV2JZf.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 15:47 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: There's nothing to do apart from waiting for enough complains to pile up the people in charge get past their reality denial phase. /rant This thread could have let to something constructive... but not so much anymore now, I guess. Good going, getting down to the rant level in less than 10 mails :-( There's no reason it can't be recovered, Matthias can you provide an explanation of the changes and the rationale behind them? Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Test-Announce] Fedora 16 Beta is GOLD!
At the Fedora 16 Beta Go/No-Go Meeting yesterday, the Fedora 16 Beta release was declared GOLD! Fedora 16 beta will be released on Tuesday, October 4, 2011. Major thanks to everyone who made this happen. There is no way that we could have gotten all this done without everyone's hard work and assistance. Tim Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-09-29/f16_beta_go_no_go_meeting_round_2.5.2011-09-29-21.03.html Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-09-29/f16_beta_go_no_go_meeting_round_2.5.2011-09-29-21.03.txt Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-09-29/f16_beta_go_no_go_meeting_round_2.5.2011-09-29-21.03.log.html #fedora-meeting: F15 Beta Go No Go Meeting Round 2.5 Meeting summary --- * Who's Here? (tflink, 21:03:42) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=713564hide_resolved=1 (adamw, 21:09:08) * why are we here (tflink, 21:09:50) * We're here to see whether or not the beta release criteria have been met (tflink, 21:10:22) * LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Beta_Release_Criteria (tflink, 21:10:30) * current release blockers (tflink, 21:10:44) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=713564hide_resolved=1 (tflink, 21:10:53) * that list doesn't take accepted/proposed into account (tflink, 21:11:02) * (725185) grubby doesn't add the initrd line at the kernel update (tflink, 21:11:57) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725185 (tflink, 21:12:04) * AGREED: - 725185 - RejectedBlocker - This is a problem, but as long as the next kernel update requires this version of grubby, things should be OK and this potential issue can be fixed with an update post-beta. (tflink, 21:20:20) * (731529) grub making uefi calls without aligning stack pointer (tflink, 21:20:39) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731529 (tflink, 21:20:45) * AcceptedBlocker, ON_QA (tflink, 21:21:53) * AGREED: - 731529 - Move to VERIFIED - All of the EFI tests are pretty much working, other issues would have likely surfaced by now (tflink, 21:23:25) * (737731) Bootloader is left in F15 configuration when preupgrading to F16 (tflink, 21:23:49) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737731 (tflink, 21:23:54) * AcceptedBlocker, ASSIGNED (tflink, 21:24:02) * AGREED: - 737731 - This needs to be fixed in F15 PreUpgrade and doesn't affect Beta compose. It doesn't appear to be in progress, need to revisit in the next couple of days. (tflink, 21:26:52) * (739253) unable to shut down from gdm greeter (tflink, 21:27:13) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739253 (tflink, 21:27:19) * AcceptedBlocker, MODIFIED (tflink, 21:27:25) * AGREED: - 739253 - Move to VERIFIED - this has been fixed to the point that we expected - no power option in shell that fails. The power option will be restored in gnome-shell updates (tflink, 21:29:26) * (742207) No usable bootloader option during a text mode f15-f16 upgrade (tflink, 21:30:04) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742207 (tflink, 21:30:12) * Proposed Blocker, NEW (tflink, 21:30:22) * ACTION: adamw or tflink - Document workaround for 742207 (tflink, 21:35:10) * AGREED: - 742207 - RejectedBlocker, CommonBugs - This doesn't directly hit any beta release criterion, isn't the most common upgrade path and can be worked around. The workaround needs to be documented (tflink, 21:35:22) * (742226) /sbin/grub2-probe: error: cannot find a GRUB drive for /dev/mapper/nvidia_cjfffajep2 (tflink, 21:36:37) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742226 (tflink, 21:36:44) * Proposed Blocker, NEW (tflink, 21:36:51) * AGREED: - 742226 - RejectedBlocker CommonBugs- BIOS Raid does work for some controllers but not all. Re-propose as final blocker and document for beta. (tflink, 21:44:21) * Test Coverage (tflink, 21:46:06) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg (adamw, 21:47:27) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Install_to_Hardware_RAID (adamw, 21:47:36) * AGREED: - only one exotic kickstart delivery method is missing from test coverage, and we provisionally suggest the stranger kickstart delivery methods should not be beta critical; therefore deeming test coverage effectively complete, as we would not block even if that test failed (adamw, 21:57:21) * Is Fedora 16 Beta Ready to Go? (tflink, 21:59:12) * QA is go for F16 Beta (tflink, 21:59:48) * RelEng is go (tflink, 22:00:10) * Devel is go (tflink, 22:00:41) * AGREED: - Fedora 16 Beta RC4 is accepted as beta (tflink, 22:01:35) * Open
exiv2-0.22 coming to rawhide
I'll be introducing exiv2-0.22 to rawhide next week, testing of affected packages is underday, and so far, so good... so I don't anticipate problems. repoquery --repoid=rawhide-source --archlist=src \ --whatrequires exiv2-devel | sort darktable-0:0.9.2-1.fc17.src geeqie-0:1.0-11.fc17.src gegl-0:0.1.6-2.fc16.src gipfel-0:0.3.2-10.fc16.src gnome-color-manager-0:3.2.0-2.fc17.src gnome-commander-3:1.2.8.13-2.fc17.src gpscorrelate-0:1.6.1-4.fc15.src gthumb-0:2.13.91-1.fc17.src gwenview-0:4.7.1-2.fc17.src hugin-0:2011.0.0-3.fc16.src immix-0:1.3.2-11.fc15.src kdebase-runtime-0:4.7.1-2.fc17.src koffice-3:2.3.3-9.fc16.src kphotoalbum-0:4.1.1-12.fc17.src krename-0:4.0.7-2.fc16.src ksnapshot-0:4.7.1-1.fc17.src libextractor-0:0.6.2-1602.fc17.src libgexiv2-0:0.2.2-2.fc15.src libkexiv2-0:4.7.1-1.fc17.src merkaartor-0:0.18.0-0.1.git654e49ba.fc16.src oyranos-0:0.3.1-1.fc16.src pyexiv2-0:0.3.0-5.fc17.src qtpfsgui-0:1.9.3-7.fc15.src rawstudio-0:2.0-1.fc16.src strigi-0:0.7.5-5.fc17.src ufraw-0:0.18-3.fc17.src ___ devel-announce mailing list devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Is there a mono developer in the house? Need help building moonlight.
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote: There's also a mono list:: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono -Toshio I was afraid that would be the answer :) Ah, another mailing list to subscribe to... If it weren't for gmail I'd already be buried under a mountain of emails! Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On 2011/09/30 11:09 (GMT-0400) Peter Robinson composed: can you provide an explanation of the changes and the rationale behind them? I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and KDE devs have decided they're controlling a playgound rather than software for users to be productive with, expecting those who don't like their silly power sapping toys to goto XFCE, LXDE or elsewhere to absolve themselves of the effects of naive and anarchist devs. -- The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive. Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:12:45PM -0400, Felix Miata wrote: I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and KDE devs have decided they're controlling a playgound rather than software for users to be productive with, expecting those who don't like their silly power sapping toys to goto XFCE, LXDE or elsewhere to absolve themselves of the effects of naive and anarchist devs. +1 Well said... /me being a pretty happy Xfce user since F15. -- --Jos Vos j...@xos.nl --X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364 --Amsterdam, The Netherlands| Fax: +31 20 6948204 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On 30/09/11 17:12, Felix Miata wrote: On 2011/09/30 11:09 (GMT-0400) Peter Robinson composed: can you provide an explanation of the changes and the rationale behind them? I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and KDE devs have decided they're controlling a playgound rather than software for users to be productive with, expecting those who don't like their silly power sapping toys to goto XFCE, LXDE or elsewhere to absolve themselves of the effects of naive and anarchist devs. I don't use Gnome since F10? But, what I surmise is, if you don't progress you stagnate. Rawhide, with hindsight would probably, have been the better candidate for any major advance. When more of the bugs\gripes could have been ironed out. Then place it in FN+1 Branched for greater feedback. Maybe it has been done that way, honestly don't know. But introduce in Rawhide, instead of Branched. -- Regards, Frank Murphy UTF_8 Encoded Friend of fedoraproject.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:59:58PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote: Someone Gnome-side decided to not trust xorg dpi and added a new heuristic to 'correct' it I know this is part of a rant.. but any chance you could quantify that point with a link to a commit, blog post, mailing list discussion, something like that? Does http://people.gnome.org/~federico/news-2007-01.html count? Or http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gnome-settings-daemon/branches/gnome-2-24/plugins/xsettings/gsd-xsettings-manager.c?view=markup#249 (line 249)? -- Tomasz Torcz RIP is irrevelant. Spoofing is futile. xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl Your routes will be aggreggated. -- Alex Yuriev -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 16 Beta is GOLD!
Tim Flink tfl...@redhat.com wrote: At the Fedora 16 Beta Go/No-Go Meeting yesterday, the Fedora 16 Beta release was declared GOLD! Fedora 16 beta will be released on Tuesday, October 4, 2011. Major thanks to everyone who made this happen. There is no way that we could have gotten all this done without everyone's hard work and assistance. Congratulations all! -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de InformaticaFono: +56 32 2654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile 234 Fax: +56 32 2797513 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
smolt query help
Hi, Can somebody help me figure out how to do a smolt query for filesystem device information? The question has come up on bug 54 whether /boot on md is a corner case or not. Smolt seems ready-made to answer questions like this. If I print my desktop's smolt profile I get: /dev/md0 /boot ext3 1024 1024 264333 196586 182938 68272 68183 68183 as an output line, but I don't see it when I pull up the machine's record (show all) on smolts.org. I've looked through the canned reports and don't see filesystem block devices. I assume I'm missing something, or perhaps it's not public and there's a way to request a query? A count of ^/dev/md.*/boot records would be the useful metric. Thanks, -Bill -- Bill McGonigle, Owner BFC Computing, LLC http://bfccomputing.com/ Telephone: +1.855.SW.LIBRE Email, IM, VOIP: b...@bfccomputing.com VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf Social networks: bill_mcgonigle/bill.mcgonigle -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl wrote: Or http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gnome-settings-daemon/branches/gnome-2-24/plugins/xsettings/gsd-xsettings-manager.c?view=markup#249 (line 249)? I'm not sure that's relevant for the current codebase. But even so if you look at 73-75 the high and low reasonable limits don't seem unreasonable to me. And since the OLPC screen hardware being described is between the high/low reasonable limits in that particular bit of code you are pointing to, the fall back logic wouldn't fire so it couldn't be the cuase of the particular technical issue which started this thread. -jef -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Jef Spaleta jspal...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl wrote: Or http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gnome-settings-daemon/branches/gnome-2-24/plugins/xsettings/gsd-xsettings-manager.c?view=markup#249 (line 249)? I'm not sure that's relevant for the current codebase. But even so if you look at 73-75 the high and low reasonable limits don't seem unreasonable to me. And since the OLPC screen hardware being described is between the high/low reasonable limits in that particular bit of code you are pointing to, the fall back logic wouldn't fire so it couldn't be the cuase of the particular technical issue which started this thread. Jef, you're right, but Tomasz's link did send me in the right direction. Thanks! Here is the equivalent code of today: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-settings-daemon/tree/plugins/xsettings/gsd-xsettings-manager.c#n219 Discussion: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=643704 Summary: GNOME hardcodes DPI to 96 regardless of X configuration. However, it now has a text scaling factor in gsettings that I was not aware of. So I guess I just need to find an appropriate factor that makes fonts look OK on the XO. cheers Daniel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: However, it now has a text scaling factor in gsettings that I was not aware of. So I guess I just need to find an appropriate factor that makes fonts look OK on the XO. One problem faced here is that (as noted earlier) Cantarell behaves quite differently to Sans (DejaVu) in terms of scaling at different sizes, and the default setup mixes these 2 fonts. This problem gets amplified when applying large scale factors. So I settled for a scale factor of 2.1. This makes the document font and window title font (both Sans) look the correct size, but everything else (Cantarell) is uncomfortably large. Then I changed the default font from Cantarell to Sans and now everything looks fine. So my final override: [org.gnome.desktop.interface] cursor-size=48 text-scaling-factor=2.1 font-name='Sans 7' Thanks ! Daniel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
Felix Miata wrote: I think it's become clear over the past couple of years that the Gnome and KDE devs have decided they're controlling a playgound rather than software for users to be productive with What does KDE have to do with this? KDE honors your screen's physical DPI by default. (It has done so for years.) Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
Daniel Drake wrote: Summary: GNOME hardcodes DPI to 96 regardless of X configuration. This is very broken. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Is there a mono developer in the house? Need help building moonlight.
Richard Shaw wrote: I was afraid that would be the answer :) Ah, another mailing list to subscribe to... If it weren't for gmail I'd already be buried under a mountain of emails! http://www.gmane.org/ Connect with your favorite NNTP (Usenet newsgroup) client. (I use KNode. Gmane mailing list gateways are actually all I use KNode for.) To post to mailing lists which only allow posts from subscribers, subscribe to the mailing list and disable mail delivery. (Mailman, which almost all the mailing lists out there use, allows you to do that from the settings.) The server is news.gmane.org, it supports both NNTPS and unencrypted NNTP, on the default ports (i.e. NNTPS on port 563 and unencrypted NNTP on port 119). Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?
rant On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Daniel Drake wrote: Summary: GNOME hardcodes DPI to 96 regardless of X configuration. This is very broken. Gnome: Reliving Window's horrible past, one emulated bug at a time. At least we can be thankful that unlike windows, gnome doesn't have the market force required for their flaws to retard the availability of displays with reasonable pixel densities. /rant -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
File MooseX-AttributeShortcuts-0.005.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by ppisar
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-MooseX-AttributeShortcuts: f9e48d36dcb81794af69cb324edf0979 MooseX-AttributeShortcuts-0.005.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 742188] perl-MooseX-TrackDirty-Attributes-1.000 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=742188 Bug 742188 depends on bug 742221, which changed state. Bug 742221 Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-AttributeShortcuts - Shorthand for common Moose attribute options https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742221 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- 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 742502] New: perl-YAML-LibYAML-0.37 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-YAML-LibYAML-0.37 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742502 Summary: perl-YAML-LibYAML-0.37 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: perl-YAML-LibYAML 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: --- Type: --- Latest upstream release: 0.37 Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 0.35 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/YAML-LibYAML/ 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 742502] perl-YAML-LibYAML-0.37 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=742502 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
Broken dependencies: perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8
perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8 has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree: On x86_64: perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03-2.fc15.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4) On i386: perl-Unicode-CheckUTF8-1.03-2.fc15.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4) Please resolve this as soon as 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-Devel-CallChecker
perl-Devel-CallChecker has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree: On x86_64: perl-Devel-CallChecker-0.003-1.fc15.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4) On i386: perl-Devel-CallChecker-0.003-1.fc15.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4) 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-Pugs-Compiler-Rule
perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree: On x86_64: perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-9.fc16.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3) On i386: perl-Pugs-Compiler-Rule-0.37-9.fc16.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3) Please resolve this as soon as 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-Test-Version
perl-Test-Version has broken dependencies in the F-16 tree: On x86_64: perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc15.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4) On i386: perl-Test-Version-1.0.0-3.fc15.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.4) Please resolve this as soon as possible. -- 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 F-16 tree: On x86_64: perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9-1.fc16.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3) On i386: perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9-1.fc16.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3) Please resolve this as soon as 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
[Bug 742502] perl-YAML-LibYAML-0.37 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=742502 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-YAML-LibYAML-0.37-1.fc ||17 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-09-30 07:25:01 -- 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
[Bug 715745] FTBFS perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9-1.fc16
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=715745 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9 ||-4.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-09-30 14:35:12 -- 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 715745] FTBFS perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9-1.fc16
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=715745 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 14:35:05 EDT --- perl-NOCpulse-Gritch-1.27.9-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 737320] Update to upstream 3.10.1
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=737320 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 14:54:00 EDT --- dspam-3.10.1-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 737320] Update to upstream 3.10.1
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=737320 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|dspam-3.10.1-1.el5 |dspam-3.10.1-1.fc16 -- 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 247253] Conflicting Provides
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=247253 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 15:06:31 EDT --- perl-Time-Piece-MySQL-0.05-14.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 247253] Conflicting Provides
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=247253 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Time-Piece-MySQL-0.05- |perl-Time-Piece-MySQL-0.05- |13.fc15 |14.fc16 -- 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 734469] Upgrade to new upstream version
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=734469 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 15:17:26 EDT --- perl-Directory-Queue-1.2-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 734469] Upgrade to new upstream version
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=734469 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Directory-Queue-1.2-1. |perl-Directory-Queue-1.2-1. |el4 |fc16 -- 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 737885] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.37 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=737885 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 15:16:21 EDT --- perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.37-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 737885] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.37 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=737885 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.37 |perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.37 |-1.fc14 |-1.fc16 -- 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 738599] perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914 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=738599 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 15:23:33 EDT --- perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 738383] perl-Mozilla-CA: stop shipping own certificate bundle
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=738383 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 15:23:38 EDT --- perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 738383] perl-Mozilla-CA: stop shipping own certificate bundle
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=738383 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version|perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914-2. |perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914-2. |fc17|fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-09-30 15:23:50 -- 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 738599] perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914 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=738599 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version|perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914-1. |perl-Mozilla-CA-20110914-2. |fc17|fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-09-30 15:23:45 -- 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 736612] fcgi package contains embedded copy of FCGI module
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=736612 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-09-30 15:41:28 EDT --- fcgi-2.4.0-17.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 736612] fcgi package contains embedded copy of FCGI module
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=736612 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||fcgi-2.4.0-17.fc16 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- 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
[389-devel] Please review: Bug 740942 - allow resource limits to be set for paged searches independently of limits for other searches/operations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740942 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=525854action=edit -- 389-devel mailing list 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
exiv2-0.22 coming to rawhide
I'll be introducing exiv2-0.22 to rawhide next week, testing of affected packages is underday, and so far, so good... so I don't anticipate problems. repoquery --repoid=rawhide-source --archlist=src \ --whatrequires exiv2-devel | sort darktable-0:0.9.2-1.fc17.src geeqie-0:1.0-11.fc17.src gegl-0:0.1.6-2.fc16.src gipfel-0:0.3.2-10.fc16.src gnome-color-manager-0:3.2.0-2.fc17.src gnome-commander-3:1.2.8.13-2.fc17.src gpscorrelate-0:1.6.1-4.fc15.src gthumb-0:2.13.91-1.fc17.src gwenview-0:4.7.1-2.fc17.src hugin-0:2011.0.0-3.fc16.src immix-0:1.3.2-11.fc15.src kdebase-runtime-0:4.7.1-2.fc17.src koffice-3:2.3.3-9.fc16.src kphotoalbum-0:4.1.1-12.fc17.src krename-0:4.0.7-2.fc16.src ksnapshot-0:4.7.1-1.fc17.src libextractor-0:0.6.2-1602.fc17.src libgexiv2-0:0.2.2-2.fc15.src libkexiv2-0:4.7.1-1.fc17.src merkaartor-0:0.18.0-0.1.git654e49ba.fc16.src oyranos-0:0.3.1-1.fc16.src pyexiv2-0:0.3.0-5.fc17.src qtpfsgui-0:1.9.3-7.fc15.src rawstudio-0:2.0-1.fc16.src strigi-0:0.7.5-5.fc17.src ufraw-0:0.18-3.fc17.src ___ devel-announce mailing list devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce
