Re: mock-0.9.19 on CentOS5/RHEL5
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 01:09:14PM -0500, Mike McLean wrote: Perhaps since RHEL5 is something of an important platform for mock we should consider making this codepath conditional, or otherwise fix this without forking. Hello Mike, thanks for getting the new release of mock out, also for the pykickstart commit to keep working with older python releases. I've moved to newest rpms and besides mock I've also tested koji a bit more now. Some recompile tests with kernel,glibc,memtest86+ and a dozen other rpms did all work ok, so the special koji config steps should be complete now... (Also Michal Hlavinka has merged in some bits for dovecot to have newest Fedora Rawhide rpms compile on RHEL5, so overall it's been a good week to reduce extra patches for me.) thanks, Florian La Roche -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
About priority on tag-inheritance
I wonder how the priority on tag-inheritance works. whether the priority number which is large has priority, or not? In other words, the larger the priority number is ,the priorer . is it like this? -- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 00:52 -0500, Bill McGonigle wrote: On 11/21/2009 03:52 AM, Jonathan Dieter wrote: FWIW, there is a syslinux module named ifcpu64 that will load different kernels/initrds based on whether the cpu is 64-bit. Cool, do syslinux modules work in isolinux? We could have a tiny 32-bit image on a 64-bit CD that would say, sorry, you got the wrong CD. They should; it's all the same project. I think the the 64-bit kernel already gives a sane error message when you attempt to run it on a 32-bit machine. Jonathan I wonder... Why can't we have 32-bit Linux able to run 64-bit applications? Mac OS X can do it. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:51 AM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Sir Gallantmon ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 00:52 -0500, Bill McGonigle wrote: On 11/21/2009 03:52 AM, Jonathan Dieter wrote: FWIW, there is a syslinux module named ifcpu64 that will load different kernels/initrds based on whether the cpu is 64-bit. Cool, do syslinux modules work in isolinux? We could have a tiny 32-bit image on a 64-bit CD that would say, sorry, you got the wrong CD. They should; it's all the same project. I think the the 64-bit kernel already gives a sane error message when you attempt to run it on a 32-bit machine. Jonathan I wonder... Why can't we have 32-bit Linux able to run 64-bit applications? Mac OS X can do it. 1) because it isn't possible 2) no it doesn't mac OS X use a 64bit hypervisor and run the rest inside it. An more importantly ... why should we want that? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora rawhide rebuild in mock status 2009-11-18 x86_64
On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:05:12 -0600 Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 09:20:54PM +0100, Robert Scheck wrote: Hello Matt, On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Matt Domsch wrote: mksh-39-1.fc12 (build/make) robert I tried to reproduce your build failure from your mass rebuild for mksh - http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/FixBuildRequires/mock-results/x86_64/mksh-39-1.fc12.src.rpm/result/build.log - http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/FixBuildRequires/mock-results/i386/mksh-39-1.fc12.src.rpm/result/build.log using a koji scratch build at the Fedora buildsystem - and there it did not fail: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1820331 I think, you've enabled SELinux at your buildsystem which causes the /dev/* files to be missing in the end, but compare yourself: it's not SELinux (that is Disabled on my builders). I believe it is: Bug 510183 - mock mounts /dev/pts in chroot with wrong options because the failure comes during your %check section: openpty failed Child returncode was: -15 The builders are all running mock-0.9.19-1.fc12.noarch, which claims in %changelog to have the fix for Bug 510183, but there are now several FTBFS bugs blocking on it still, so the problem remains... The original problem that Bug 510183 was reported about is indeed fixed, but along with the fix came an enhancement to use separate instances of /dev/pts in the chroots where the kernel supported it, and this enhancement is broken. As mentioned in Comment 10 of the bug, commenting out two lines mock/backend.py to disable the enhancement should be sufficient to get these packages building again. Paul. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora rawhide rebuild in mock status 2009-11-18 x86_64
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:39:49 +0100 Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:05 PM, Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com wrote: it's not SELinux (that is Disabled on my builders). I believe it is: Bug 510183 - mock mounts /dev/pts in chroot with wrong options because the failure comes during your %check section: openpty failed Child returncode was: -15 Is this the same as my buildbot failure? I see: [ERROR]: buildbot.test.test_slavecommand.ShellPTY.testShell1 Traceback (most recent call last): File /builddir/build/BUILD/buildbot-0.7.11p3/buildbot/slave/commands.py, line 388, in start self._startCommand() File /builddir/build/BUILD/buildbot-0.7.11p3/buildbot/slave/commands.py, line 507, in _startCommand usePTY=self.usePTY) File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/twisted/internet/posixbase.py, line 221, in spawnProcess processProtocol, uid, gid, usePTY) File /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/twisted/internet/process.py, line 812, in __init__ masterfd, slavefd = pty.openpty() File /usr/lib/python2.6/pty.py, line 29, in openpty master_fd, slave_name = _open_terminal() File /usr/lib/python2.6/pty.py, line 70, in _open_terminal raise os.error, 'out of pty devices' exceptions.OSError: out of pty devices Looks like it. Does a koji scratch build succeed? If so, should I just close the bug? I'd wait until Matt's builders are fixed or you might just end up getting another bug raised. Paul. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
rawhide report: 20091122 changes
Compose started at Sun Nov 22 08:15:10 UTC 2009 New package microba Set of JFC (Swing) components Updated Packages: Coin2-2.5.0-8.fc13 -- * Sun Nov 22 2009 Ralf Corsépius corse...@fedoraproject.org - 2.5.0-8 - Eliminate /usr/share/Coin. - Rename mans into *coin2. - Fix broken calls to rename. R-AnnotationDbi-1.8.1-1.fc13 * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.8.1-1 - Update to 1.8.1 - Remove the %post and %postun - Adapt %files to the new R R-Biobase-2.6.0-1.fc13 -- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 2.6.0-1 - Update to 2.6.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 * Fri Nov 20 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 2.4.1-2 - Rebuild R-BufferedMatrix-1.10.0-1.fc13 -- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.10.0-1 - Update to 1.10.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 R-BufferedMatrixMethods-1.10.0-1.fc13 - * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.10.0-1 - Update to 1.10.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 R-DynDoc-1.24.0-1.fc13 -- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.24.0-1 - Update to 1.24.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 R-GeneR-2.16.0-1.fc13 - * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 2.16.0-1 - Update to 2.16.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 R-RUnit-0.4.22-3.fc13 - * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 0.4.22-3 - Rebuild for R-2.10.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 R-affyio-1.14.0-1.fc13 -- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.14.0-1 - Update to 1.14.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 R-maanova-1.16.0-1.fc13 --- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.16.0-1 - Update to 1.16.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 - Fix BR tex(latex) R-preprocessCore-1.8.0-1.fc13 - * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.8.0-1 - Update to 1.8.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 - Fix BR tex(latex) R-qvalue-1.20.0-1.fc13 -- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.20.0-1 - Update to 1.20.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 - Fix BR tex(latex) R-rlecuyer-0.3.1-1.fc13 --- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 0.3.1-1 - Update to 0.3.1 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 - Fix BR tex(latex) R-widgetTools-1.24.0-1.fc13 --- * Sat Nov 21 2009 pingou pin...@pingoured.fr 1.24.0-1 - Update to 1.24.0 - Remove %post and %postun - Adapt %files to R-2.10.0 - Fix BR tex(latex) SoQt-1.4.1-13.fc13 -- * Sun Nov 22 2009 Ralf Corsépius corse...@fedoraproject.org - 1.4.1-13 - Eliminate stray /usr/share/Coin directory. avr-gcc-4.4.2-1.fc13 * Fri Nov 20 2009 Thibault North tnorth AT fedoraproject DOT org - 4.4.2-1 - New upstream release avr-libc-1.6.5-1.fc13 - * Fri Nov 20 2009 Thibault North tnorth AT fedoraproject DOT org 1.6.5-1 - New upstream release azureus-4.3.0.0-1.fc13 -- * Thu Nov 19 2009 David Juran dju...@redhat.com - 4.3.0.0-1 - upgrade to azureus-4.3.0.0 bitbake-1.8.18-1.fc13 - * Sun Nov 15 2009 Michal Ingeli m...@v3.sk - 1.8.18-1 - Update to current release - Stripped shebangs from non-executable python scripts - Fixed documentation file encoding fontpackages-1.33-1.fc13 * Sat Nov 21 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nim at fedoraproject dot org - 1.33-1 — repo-font-audit: add ancilliary script to compare the results of two different runs - 1.32-1 — repo-font-audit: add test for core fonts direct use — repo-font-audit: replace font naming tests by a more comprehensive one (in a separate utility) — repo-font-audit: add fedora packager detection — repo-font-audit: parallelize (at the cost of more filesystem space use) — repo-font-audit: misc output and reliability fixes gbirthday-0.5.3-1.fc13 -- * Sat Nov 21 2009 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 0.5.3-1 - new version gsim85-0.3-1.fc13 - * Fri Aug 07 2009 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net - 0.3-1 - Removed wrong end of line encoding fix - Removed permission fix - Removed patch0, replaced with desktop-file-install - Updated to new upstream version 0.3 gupnp-vala-0.6.2-1.fc13 --- * Sat Nov 21 2009 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 0.6.2-1 - New upstream 0.6.2 release jack-audio-connection-kit-0.118.0-1.fc13 * Sat Nov 21 2009 Andy Shevchenko a...@smile.org.ua - 0.118.0-1 - update to 0.118.0 (should fix #533419) - remove upstreamed patch - append new binaries to -example-clients subpackage
Re: Notification of uploads to the lookaside cache
On Sunday, 22 November 2009 at 01:34, Jon Stanley wrote: [...] Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, or room for improvement! It'll provide means for maintainers to verify their changes, and that's always a good thing. Thanks! Regards, R. -- Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu Faith manages. -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:Confessions and Lamentations -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Head-up - new firefox in rawhide
to, 2009-11-19 kello 14:30 -0800, Christopher Aillon kirjoitti: Perhaps we should continue to provide -unstable, though. Things that still need the unstable libs can continue Require -unstable which will make it a heck of a lot easier to figure out what to rebuild... +1. I'd like to see a decision made soon on whether you will provide -unstable or not. My xulrunner unstable dependent package (mozvoikko) has been broken in Rawhide for a few days now, I'd like to know which will be the best way to fix it. -- Ville-Pekka Vainio -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora rawhide rebuild in mock status 2009-11-18 x86_64
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org wrote: Looks like it. Does a koji scratch build succeed? Yes: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1822361 If so, should I just close the bug? I'd wait until Matt's builders are fixed or you might just end up getting another bug raised. Ok, thank you very much -- Gianluca Sforna http://morefedora.blogspot.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/gianlucasforna -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Notification of uploads to the lookaside cache
Jon Stanley wrote: The message will contain the name of the file, the package concerned, the md5sum, and the user that uploaded it. An example is below: File upload.cgi for package sportrop-fonts has been uploaded to the lookaside cache with md5sum 26489f9e92601f0f84cfbb278c2b98e1 by jstanley Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, or room for improvement! Well, since you asked... :) I'd like to suggest that we use the name of the account uploading the file instead of nob...@fedoraproject.org and tweak the format of the message just a little, to make it easier to compare the output to locally generated md5sum output. An example: A file has been added to the lookaside cache for sportrop-fonts: 26489f9e92601f0f84cfbb278c2b98e1 sportrop-fonts-1.0.tar.gz Being lazy, I try to be the last one to volunteer anyone else for work, so I have also made these suggestions in convenient unified diff format (easily applied using git am to the infrastructure puppet repository) at: http://tmz.fedorapeople.org/patches/upload_cgi/ Thanks for adding this feature to the upload scripts. I think it's a good idea. Next up, moving from MD5 to something stronger, like SHA256. ;) -- ToddOpenPGP - KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~ Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. -- Douglas Adams pgpiigayDaS9L.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Notification of uploads to the lookaside cache
Jon Stanley wrote: The message will contain the name of the file, the package concerned, the md5sum, and the user that uploaded it. An example is below: File upload.cgi for package sportrop-fonts has been uploaded to the lookaside cache with md5sum 26489f9e92601f0f84cfbb278c2b98e1 by jstanley Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, or room for improvement! Well, since you asked... :) I'd like to suggest that we use the name of the account uploading the file instead of nob...@fedoraproject.org and tweak the format of the message just a little, to make it easier to compare the output to locally generated md5sum output. An example: A file has been added to the lookaside cache for sportrop-fonts: 26489f9e92601f0f84cfbb278c2b98e1 sportrop-fonts-1.0.tar.gz Being lazy, I try to be the last one to volunteer anyone else for work, so I have also made these suggestions in convenient unified diff format (easily applied using git am to the infrastructure puppet repository) at: http://tmz.fedorapeople.org/patches/upload_cgi/ Thanks for adding this feature to the upload scripts. I think it's a good idea. Next up, moving from MD5 to something stronger, like SHA256. ;) Does anyone know why I'm getting tons of notifications concerning packages for which I am not maintainer, co-maintainer? -- ToddOpenPGP - KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~ Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. -- Douglas Adams -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Notification of uploads to the lookaside cache
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net wrote: Does anyone know why I'm getting tons of notifications concerning packages for which I am not maintainer, co-maintainer? No clue - are you on fedora-extras-commits maybe? You'd get them all in that case. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: abrt + X Error = zillions of duplicate bug reports?
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Martin Sourada martin.sour...@gmail.com wrote: So, since I've already received 3 separate bug reports caused by BadIDChoice X Error in subtitleeditor [1][2][3] (haven't had enough time to debug and try to fix it yet though) by abrt, I wonder if there is any room for duplicity detection improvement in these cases, or if we are doomed to zillions of duplicates in rhbz? (btw. otherwise abrt is awesome, IMHO the bugreports from abrt are much more useful than before :-) Yeah duplicate detection needs to improve, my inbox is flooded with bugreports, I didn't have time to debug them yet. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: texlive 2009 - should set TEXMFCNF?
2009/10/30 Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com: I'm presenting a complete list of packages shipped in TeX Live to discuss another possible obsoletions: dvipdfm dvipdfmx I think the latest TeXLive doesn't include dvipdfm as its functionality is now covered by dvipdfmx. Anyway, In both cases I am the packager, and would rather see the texlive variant shipped and the packages obsoleted. xdvi Again, would prefer if we obsoleted the separate package and went with the texlive variant. Here however we may need to shipp a separate package for the japanese patched version. Or we could integrate the japanese patch into texlive - this may need some work though, as the japanese patch seems to be unmaintined presently. Longer term I hope xdvi just goes away, as its functionality increasingly gets added to evince - xdvi is only minimally maintained at this point and is rather... crusty. dvipng Yep, we should simply go with the texlive version - I am happy with this, as dvipng maintainer. xdvipdfmx I'm not primary maintainer of this one, but again, I think we should go with the texlive shipped version (which is ahead of the version available as a separate tarball). Let me know if you need any help with this. Cheers, Jonathan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: PackageKit policy: background and plans
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote: worked without a password or login or anything. For the envisioned 'desktop' model is there a reason to have multiple users for the default? Is there a reason to have anything but root? Yes. There's a range of acts that root is able to perform that even an admin user should not be able to perform without extra authentication. It's not even necessarily related to security - I don't want a bug in firefox resulting in it trying to write to /dev/sda rather than a file in my home directory, for instance. This needs to be enforced at the OS level, with an analyzable policy, so you can determine if this is possible or not. Install all signed packages from a Fedora repository may indeed include the ability to write to /dev/sda -- nobody really knows and you have no way to find out. Also, it should certainly be possible while the operation is running at full privilege. - James -- James Morris jmor...@namei.org -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: PackageKit policy: background and plans
James Morris wrote: On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote: I don't think I'd agree with that. The common case for F10 and F11 will be for people to have installed a package once with the root password and then ticked the Remember authentication box. At that point, we have the same security exposure as we do with F12 (again, concentrating on the single-user machine case). I never tick those boxes. I'd like to know how to get rid of them entirely. Upgrade to F12 (with the latest PackageKit update), there's no such checkbox in F12's PolicyKit. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Improve the way rpm decides what is newer
Mike McGrath wrote: Epochs are nasty. Can anyone think of any other mechanism they could use with rpm? Ubuntu's really hack? E.g. this version was used for Jaunty's K3b: 1.0.5+kde4svn935857+really1.0.5-3ubuntu5 Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Right-click for wacom driver?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 While working on Flash development in Windows XP TabletPC, I noticed the right-click is done by pressing the stylus for few second and icon will display the right-click mouse delay. I wonder if the new xorg-x11-drv-wacom can do similar action for stylus that don't have eraser action. I am not sure if the current linuxwacom can do similar action. If so, how can it be done? - -- Luya Tshimbalanga Graphic Web Designer E: l...@fedoraproject.org W: http://www.thefinalzone.net -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAksJyGYACgkQaS6HaNQHFTkFVwCaA7qSkuj3DH6BO6Ue8jo8nQs6 EoQAoJOhiHKXye+La8Lz7CDhDuH4rARR =u8CC -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Right-click for wacom driver?
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 03:25:27PM -0800, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: While working on Flash development in Windows XP TabletPC, I noticed the right-click is done by pressing the stylus for few second and icon will display the right-click mouse delay. I wonder if the new xorg-x11-drv-wacom can do similar action for stylus that don't have eraser action. I don't think it has that functionality yet, though I have to admit I might be wrong there. I am not sure if the current linuxwacom can do similar action. If so, how can it be done? the principle would be similar to the middle mouse button emulation in other drivers. when a press is detected, a timer is set. that timer is cancelled by a button release but if the timer expires normally a right click/button 3 event is posted to the server. Of course, you'd need to take some motion filtering into account to avoid having every drag action converted into right clicks. The main usability issue is sorting out whether to delay the original button press until the timeout is triggered or to send the button 1 press immediately and fake the release before posting button 3. My tendency is that the former is better, the latter would not allow for right clicks without previous selection. I'd be curious what windows does in that regard though. Cheers, Peter -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Improve the way rpm decides what is newer
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:31:27 -0500, Tony wrote:
On 09-11-21 06:40:45, drago01 wrote:
...
You misunderstood me, I was not suggesting adding another epoch but
simply bump the %{epoch} for every release.
If this were really important to do, just putting the release first in
the version would take care of it without dragging in Epochs.
That's %build number (= super-Epoch) style:
1-2.10 2-2.10 3-2.10 4-2.20 5-2.3 (!) 6-2.31 7-2.40
... [a year later] ... 1337-3.0 1338-3.0 1339-3.10
This has the same effect as bumping the release tag on every update
and not resetting it to 1 on upstream releases, and make the Release
tag take precedence over the Version tag. Wasn't this proposed before?
Orcan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Right-click for wacom driver?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/22/2009 05:09 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 03:25:27PM -0800, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: I am not sure if the current linuxwacom can do similar action. If so, how can it be done? the principle would be similar to the middle mouse button emulation in other drivers. when a press is detected, a timer is set. that timer is cancelled by a button release but if the timer expires normally a right click/button 3 event is posted to the server. Of course, you'd need to take some motion filtering into account to avoid having every drag action converted into right clicks. The main usability issue is sorting out whether to delay the original button press until the timeout is triggered or to send the button 1 press immediately and fake the release before posting button 3. My tendency is that the former is better, the latter would not allow for right clicks without previous selection. I'd be curious what windows does in that regard though. In reply to Windows behaviour for the right-click, button 1 (assuming it is left-click) is pressed, there seems to be a slight delay before the timer is triggered for button 3. It sounds similar to the first method you mentioned. Because of closed nature of Windows, I don't know how that exactly works. I think it would be nice to include that functionality someday. Cheers, - -- Luya Tshimbalanga Graphic Web Designer E: l...@fedoraproject.org W: http://www.thefinalzone.net -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAksKKIIACgkQaS6HaNQHFTnECgCcC6MNxm2jsEY7CQub95yNOopi pscAn22rD1bPtr5BOlf7kgDTopddWymP =My3Z -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Improve the way rpm decides what is newer
On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 08:16 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: it has the problem that we'd have to do something horrible one time to switch to that system, of course, but that seems the 'cleanest' way to do it. I'm still not sure it's necessary. I think as Jesse does - any time this is broken indicates maintainer error, our work should focus on helping maintainers not make errors. Right, even if you do this horrible hack one day, the very next day we could have somebody submitting an update for f12 that is a major version newer than what gets put out on f13 and now you've got an upgrade in the form of a downgrade. Hope you didn't want to keep that data! -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec, 1.14, 1.15 import.log, 1.11, 1.12
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7763/devel
Modified Files:
apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec import.log
Log Message:
remove evil duplicate ttf files
Index: apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel/apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.14
retrieving revision 1.15
diff -u -p -r1.14 -r1.15
--- apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec9 Oct 2009 21:17:40 - 1.14
+++ apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec22 Nov 2009 13:45:55 - 1.15
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 0.2
-Release: 4%{?dist}
+Release: 5%{?dist}
Epoch: 1
Summary: Heuristica font
@@ -42,12 +42,13 @@ done
make
+rm *\.gen\.ttf
%install
rm -fr %{buildroot}
install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir}
-install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir}
+install -m 0644 -p *\.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir}
install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \
%{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}
@@ -68,6 +69,10 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%changelog
+* Sun Nov 22 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 1:0.2-5
+— remove evil duplicate TTF files
+
* Fri Oct 9 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
- 1:0.2-4
– not smp-safe upstream makefile
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -p -r1.11 -r1.12
--- import.log 9 Oct 2009 21:17:40 - 1.11
+++ import.log 22 Nov 2009 13:45:55 - 1.12
@@ -9,3 +9,4 @@ apanov-heuristica-fonts-0_2-1_fc12:HEAD:
apanov-heuristica-fonts-0_2-2_fc12:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-0.2-2.fc12.src.rpm:1252860982
apanov-heuristica-fonts-0_2-3_fc13:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-0.2-3.fc13.src.rpm:1255117443
apanov-heuristica-fonts-0_2-4_fc13:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-0.2-4.fc13.src.rpm:1255123023
+apanov-heuristica-fonts-0_2-5_fc13:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-0.2-5.fc13.src.rpm:1258897517
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
File fontpackages-1.34.tar.xz uploaded to lookaside cache by nim
File fontpackages-1.34.tar.xz for package fontpackages has been uploaded to the lookaside cache with md5sum e2addbc31d1cfdba3f457b40a44faa95 by nim ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/fontpackages/devel .cvsignore, 1.23, 1.24 fontpackages.spec, 1.30, 1.31 import.log, 1.26, 1.27 sources, 1.23, 1.24
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv29971/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore fontpackages.spec import.log sources
Log Message:
1.34
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.23
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -p -r1.23 -r1.24
--- .cvsignore 21 Nov 2009 20:41:45 - 1.23
+++ .cvsignore 22 Nov 2009 15:13:13 - 1.24
@@ -1 +1 @@
-fontpackages-1.33.tar.xz
+fontpackages-1.34.tar.xz
Index: fontpackages.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/fontpackages.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.30
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -p -r1.30 -r1.31
--- fontpackages.spec 21 Nov 2009 20:41:45 - 1.30
+++ fontpackages.spec 22 Nov 2009 15:13:13 - 1.31
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
%global rpmmacrodir %{_sysconfdir}/rpm/
Name:fontpackages
-Version: 1.33
+Version: 1.34
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages
@@ -133,6 +133,10 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%{_bindir}/*
%changelog
+* Sun Nov 21 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nim at fedoraproject dot org
+- 1.34-1
+— compare-repo-font-audit: make output more comprehensive
+
* Sat Nov 21 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nim at fedoraproject dot org
- 1.33-1
— repo-font-audit: add ancilliary script to compare the results of two
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.26
retrieving revision 1.27
diff -u -p -r1.26 -r1.27
--- import.log 21 Nov 2009 20:41:45 - 1.26
+++ import.log 22 Nov 2009 15:13:13 - 1.27
@@ -24,3 +24,4 @@ fontpackages-1_31-1_fc13:HEAD:fontpackag
fontpackages-1_31-2_fc13:HEAD:fontpackages-1.31-2.fc13.src.rpm:1257112310
fontpackages-1_32-1_fc13:HEAD:fontpackages-1.32-1.fc13.src.rpm:1258800058
fontpackages-1_33-1_fc13:HEAD:fontpackages-1.33-1.fc13.src.rpm:1258836076
+fontpackages-1_34-1_fc13:HEAD:fontpackages-1.34-1.fc13.src.rpm:1258902754
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.23
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -p -r1.23 -r1.24
--- sources 21 Nov 2009 20:41:45 - 1.23
+++ sources 22 Nov 2009 15:13:13 - 1.24
@@ -1 +1 @@
-3610dedf4ebd7007646f09286c29f59f fontpackages-1.33.tar.xz
+e2addbc31d1cfdba3f457b40a44faa95 fontpackages-1.34.tar.xz
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your saab-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager, At 20091122T202901Z, your “saab-fonts” package failed one or more of the tests I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/ There are three different reasons that may cause this message: 1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging them properly; 2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found issues in some of them; 3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses fonts in other packages is not satisfying. To stop receiving this message, you need to: 1. drop the font files or fix their packaging; 2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised; 3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT) You can self-check your packages at any time by: 1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools: # yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools 2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a test directory 3. indexing this directory with createrepo: $ createrepo path-to-test-directory 4. running repo-font-audit: $ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this message. Errors, warnings and suggestions: P# t17 1 1 Total 1 P# Maintainer SRPMRPM EVRArch 1 aalam saab-fonts saab-fonts 0:0.91-3.fc12 noarch Test explanation: t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Font upstream task Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users Please relay the problem report to the font upstream. ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “saab-fonts” package. I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran. This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list (subscription required) Your friendly QA robot, -- repo-font-audit saab-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts” package failed
one or more of the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 11
Total 11
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM
EVR Arch
1 adsllc drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts
drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts 0:1.0.1.1-1.fc13 noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the
“drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your drehatlas-xaporho-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “drehatlas-xaporho-fonts” package failed one or more
of the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 11
Total 11
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR
Arch
1 adsllc drehatlas-xaporho-fonts drehatlas-xaporho-fonts
0:1.0.3.2-2.fc13 noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “drehatlas-xaporho-fonts”
package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
drehatlas-xaporho-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your drehatlas-widelands-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “drehatlas-widelands-fonts” package failed one or
more of the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t9 t17 t19
1 1 11
Total 1 11
P# Maintainer SRPM RPMEVR
Arch
1 adsllc drehatlas-widelands-fonts drehatlas-widelands-fonts
0:1.0.2.2-6.fc13 noarch
Test explanation:
t9. Error: rpmlint
☛ Packager task
Check rpmlint output to fix the listed packages (using the -i flag if you
don't understand rpmlint messages).
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “drehatlas-widelands-fonts”
package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
drehatlas-widelands-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your beteckna-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “beteckna-fonts” package failed one or more of the
tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 11
2 44
3 11
Total 66
P# Maintainer SRPMRPMEVR Arch
1 ankursinha beteckna-fonts beteckna-fonts 0:0.3-5.fc12 noarch
2 ankursinha beteckna-fonts beteckna-lower-case-fonts 0:0.3-5.fc12 noarch
3 ankursinha beteckna-fonts beteckna-small-caps-fonts 0:0.3-5.fc12 noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “beteckna-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
beteckna-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager, At 20091122T202901Z, your “chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts” package failed one or more of the tests I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/ There are three different reasons that may cause this message: 1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging them properly; 2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found issues in some of them; 3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses fonts in other packages is not satisfying. To stop receiving this message, you need to: 1. drop the font files or fix their packaging; 2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised; 3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT) You can self-check your packages at any time by: 1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools: # yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools 2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a test directory 3. indexing this directory with createrepo: $ createrepo path-to-test-directory 4. running repo-font-audit: $ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this message. Errors, warnings and suggestions: P# t13 t17 t19 1 333 Total 333 P# Maintainer SRPMRPM EVRArch 1 ankursinha chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts 0:20030323-2.fc12 noarch Test explanation: t13. Warning: bad font naming ☛ Font upstream task, with packager workarounds The font naming declared by one or more files in the package is not a canonical WWS¹ naming or has some other naming problem. As noted by Adobe² the W3C CSS font family model used in WPF/WWS is less than ideal, but it is a standard and applications expect it. This script attempted to apply some heuristics to fix this naming, and computed different values than those in the font files. That means some of those files are using non-standard, fuzzy, self-conflicting, confusing names. A correct naming: 1. only includes “Width”, “Weight”, “Slant” qualifiers in its style name; 2. does not declare more than one of each; 3. declares them using the canonical keywords defined in the WWS paper; 4. declares them in “Width”, “Weight”, “Slant” order; 3. uses spaces to separate them; 4. does not use “Width”, “Weight”, “Slant” qualifiers in its family name; 5. does not use symbols such as that cause problems in SGML/XML/HTML contexts. The canonical naming computed by this script was printed at test time. Please note that it is only correct in a formal sense: no attempt was made to check that the computed naming corresponds to actual font characteristics. It still needs human review (when the computed naming is way off however that usually indicates the original naming is particularly bad and confusing). Because the aim of this test is to help improve overall font naming it will not accept some user-unfriendly naming exceptions Microsoft handles in its WPF heuristic. Also, the naming parsing used in this test is more aggressive than the one Microsoft uses, so it will manage to “fix” some names WPF can not, at the expense of a few false positives³. The average application is not as smart as this script and will not attempt to “fix” font naming in any way. Therefore, even if this script computed a correct naming, you should not rely on applications doing the same. Please ask the font usptream to fix the naming directly in the font file(s). Packager workaround: patch the file (if it is available in .sfd format), or add a fontconfig rule to your package to hide the problem⁴. ¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/typotechnica2007/Font%20names.pdf ² http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/atypi2006/CSS%20%20OT%2015.pdf ³ For example the family name may include some words that look like a “Width”, “Weight”, “Slant” attribute, but that are used in a different sense. This script is not a natural language parser and can not detect those cases reliably ⁴ cf the “fontpackages” remapping template; unfortunately this workaround won't fix problems for non-fontconfig applications, or when interoperating with other systems. t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Font upstream task Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications
[RFA] Your cf-bonveno-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “cf-bonveno-fonts” package failed one or more of the
tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t19
1 1
Total 1
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR Arch
1 ankursinha cf-bonveno-fonts cf-bonveno-fonts 0:1.1-9.fc12 noarch
Test explanation:
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “cf-bonveno-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
cf-bonveno-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your gargi-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “gargi-fonts” package failed one or more of the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 11
Total 11
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR Arch
1 ankursinha gargi-fonts gargi-fonts 0:1.9-2.fc13 noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “gargi-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
gargi-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your conakry-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “conakry-fonts” package failed one or more of the
tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19 t20
1 111
Total 111
P# Maintainer SRPM RPMEVRArch
1 ankursinha conakry-fonts conakry-fonts 0:20070829-3.fc12 noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
t20. Suggestion: fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly. A font may need to be
extended to maintain full coverage of a block when a new Unicode standard
revision is published¹.
To check the unicode coverage of a font, run the ttfcoverage command. (It
only works for modern .otf or .ttf fonts).
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “conakry-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
conakry-fonts.tar.xz
Description:
[RFA] Your oflb-notcouriersans-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “oflb-notcouriersans-fonts” package failed one or
more of the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 22
Total 22
P# Maintainer SRPM RPMEVR
Arch
1 ankursinha oflb-notcouriersans-fonts oflb-notcouriersans-fonts
0:1.1-2.fc12 noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “oflb-notcouriersans-fonts”
package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
oflb-notcouriersans-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your oflb-prociono-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “oflb-prociono-fonts” package failed one or more of
the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 11
Total 11
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR
Arch
1 ankursinha oflb-prociono-fonts oflb-prociono-fonts 0:20090715-2.fc13
noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “oflb-prociono-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
oflb-prociono-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your oldstandard-sfd-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “oldstandard-sfd-fonts” package failed one or more of
the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 33
Total 33
P# Maintainer SRPM RPMEVR
Arch
1 ankursinha oldstandard-sfd-fonts oldstandard-sfd-fonts 0:2.0.2-8.fc12
noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “oldstandard-sfd-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
oldstandard-sfd-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your pango package did not pass QA
Dear packager, At 20091122T202901Z, your “pango” package failed one or more of the tests I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/ There are three different reasons that may cause this message: 1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging them properly; 2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found issues in some of them; 3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses fonts in other packages is not satisfying. To stop receiving this message, you need to: 1. drop the font files or fix their packaging; 2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised; 3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT) You can self-check your packages at any time by: 1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools: # yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools 2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a test directory 3. indexing this directory with createrepo: $ createrepo path-to-test-directory 4. running repo-font-audit: $ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this message. Errors, warnings and suggestions: P# t14 1 1 Total 1 P# Maintainer SRPM RPMEVR Arch 1 behdad pango pango 0:1.26.0-1.fc12 x86_64 Test explanation: t14. Warning: core fonts use ☛ Upstream task This package accesses fonts through the X11 Core protocol. Numerous long-standing problems with this mode of access, and a design that could not scale to modern font needs lead the (then XFree86) team to deprecate it in favour of fontconfig (née xft). Adoption was quick and by 2003 it was clear fontconfig was the new standard¹. Nowadays fontconfig is widely used², including on non Linux/Unix platforms. While X11 Core access has been kept on life-support this font system is not actively maintained today. The font library it depends on is slowly shrinking, as it was created in a period of different legal and technical requirements², and there is no one to update the font files when a problem is found³. Therefore, projects are advised to migrate before the situation reaches a critical stage. Fontconfig has been our default font system for a long time, and accessing fonts by other means will cause behaviour inconsistencies and many other problems (since fontconfig can be used to change the behaviour of a font). If an application can not use fontconfig today this is a serious bug that should be reported to the application upstream. Please ask it to add fontconfig support to their code (usually, via a higher-level library such as pango-cairo). ¹ http://xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2003-March/000799.html ² Screen technology changed, encoding standard (Unicode) changed, legal reviews became more comprehensive, etc. ³ Leaving culling the only solution. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “pango” package. I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran. This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list (subscription required) Your friendly QA robot, -- repo-font-audit pango.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your abyssinica-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “abyssinica-fonts” package failed one or more of the
tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19 t20
1 111
Total 111
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR Arch
1 bochechaabyssinica-fonts abyssinica-fonts 0:1.0-5.fc12 noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
t20. Suggestion: fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly. A font may need to be
extended to maintain full coverage of a block when a new Unicode standard
revision is published¹.
To check the unicode coverage of a font, run the ttfcoverage command. (It
only works for modern .otf or .ttf fonts).
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “abyssinica-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
abyssinica-fonts.tar.xz
Description:
[RFA] Your nafees-web-naskh-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “nafees-web-naskh-fonts” package failed one or more
of the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t17 t19
1 11
Total 11
P# Maintainer SRPMRPM EVR
Arch
1 bochechanafees-web-naskh-fonts nafees-web-naskh-fonts 0:1.2-3.fc12
noarch
Test explanation:
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “nafees-web-naskh-fonts”
package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
nafees-web-naskh-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your baekmuk-bdf-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager, At 20091122T202901Z, your “baekmuk-bdf-fonts” package failed one or more of the tests I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/ There are three different reasons that may cause this message: 1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging them properly; 2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found issues in some of them; 3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses fonts in other packages is not satisfying. To stop receiving this message, you need to: 1. drop the font files or fix their packaging; 2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised; 3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT) You can self-check your packages at any time by: 1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools: # yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools 2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a test directory 3. indexing this directory with createrepo: $ createrepo path-to-test-directory 4. running repo-font-audit: $ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this message. Errors, warnings and suggestions: P# t2 t6 t7 t17 1 42 42 42 42 Total 42 42 42 42 P# Maintainer SRPM RPMEVR Arch 1 cchance baekmuk-bdf-fonts baekmuk-bdf-fonts 0:2.2-8.fc12 noarch Test explanation: t2. Error: fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata ☛ Packager task Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at package creation time. t6. Error: fonts fc-query can not parse ☛ Upstream task fc-query could not parse some font files in the package. The files may be malformed and in need of fixing, or fc-query has a bug. Any font file rejected by fc-query will be useless in fontconfig and most applications. If it can not be fixed drop it Please relay the problem to the appropriate upstream to get it fixed. t7. Error: fonts not identified as such by libmagic ☛ Upstream task libmagic could not identify some files with font-like extensions in the package. The files may be malformed and in need of fixing, or they use a font extension when they should not, or libmagic has a bug. Please relay the problem to the appropriate upstream to get it fixed. t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Font upstream task Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users Please relay the problem report to the font upstream. ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “baekmuk-bdf-fonts” package. I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran. This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list (subscription required) Your friendly QA robot, -- repo-font-audit baekmuk-bdf-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your cjkuni-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “cjkuni-fonts” package failed one or more of the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t9 t10 t15 t17 t19
1 ‧ ‧2‧‧
2 ‧ 1‧11
3 1 1‧11
Total 1 2222
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR
Arch
1 cchance cjkuni-fonts cjkuni-fonts-compat 0:0.2.20080216.1-31.fc13
noarch
2 cchance cjkuni-fonts cjkuni-ukai-fonts0:0.2.20080216.1-31.fc13
noarch
3 cchance cjkuni-fonts cjkuni-uming-fonts 0:0.2.20080216.1-31.fc13
noarch
Test explanation:
t9. Error: rpmlint
☛ Packager task
Check rpmlint output to fix the listed packages (using the -i flag if you
don't understand rpmlint messages).
t10. Error: fonts in packages that contain non-font data
☛ Packager task
Please do not mix font files with non-font data in packages. Fonts are
usually useful outside of the package that deploys them and should be
installable without pulling in other material.
t15. Warning: font linking
☛ Upstream task
Symlinking is a way for non-font packages to avoid duplicating font files,
but it is also a symptom of missing or incomplete fontconfig support.
Fontconfig has been our default font system for a long time, and accessing
fonts by other means will cause behaviour inconsistencies and many other
problems (since fontconfig can be used to change the behaviour of a font).
If an application can not use fontconfig today this is a serious bug that
should be reported to the application upstream. Please ask it to add
fontconfig support to their code (usually, via a higher-level library
such as pango-cairo).
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
[RFA] Your taipeifonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager, At 20091122T202901Z, your “taipeifonts” package failed one or more of the tests I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/ There are three different reasons that may cause this message: 1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging them properly; 2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found issues in some of them; 3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses fonts in other packages is not satisfying. To stop receiving this message, you need to: 1. drop the font files or fix their packaging; 2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised; 3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT) You can self-check your packages at any time by: 1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools: # yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools 2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a test directory 3. indexing this directory with createrepo: $ createrepo path-to-test-directory 4. running repo-font-audit: $ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this message. Errors, warnings and suggestions: P# t2 t3 t5 t7 t10 t12 t13 t17 t19 1 4 4 1 4 44341 Total 4 4 1 4 44341 P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR Arch 1 cchance taipeifonts taipeifonts 0:1.2-9.fc12 noarch Test explanation: t2. Error: fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata ☛ Packager task Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at package creation time. t3. Error: packages that mix different font families ☛ Packager task Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family per font package. (If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of). t5. Error: font faces duplicated by different packages ☛ Packager task, eventual upstream task Several packages duplicate font files with the same face name. This needlessly wastes resources infrastructure and user side and makes font maintenance problematic: 1. Very often an upstream that copied some fonts will forget to keep them up to date, and the duplication will result in the distribution of old buggy data. 2. Shipping the same font in different formats is also problematic: different font formats have different features, and are processed by different font libraries. It is almost impossible to create a font in multiple formats that will all behave the same. Users hate fonts that do not behave consistently everywhere. 3. Most of our applications use fontconfig to access fonts, and fontconfig uses font names to identify files. Naming collisions make font selection unreliable. So even genuine forks with different features from the original are a problem if not renamed. A repository should always include only one version of a font face. This test can not discriminate between packages and identity the correct owner of the font face. His maintainer will be blamed with others. If you're not him it is therefore unfriendly not to fix this error as soon as you can. It is always possible to reuse a font file packaged separately by adding a dependency on the other package providing it, and accessing the font through fontconfig. If an application can not use fontconfig today this is a serious bug that should be reported to the application upstream. Please ask it to add fontconfig support to their code (usually, via a higher-level library such as pango-cairo). However it can workarounded by the packager with symlinks (that will need maintenance). If an application can not use a modern font format and forces the re-packaging in an older format of an exiting font this is an application bug that should be reported to the application upstream. In that case these is no good solution possible baring the fixing of the application. t7. Error: fonts not identified as such by libmagic ☛ Upstream task libmagic could not identify some files with font-like extensions in the package. The files may be malformed and in need of fixing, or they use a font extension when they should not, or libmagic has a bug. Please relay the problem to the appropriate upstream to get it fixed. t10. Error: fonts in packages that contain non-font data ☛ Packager task Please do
[RFA] Your liberation-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “liberation-fonts” package failed one or more of the
tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t5 t19
1 ‧ 4
2 1 4
3 ‧ 4
Total 1 12
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR
Arch
1 cchance liberation-fonts liberation-mono-fonts
0:1.05.2.20091019-2.fc13 noarch
2 cchance liberation-fonts liberation-sans-fonts
0:1.05.2.20091019-2.fc13 noarch
3 cchance liberation-fonts liberation-serif-fonts
0:1.05.2.20091019-2.fc13 noarch
Test explanation:
t5. Error: font faces duplicated by different packages
☛ Packager task, eventual upstream task
Several packages duplicate font files with the same face name. This
needlessly wastes resources infrastructure and user side and makes font
maintenance problematic:
1. Very often an upstream that copied some fonts will forget to keep them
up to date, and the duplication will result in the distribution of old
buggy data.
2. Shipping the same font in different formats is also problematic:
different font formats have different features, and are processed by
different font libraries. It is almost impossible to create a font in
multiple formats that will all behave the same. Users hate fonts that do
not behave consistently everywhere.
3. Most of our applications use fontconfig to access fonts, and fontconfig
uses font names to identify files. Naming collisions make font selection
unreliable. So even genuine forks with different features from the
original are a problem if not renamed.
A repository should always include only one version of a font face.
This test can not discriminate between packages and identity the correct
owner of the font face. His maintainer will be blamed with others. If
you're not him it is therefore unfriendly not to fix this error as soon as
you can.
It is always possible to reuse a font file packaged separately by adding a
dependency on the other package providing it, and accessing the font
through fontconfig.
If an application can not use fontconfig today this is a serious bug that
should be reported to the application upstream. Please ask it to add
fontconfig support to their code (usually, via a higher-level library
such as pango-cairo). However it can workarounded by the packager with
symlinks (that will need maintenance).
If an application can not use a modern font format and forces the
re-packaging in an older format of an exiting font this is an application
bug that should be reported to the application upstream. In that case
these is no good solution possible baring the fixing of the application.
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on
[RFA] Your fonts-hebrew-fancy package did not pass QA
Dear packager, At 20091122T202901Z, your “fonts-hebrew-fancy” package failed one or more of the tests I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/ There are three different reasons that may cause this message: 1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging them properly; 2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found issues in some of them; 3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses fonts in other packages is not satisfying. To stop receiving this message, you need to: 1. drop the font files or fix their packaging; 2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised; 3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT) You can self-check your packages at any time by: 1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools: # yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools 2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a test directory 3. indexing this directory with createrepo: $ createrepo path-to-test-directory 4. running repo-font-audit: $ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this message. Errors, warnings and suggestions: P# t2 t3 t12 t13 t17 1 9 9 922 Total 9 9 922 P# Maintainer SRPMRPM EVR Arch 1 danken fonts-hebrew-fancy fonts-hebrew-fancy 0:0.20051122-5.fc11 noarch Test explanation: t2. Error: fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata ☛ Packager task Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at package creation time. t3. Error: packages that mix different font families ☛ Packager task Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family per font package. (If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of). t12. Warning: fonts in packages that do not respect font naming conventions ☛ Packager task Please respect font package naming conventions and provide consistent packages to users. Some scripts may depend on strict package naming. t13. Warning: bad font naming ☛ Font upstream task, with packager workarounds The font naming declared by one or more files in the package is not a canonical WWS¹ naming or has some other naming problem. As noted by Adobe² the W3C CSS font family model used in WPF/WWS is less than ideal, but it is a standard and applications expect it. This script attempted to apply some heuristics to fix this naming, and computed different values than those in the font files. That means some of those files are using non-standard, fuzzy, self-conflicting, confusing names. A correct naming: 1. only includes “Width”, “Weight”, “Slant” qualifiers in its style name; 2. does not declare more than one of each; 3. declares them using the canonical keywords defined in the WWS paper; 4. declares them in “Width”, “Weight”, “Slant” order; 3. uses spaces to separate them; 4. does not use “Width”, “Weight”, “Slant” qualifiers in its family name; 5. does not use symbols such as that cause problems in SGML/XML/HTML contexts. The canonical naming computed by this script was printed at test time. Please note that it is only correct in a formal sense: no attempt was made to check that the computed naming corresponds to actual font characteristics. It still needs human review (when the computed naming is way off however that usually indicates the original naming is particularly bad and confusing). Because the aim of this test is to help improve overall font naming it will not accept some user-unfriendly naming exceptions Microsoft handles in its WPF heuristic. Also, the naming parsing used in this test is more aggressive than the one Microsoft uses, so it will manage to “fix” some names WPF can not, at the expense of a few false positives³. The average application is not as smart as this script and will not attempt to “fix” font naming in any way. Therefore, even if this script computed a correct naming, you should not rely on applications doing the same. Please ask the font usptream to fix the naming directly in the font file(s). Packager workaround: patch the file (if it is available in .sfd format), or add a fontconfig rule to your package to hide the problem⁴. ¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx
[RFA] Your wqy-unibit-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “wqy-unibit-fonts” package failed one or more of the
tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t7 t17 t19
1 1 11
Total 1 11
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR Arch
1 fangq wqy-unibit-fonts wqy-unibit-fonts 0:1.1.0-7.fc12 noarch
Test explanation:
t7. Error: fonts not identified as such by libmagic
☛ Upstream task
libmagic could not identify some files with font-like extensions in the
package. The files may be malformed and in need of fixing, or they use a
font extension when they should not, or libmagic has a bug.
Please relay the problem to the appropriate upstream to get it fixed.
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “wqy-unibit-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
wqy-unibit-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your wqy-bitmap-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “wqy-bitmap-fonts” package failed one or more of the
tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t7 t17 t19
1 8 88
Total 8 88
P# Maintainer SRPM RPM EVR Arch
1 fangq wqy-bitmap-fonts wqy-bitmap-fonts 0:0.9.9-11.fc12 noarch
Test explanation:
t7. Error: fonts not identified as such by libmagic
☛ Upstream task
libmagic could not identify some files with font-like extensions in the
package. The files may be malformed and in need of fixing, or they use a
font extension when they should not, or libmagic has a bug.
Please relay the problem to the appropriate upstream to get it fixed.
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “wqy-bitmap-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary next time I am ran.
This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
(subscription required)
Your friendly QA robot,
--
repo-font-audit
wqy-bitmap-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[RFA] Your linux-libertine-fonts package did not pass QA
Dear packager,
At 20091122T202901Z, your “linux-libertine-fonts” package failed one or more of
the tests
I was performing on the “fedora-devel” repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-f13-build-current/x86_64/
There are three different reasons that may cause this message:
1. your package is including one or more font files, but not packaging
them properly;
2. your package is including one or more font files, and I've found
issues in some of them;
3. your package is not shipping any font file, but the way it accesses
fonts in other packages is not satisfying.
To stop receiving this message, you need to:
1. drop the font files or fix their packaging;
2. relay the fonts issues to the fonts upstream to get them revised;
3. work with the code upstream to improve the way it accesses font
files (usually by making it use fontconfig through a higher-level
text library such as pango, pango-cairo, harfbuzz, or QT)
You can self-check your packages at any time by:
1. installing createrepo and fontpackages-tools:
# yum install createrepo fontpackages-tools
2. putting your packages and any font package they depends on in a
test directory
3. indexing this directory with createrepo:
$ createrepo path-to-test-directory
4. running repo-font-audit:
$ repo-font-audit test file://absolute-path-to-test-directory
A summary of the issues I detected is appended here. For your
convenience a more comprehensive analysis is also attached to this
message.
Errors, warnings and suggestions:
P# t3 t17 t19 t20
1 7 174
Total 7 174
P# Maintainer SRPM RPMEVR
Arch
1 farnold linux-libertine-fonts linux-libertine-fonts 0:4.4.1-2.fc12
noarch
Test explanation:
t3. Error: packages that mix different font families
☛ Packager task
Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family per
font package.
(If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).
t17. Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Font upstream task
Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as
strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug).
For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and
get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
Please relay the problem report to the font upstream.
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
t19. Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing a few glyphs to be
accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
Many scripts differ by only a few glyphs and it is unfortunately common
for font authors not to notice they stopped just short of full support for
some of them.
To check a font file script coverage, run:
$ FC_DEBUG=256 fc-query font-file
and look for lines like:
script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
For example
“mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }”
means fontconfig will accept the tested file for Maori if codepoints 1e34
and 1e35 are added.
fontconfig is used by a lot of applications on many systems so ignoring
its opinion on a font is a mistake.
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
P.S.
Of course fontconfig is not perfect either so it may require a glyph for a
script when it should not. In that case, please report the problem to
fontconfig upstream:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
against the “orth” component.
¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig
t20. Suggestion: fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Font upstream task
Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly. A font may need to be
extended to maintain full coverage of a block when a new Unicode standard
revision is published¹.
To check the unicode coverage of a font, run the ttfcoverage command. (It
only works for modern .otf or .ttf fonts).
Please relay the incomplete coverage report to the font upstream.
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the “linux-libertine-fonts” package.
I will warn you again if it is still necessary
[Bug 526204] Review Request: ucs-miscfixed-fonts selected set of bitmap fonts
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=526204 Pravin Satpute psatp...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(ke...@tummy.com) --- Comment #15 from Pravin Satpute psatp...@redhat.com 2009-11-23 01:35:50 EDT --- should i raise cvs-request flag again? -- 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-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Permission for an off-site copy of CVS
In an effort to work on the cvs side of https://fedorahosted.org/packagedb/ticket/165 I'd like to have an offsite copy of cvs1:/cvs/pkgs to test on. Being that this is in violation of our security policy (http://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/csi/security-policy/en-US/html/EndUser-Standard-Introduction.html) and requires written permission, I'm asking for that permission here :) I just need two sysadmin-main members to +1 it, and I'll rsync it off tomorrow or so, ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Graphical video not working after yum upgrade from fedora 11 to fedora 12
Hi John, I had an up to date fedora 11 install that was working fine. I followed the instructions on the wiki for doing a yum upgrade and everything seemed to go very well until I rebooted and things hung as the graphical interface (I use KDE) was to boot. I am able to boot into single user mode and run level 3 and things appear to be fine. I just can not get the graphical display. Any help would be appreciated. I had some minor issues with the open driver (aka nouveau) when upgrading to Fedora 12 and in my investigations I found a couple of interesting links for people using the proprietary one: - Official howto from RPM Fusion: http://rpmfusion.org/Howto/nVidia - Personal blog with similar problem (solved): http://linuxsoftwareblog.com/blog/?p=232 HTH, David -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Screenshot Tutorial: How to D-I-Y your own Google Chrome OS with Xen-based Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala amd64 Virtual Machine in Fedora 11 x86_64 Pv-Ops Dom0
*Google Chrome OS Download* Filename: Google-Chrome-OS-Build-enming.teo-22Nov2009-0704hrs.vmdk Filesize: 697.38MB Type: VMware VMDK image file MD5 Checksum: 1aec57157dd2083b166e493c0e831a 67 Download link: http://www.zshare.net/download/68819648ff817281/ -- Mr. Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming) Dip(Mechatronics) BEng(Hons)(Mechanical Engineering) Alma Maters: (1) Singapore Polytechnic (2) National University of Singapore My Primary Blog: http://teo-en-ming-aka-zhang-enming.blogspot.com My Secondary Blog: http://enmingteo.wordpress.com My Youtube videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/enmingteo Email: space.time.unive...@gmail.com Mobile Phone (Starhub Prepaid): +65-8369-2618 Street: Bedok Reservoir Road Country: Singapore -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
sound card configuration
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bonjour, Is there a tutorial to configure a sound card under fedora 10? My sound card (Realtek ALC 882 integrated on Asus P5WD2 mobo) is working but the sound is not clear: a lot of interferences (b, criccroc...), so, in piano passages of record, I can ear more electronic sounds than music Is there a way to have no background noise? Thanks. - -- François Patte UFR de mathématiques et informatique Université Paris Descartes 45, rue des Saints Pères F-75270 Paris Cedex 06 Tél. +33 (0)1 4286 2145 http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAksJDXwACgkQdE6C2dhV2JW94gCgyAFy5XO4KrRhoTkB7XImaAwS xAQAnicUYZ2BlTIc2L8Sw97nAHHIcY3V =4ONd -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: XV under x86_64
On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 21:18 -0700, Reg Clemens wrote: I use XV for everyting, and it worked fine till I went to 64bit Fc11 Is there an rpm out there with a good 64bit xv in it? Currently the 32bit version cant find a needed library, even tho its in /usr/lib64 -- Reg.Clemens r...@dwf.com For F11 I see yum install xv xv x86_64 3.10a.jumbopatch.20070520-10.fc11 rpmfusion-nonfree-updates but I think I compiled the version I'm using on F11 Just installed the following for F12 xv-3.10a.jumbopatch.20070520-10.fc12.x86_64 John -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
assertion in NetworkManager
Hello @all, after upgrading to Fedora 12 I get some problems with NetworkManager for example Wireless Networks were disabled and you couldn't avtivate this. Some entries in /var/log/messages shows me an assertion in NetworkManager. I will post these line and I hope that somebody can help me. My wireless-device is an Atheros AR242x 802.11abg Wireless PCI Express Adapter (wlan0). /var/log/messages: Nov 22 11:00:18 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info Wireless now enabled by radio killswitch Nov 22 11:00:18 philipps-toshi rpc.statd[1270]: Version 1.2.1 Starting Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager:ifcfg-rh: parsing /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-wlan0 ... Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager:ifcfg-rh: error: Missing SSID Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager:ifcfg-rh: parsing /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 ... Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager:ifcfg-rh: read connection 'System eth0' Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager:ifcfg-rh: parsing /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-lo ... Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): driver supports SSID scans (scan_capa 0x01). Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): new 802.11 WiFi device (driver: 'ath5k') Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): exported as /org/freedesktop/NetworkManager/Devices/0 Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): now managed Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): device state change: 1 - 2 (reason 2) Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): bringing up device. Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi kernel: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): wlan0: link is not ready Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): preparing device. Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: info (wlan0): deactivating device (reason: 2). Nov 22 11:00:19 philipps-toshi NetworkManager: supplicant_interface_acquire: assertion `mgr_state == NM_SUPPLICANT_MANAGER_STATE_IDLE' failed -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12 installs report here.
Dell Inspiron 531S: Installed 64-bit, everything I've tested works perfectly. Dell Latitude E6400: Installed 64-bit, everything I've tested works perfectly. Dell Inspiron 546: +Airlink 101 wireless PCI card Installed 64-bit, everything I've tested works perfectly. (Side note: it took me several hours to get the wireless card working in Windows 7) Toshiba (forgot the model number): I attempted an update of a friend's laptop Friday night and learned that the system crashes unless I use nomodeset as a kernel option. The Intel i915 driver is the offending code. I gathered some information and filed a bugzilla report, but haven't updated the laptop yet. I did boot the LiveCD with nomodeset and everything else seemed fine. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Preup to F12, won't boot
On 11/19/2009 10:51 AM, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote: I just preupgraded from F10 to F12, and booting goes as far as the Fedora logo (circle with lower tip) filling up with white, then flashing briefly. Then the screen goes and stays blank afterwards, except for a cursor, and it displays if I type somthing. Try to get /var/log/Xorg.0.log and send that to the list. It will probably clarify why you aren't getting a login. You might also try nomodeset as a boot option in GRUB. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
F12: Mobile broadband dongle problem
Hi, I have a Huawei E220 mobile broadband dongle on 3UK. In Fedora 10 this worked beautifully. However, having upgraded to F12, I get the following in the log when I try to connect: Nov 22 10:45:57 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info Activation (ttyUSB0) starting connection '3 Internet' Nov 22 10:45:57 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info (ttyUSB0): device state change: 3 - 4 (reason 0) Nov 22 10:45:57 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info Activation (ttyUSB0) Stage 1 of 5 (Device Prepare) scheduled... Nov 22 10:45:57 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info Activation (ttyUSB0) Stage 1 of 5 (Device Prepare) started... Nov 22 10:45:57 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info Activation (ttyUSB0) Stage 1 of 5 (Device Prepare) complete. Nov 22 10:45:57 Sonozaki modem-manager: (ttyUSB0) opening serial device... Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: WARN stage1_prepare_done(): GSM modem connection failed: Network timeout Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info (ttyUSB0): device state change: 4 - 9 (reason 1) Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info Marking connection '3 Internet' invalid. Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info Activation (ttyUSB0) failed. Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info (ttyUSB0): device state change: 9 - 3 (reason 0) Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: info (ttyUSB0): deactivating device (reason: 0). Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: flush_routes: assertion `iface_idx = 0' failed Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki NetworkManager: flush_addresses: assertion `iface_idx = 0' failed Nov 22 10:46:58 Sonozaki modem-manager: (ttyUSB0) closing serial device... However, I can point Minicom at /dev/ttyUSB0 and I can get the expected results by throwing AT commands at the unit, e.g: ATI Manufacturer: huawei Model: E220 Revision: 11.117.09.04.00 IMEI: [hidden] +GCAP: +CGSM,+DS,+ES OK (I hid the IMEI.) Any suggestions (short of going the old-fashioned route and writing my own dial-scripts)? -- -- Michael Soruk McConnell Eridani Star System -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: [Fedora-music-list] Tester needed for Audacious
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:20:29 -0500, Orcan wrote: My tests, with a few mpc files that I have, gave positive results on F-12 x86_64. No issues. Thanks for the test. Basically, the worst that could have happened is that the plugin failed to play anything on x86_64 _actually_ while it simply refuses to fail on i686. ;) You can push them to testing if you have not done so already. Yes, this has been done meanwhile including a few more patches for unrelated issues. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: XV under x86_64
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:18:49 -0700, Reg wrote: I use XV for everyting, and it worked fine till I went to 64bit Fc11 Is there an rpm out there with a good 64bit xv in it? Currently the 32bit version cant find a needed library, even tho its in /usr/lib64 The 32-bit build won't search in /usr/lib64, which is a directory for 64-bit libraries. Perhaps you can post some details? What you describe sounds unusual as library requirements are covered by RPM package depencencies. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
how far from the arrive of evolution 2.28.1 for Fedora 12
Hi I am wonder how far from the arrival of evolution 2.28.1 in F12. One of main reasons to upgrade to F12, for me, is that F12 shipped with evo 2.28. People from Unbuntu use evo-2.28 (in fact evo 2.28.1) and evo-mapi to connect to exchange 2007. Unfortunately, current evo 2.28.0 can't connect to exchange 2007 (via evo-mapi). It crashes every time. Does any one know if F12 will upgrade evo 2.28.1 soon? best Y -- http://etvillage.blogspot.com/ -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Preup to F12, won't boot
Hello, On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 5:38 AM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote: On 11/19/2009 10:51 AM, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote: I just preupgraded from F10 to F12, and booting goes as far as the Fedora logo (circle with lower tip) filling up with white, then flashing briefly. Then the screen goes and stays blank afterwards, except for a cursor, and it displays if I type somthing. Try to get /var/log/Xorg.0.log and send that to the list. It will probably clarify why you aren't getting a login. You might also try nomodeset as a boot option in GRUB. Thanks, I already sent it in the thread Re: F12 - no gui - nvidia/nouveau, came to the conclusion that it is probably this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=538578 and solve it by removing the xorg.conf file. Take care Oliver -- Oliver Ruebenacker, Computational Cell Biologist Systems Biology Linker at Virtual Cell (http://vcell.org/sybil) Turning Knowledge Data into Models Center for Cell Analysis and Modeling http://www.oliver.curiousworld.org -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: how far from the arrive of evolution 2.28.1 for Fedora 12
Am Sonntag, den 22.11.2009, 23:10 +1100 schrieb L: Hi I am wonder how far from the arrival of evolution 2.28.1 in F12. One of main reasons to upgrade to F12, for me, is that F12 shipped with evo 2.28. People from Unbuntu use evo-2.28 (in fact evo 2.28.1) and evo-mapi to connect to exchange 2007. Unfortunately, current evo 2.28.0 can't connect to exchange 2007 (via evo-mapi). It crashes every time. Does any one know if F12 will upgrade evo 2.28.1 soon? best Y As you can see here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=175 It has already been build (so feel free to test manually), but since this is roughly one month old, I guess that somewhere along the gnome stack there must be some breakage that prevents an update - maybe you simply ask the maintainer or open a feature request to track the progress. signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: flash player in F11
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:15:01 -0800, Greg Maruszeczka wrote: On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:05:43 + (UTC) Amadeus W.M. amadeu...@verizon.net wrote: I have been happily using 64 bit flash player on a 64 bit F11 and suddenly, after today's updates it simply disappeared. Firefox doesn't think it has flash installed. But it's there, of course. What happened? Anyone having this problem? How did you 'install' it? I had the .so in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins but discovered that the latest FF seems to look in /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins instead. Symlinking it to that folder did the trick in my case. Maybe this will help you as well... HTH, GM That did it. I put the 64-bit libflashplayer.so in /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins and it worked. Thank you very much. Something that worries me is that I got the 64-bit libflashplayer.so from here http://download.macromedia.com/pub/labs/flashplayer10/libfl ashplayer-10.0.22.87.linux-x86_64.so.tar.gz back when I installed F11. Now that link seems dead. I keep the tar.gz file around so I can reuse it but that's not the permanent solution. Is there a standard location for downloading the 64-bit libflashplayer.so ? After the few google hits on 64 bit flash I arrived at this link: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html but that seems to point to a 32-bit flash version. Where can I find an up- to-date download page for the 64-bit flash plugin? Thanks! -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
lost superblock
I just updated f11-f12. After, I followed instructions to convert root partition from ext3-ext4. I used superrescuecd to do it, so filesystem was not mounted. Rebooted into f12 and everything seemed fine. I also was trying out nouveau instead of nvidia, which was OK until I tried to play an hd video. The machine became so unresponsive (seemed to be swapping continuously) that I finally had to use the power switch to shut it off (this is a laptop). On power up, the superblock was corrupted. I tried fsck, but after trying to repair it screwed up beyond all hope, and I had to reinstall. So, what in the world could have happened? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: flash player in F11
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Amadeus W.M. wrote: ... but that seems to point to a 32-bit flash version. Where can I find an up- to-date download page for the 64-bit flash plugin? http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html rday -- Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
the minimal toolset for XML/docbook processing?
these days, what's the most up-to-date set of packages that supports rendering docbook into as many formats as possible -- html, xhtml, pdf, ps, dvi, txt, and so on. specifically, i have no interest in packages related to SGML or DSSSL or, if possible, jade. if one could guarantee that one had only current docbook5 input, what's a good collection of packages for this? trivially, i'm looking at: * docbook-dtds * docbook5-schemas * docbook5-style-xsl * libxslt, libxml2 (for xsltproc) * xmlto * fop (for PDF generation) beyond that, what else should be part of the collection? i know of other packages like docbook-utils and docbook-utils-pdf, but as i read it, those involve pulling in jade, and it's not clear that that's necessary once you have all of the above. or is it? is there a wiki page on all this somewhere, or am i going to have to write one? :-) rday -- Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Amazon MP3 Downloader
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:34:11 +0100, ELMORABITY Mohamed wrote: Le samedi 21 novembre 2009 à 16:25 -0600, Chris a écrit : So it seems. Agreed as to boost. I read somewhere that an app called Clamz might be worth considering. Perhaps sometime soon I shall. Clamz seems to be a good alternative, although there is no GUI. By the way, it is in review for integration in Fedora: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473184 I've been using clamz for a while - seems to work fine. Except you need to apply a patch if you want to specify an absolute path in the output directory parameter (-d). Even lets you re-download an album for about 24hrs after you have bought it. Andy -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Mostly successful with f12
Got everything re-installed from scratch (I like to take the opportunity to clean stuff up every 6 months rather than trying to upgrade :-). My first backup successfully rsynced my new installation to a USB drive in cron last night, I can VPN to work with pptp and run NX sessions, so things seem to be working well. The only really weird bug I found is this one for gdb: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539590 (I'm convinced that somewhere in Ulrich Drepper's basement, possibly guarded by a 3 headed dog, is a copy of the secret linux cabal's design document which states the primary design goal for linux is to make life a living hell for people who work on debuggers :-). There was also this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531370 but a yum install foomatic gets that printer working. And this is fixed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524428 but hasn't yet made it to stable repo, so I have to install xorg-x11-drv-evdev from updates-testing to get my drag lock setting to work. I gave in and started using pulseaudio (mainly because I now have a separate sound card for doing spdif output to my sound system which I turn off in pulse and dedicate to mplayer), so I had to start the pulse daemon in my custom .xsession. Finding the /etc/xdg/autostart/ directory was useful for determining the command to run. I also now am forced to start /usr/libexec/polkit-gnome-authentication-agent-1 or none of the little tools that want to become root can ask how to do that (considering the 200 or so kernel daemons and system services that typically start, and the 30 or 40 gnome daemons that run all the time before any actual user applications get going, I wonder how long it will be before the first linux server runs out of PIDs - there are only 32K of them, and at the rate the gnome developers are following the philosophy of Why call a subroutine when I can send dbus messages to a separate daemon instead? it might come sooner than anyone expects :-). -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: logwatch?
On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 05:00 +, Andreas M. Kirchwitz wrote: It looks like a lot of people were complaining about such reports and asked to turn it off. I'd be surprised if those sort of people even read the root mail, so I wouldn't expect them to see, or even know about, a logwatch report. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Fedora-12 from USB stick
Timothy Murphy wrote: However, I find that when I add my old grub.conf entries for Fedora-11 to my new grub.conf , I am unable to boot Fedora-11 . (I'm also unable to boot it if I run grub interactively.) The error I get is: fsck.ext4: unable to resolve UUID=66c3...699e . I cannot work out what this UUID represents. It does not appear to be the old or the new / partition. I thought it might be the memory stick, but replacing this did not help. To reply to myself, I found that the mystery UUID actually refers to the partition which is the new / . So installing Fedora-12 on this partition changes its UUID, which I find slightly surprising - I thought the whole point of these UUIDs was that they never changed. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Fedora 12 sha1sum
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: Woudld it be possible to do the signature using SHA256 also? On one of the iso's I recently burned did have a checksum file with a gpg SHA256 signature hash. That was enough to remind me that I should be using the SHA256 for checksumming the iso. Yes, that is generally a goal. The F-11 *-CHECKSUM files were signed using a SHA-256 hash. One unfortunate effect of moving to the Sigul signing server for F-12 is that controlling the hash used for gpg signatures is more difficult and resulted in the default SHA-1 being used. However, while using SHA-256 every where is the goal, it's still good to make people aware that the GPG Hash: header and the checksum used for the .iso are not related at all. It seems that far too many people make the mistaken assumption that they are. :/ -- ToddOpenPGP - KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~ The trouble with being punctual is that nobody's there to appreciate it. -- Franklin P. Jones pgpQY0270a6nf.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Autofs under Fedora-12
Is there a problem with autofs/automount under Fedora-12? I have exactly the same settings that I had in Fedora-11, but the mount command is not being completed at boot-time, although I have no problem giving it later by hand. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Autofs under Fedora-12
Timothy Murphy wrote: Is there a problem with autofs/automount under Fedora-12? I have exactly the same settings that I had in Fedora-11, but the mount command is not being completed at boot-time, although I have no problem giving it later by hand. I'm a bit confused about what command you're giving later. I've used autofs before and don't recall any commands to get it to work. The automount command modifies the auto.master file and the file system would get mounted when the directory is accessed. Could it be that you don't have the autofs service starting at boot time? chkconfig --list autofs -- Satan did it Guess Who! http://tinyurl.com/mc4xe7 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: XV under x86_64
Reg Clemens wrote: I use XV for everyting, and it worked fine till I went to 64bit Fc11 Is there an rpm out there with a good 64bit xv in it? Currently the 32bit version cant find a needed library, even tho its in /usr/lib64 Did you try the 64bit version from rpmfusion-nonfree? I know the one for FC12 works fine. Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
KVM Iptables On Boot
I'm currently using KVM and trying to figure out how to reload/edit the default KVM iptable rules. I understand that I can save them (iptables-save) in the /etc/sysconfig/iptables and simply reload it rather than having to reboot each time. Where/How can I modify the default kvm/libvirt rules? Everything in /var/lib/libvirt/iptables and /etc/sysconfig/iptables is empty. The one I am most interested in customizing is the last two lines below. -A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j fail2ban-SSH -A FORWARD -d 192.168.122.0/24 -o virbr0 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -s 192.168.122.0/24 -i virbr0 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i virbr0 -o virbr0 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -o virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable -A FORWARD -i virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable -overkill -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: KVM Iptables On Boot
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:12:24 -0500 Nabeel wrote: I'm currently using KVM and trying to figure out how to reload/edit the default KVM iptable rules. Good luck with that :-). I don't know how to modify them, but I can completely eradicate them via: virsh net-destroy default virsh net-undefine default That gets rid of the default NAT scheme libvirt uses and I replace it by creating a bridge and using bridged networking I setup myself. Possibly the key to merely modifying the rules lies somewhere in the virsh net* family of commands? Might find a better answer on the fedora-virt list. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
BackupPC: How much should be setup by package?
I recently installed F12 and after decided to resetup BackupPC instead of just restoring my settings from F11 (in case any important changes were made). After fixing some selinux issues I was able to login to the cgi interface but I could only get the summary page, not the admin options. After several hours of searching without finding anything useful I finally caught a break[1] buried near the bottom of the documentation. One could argue that it probably should be a little more in your face. Also, none of the wiki's or howto's that I found mentioned this step. Of course now that I know to add CgiAdminUsers to my search I can find a few, but hindsight is 20-20. A few questions: 1. Should an admin user be defaulted, or is the expectation that everyone should know this? 2. If it is not proper to have this defaulted, where should some fedora specific documentation go? 3. The default apache configuration for BackupPC only allows connections from 127.0.0.1. Shouldn't localhost also be defaulted? [1] http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/faq/BackupPC.html#item__conf_cgiadminusers_ -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
NVIDIA under F12
Hi, I try to compile latest nvidia drivers for a GEFORCE 8600 GTS under F12, but it doesn't work and the log isn't very verbose. Has anyone succeed to do this ? BR -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: sound card configuration
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:07:57 +0100 François Patte francois.pa...@mi.parisdescartes.fr wrote: Is there a tutorial to configure a sound card under fedora 10? I'm not aware of one, though that doesn't mean there isn't one. My sound card (Realtek ALC 882 integrated on Asus P5WD2 mobo) is working but the sound is not clear: a lot of interferences (b, criccroc...), so, in piano passages of record, I can ear more electronic sounds than music Is there a way to have no background noise? If the noise isn't there in the original recording, it is probably coming from processing *after* the sound card. Are you changing the frame rate on the sound? On the fly resampling can lead to artifacts such as you describe. The sound card does the best it can under all circumstances given the input and output. There really isn't any configuration unless you are using the wrong driver. If this doesn't give you enough hints to solve the problem, you will need to post more information. What is the source of the music? How does it get to the sound card? What program are you using to record? Is pulseaudio running? Have you configured it with pavucontrol? Are frame rates consistent throughout? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: KVM Iptables On Boot
On 11/22/2009 10:12 AM, Nabeel wrote: Where/How can I modify the default kvm/libvirt rules? These rules are created by libvirtd when it sets up its virtual network(s). If you want to use libvirt-managed networks, I think you're stuck with this behavior. You do have the option, however of disabling all libvirt-managed virtual networks and setting everything up manually. -- Ian Pilcher arequip...@gmail.com -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: NVIDIA under F12
On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 17:43 +0100, Luc MAIGNAN wrote: Hi, I try to compile latest nvidia drivers for a GEFORCE 8600 GTS under F12, but it doesn't work and the log isn't very verbose. Has anyone succeed to do this ? Have you tried the ones on RPMfusion's updates-testing repo? BR -- Matthew Saltzman Clemson University Math Sciences mjs AT clemson DOT edu http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12 upgrade needs more space for /mnt/sysimage/boot
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:36:25 -0200, Germán Racca wrote:
[]
I did the following. Before starting with preupgrade, I removed all but
the last F11 kernel (this to save space on /boot). But nevertheless,
after reboot it said that it needed 0MB of space. Here I did what
someone said in a post some minutes earlier: I moved
System-map-{kernel-version}, config-{kernel-version} and the efi
directory onto / to free more space on /boot and then tried again. This
time it completed the upgrade successfully.
I did all those things, on three PCs and a laptop, with no joy;
noticed that a packagekit update updated preupgrade; tried again; still
no joy.
On some machines, if I'm quick enough, I can make it try the
install, whereupon it launches anaconda -- but still fails with the same
old space complaint. (If I'm quick enough: timeout in grub.conf is set to
25 seconds; but it disregards that, and barely flashes.)
--
Beartooth Staffwright, Neo-Redneck Not Quite Clueless Power User
I have precious (very precious!) little idea where up is.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
F12: ssh change port number
Hi, I have been using Ubuntu for several years, but I've just installed F12 for a specific use. While using it, I have encountered an odd problem in changing the default SSH port number other than 22. In Ubuntu (like other Unix-like systems), it was very straight forward to change the default SSH port number by modifying Port 22 in /etc/ssh/sshd_config. However, for some reasons, F12 didn't work like this way. I have done a quick google on this subject, but didn't find any answer yet. Is there a F12-only specific way to change the default SSH port number to something else? Or, am I missing something? Thanks, -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: sound card configuration
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 22/11/2009 17:49, stan a écrit : On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:07:57 +0100 François Patte francois.pa...@mi.parisdescartes.fr wrote: Is there a tutorial to configure a sound card under fedora 10? I'm not aware of one, though that doesn't mean there isn't one. My sound card (Realtek ALC 882 integrated on Asus P5WD2 mobo) is working but the sound is not clear: a lot of interferences (b, criccroc...), so, in piano passages of record, I can ear more electronic sounds than music Is there a way to have no background noise? If the noise isn't there in the original recording, it is probably coming from processing *after* the sound card. Thanks for answering. I am not able to answer all your questions, I'll try my best. Are you changing the frame rate on the sound? No. I just play sound from CD (or DVD) or from the HD if I have ripped a record. I listen to internet streams too (radio). On the fly resampling can lead to artifacts such as you describe. The sound card does the best it can under all circumstances given the input and output. There really isn't any configuration unless you are using the wrong driver. I did not install any driver, the sound card was working out of the box after install. How can check this point? And, if necessary, where can I find the good driver? If this doesn't give you enough hints to solve the problem, you will need to post more information. What is the source of the music? As I told: CD, DVD, HD, streams How does it get to the sound card? This, I don't understand/know. pulseaudio is working. I am a member of pulse-rt group. What program are you using to record? I don't record anything. Is pulseaudio running? Have you configured it with pavucontrol? I don't understand how to configure anything with this: I can only modify a level, but how can I know what is the good level? Are frame rates consistent throughout? I don't understand this question! Thanks for helping. - -- François Patte UFR de mathématiques et informatique Université Paris Descartes 45, rue des Saints Pères F-75270 Paris Cedex 06 Tél. +33 (0)1 4286 2145 http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAksJe+AACgkQdE6C2dhV2JXlJgCfWG0rYTNN2I+UAZY9SlLgOqYi ZrUAoJBEVoEq9UfrZ6auIaivbMmFl6xe =mzrN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Soo-Hyun Choi s.c...@hackers.org.uk wrote: Hi, I have been using Ubuntu for several years, but I've just installed F12 for a specific use. While using it, I have encountered an odd problem in changing the default SSH port number other than 22. In Ubuntu (like other Unix-like systems), it was very straight forward to change the default SSH port number by modifying Port 22 in /etc/ssh/sshd_config. However, for some reasons, F12 didn't work like this way. I have done a quick google on this subject, but didn't find any answer yet. Is there a F12-only specific way to change the default SSH port number to something else? Or, am I missing something? Thanks, -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines I have F12 i686, i found this in sshd_config at line 13 (just un-comment and change port number) #Port 22 -- Athmane Madjoudj -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
I have F12 i686, i found this in sshd_config at line 13 (just un-comment and change port number) #Port 22 Yes, what I am saying is it didn't work what it supposed to do by simply changing this value. That is if I change this value to an arbitrary high number (e.g., 10100), the ssh connection is not being made. (Yes, I did restart sshd by doing sudo /etc/init.d/sshd restart before trying logging in with the changed port number. [...@foo ~] $ ssh -p 10100 mymachine ssh: connect to host mymachine port 10100: No route to host Any idea? -- Athmane Madjoudj -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Soo-Hyun Choi s.c...@hackers.org.uk wrote: Yes, what I am saying is it didn't work what it supposed to do by simply changing this value. That is if I change this value to an arbitrary high number (e.g., 10100), the ssh connection is not being made. (Yes, I did restart sshd by doing sudo /etc/init.d/sshd restart before trying logging in with the changed port number. [...@foo ~] $ ssh -p 10100 mymachine ssh: connect to host mymachine port 10100: No route to host Any idea? Firewall ? -- Mauriat Miranda http://www.mjmwired.net/linux -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 7:15 PM, Soo-Hyun Choi s.c...@hackers.org.uk wrote: I have F12 i686, i found this in sshd_config at line 13 (just un-comment and change port number) #Port 22 Yes, what I am saying is it didn't work what it supposed to do by simply changing this value. That is if I change this value to an arbitrary high number (e.g., 10100), the ssh connection is not being made. (Yes, I did restart sshd by doing sudo /etc/init.d/sshd restart before trying logging in with the changed port number. [...@foo ~] $ ssh -p 10100 mymachine ssh: connect to host mymachine port 10100: No route to host Any idea? -- Athmane Madjoudj -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines i have changed that line to ; # nmap localhost Starting Nmap 5.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2009-11-22 19:10 CET Interesting ports on localhost.localdomain (127.0.0.1): Not shown: 993 closed ports PORT STATE SERVICE 25/tcp open smtp 80/tcp open http 111/tcp open rpcbind 443/tcp open https 631/tcp open ipp /tcp open unknown 3306/tcp open mysql # ssh -p localhost The authenticity of host '[localhost]: ([127.0.0.1]:)' can't be established. RSA key fingerprint is eb:e7:36:5f:a3:ba:81:eb:d4:6a:f9:18:f7:25:d6:16. Are you sure you want to continue connecting (yes/no)? so i thinks that you need to open this port from firewall (to diagnostic just disable it by: service iptables stop) HTH -- Athmane Madjoudj -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:58:17 + Soo-Hyun Choi s.c...@hackers.org.uk wrote: Hi, I have been using Ubuntu for several years, but I've just installed F12 for a specific use. While using it, I have encountered an odd problem in changing the default SSH port number other than 22. In Ubuntu (like other Unix-like systems), it was very straight forward to change the default SSH port number by modifying Port 22 in /etc/ssh/sshd_config. However, for some reasons, F12 didn't work like this way. I have done a quick google on this subject, but didn't find any answer yet. Is there a F12-only specific way to change the default SSH port number to something else? Or, am I missing something? Thanks, Are you sure it isn't some simple oversight like forgetting to restart the daemon? I ask because I just changed the listening port on my F12 install and it works as expected simply by changing the 'Port ' line in /etc/ssh/sshd_config. HTH, GM -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
i have changed that line to ; # nmap localhost Starting Nmap 5.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2009-11-22 19:10 CET Interesting ports on localhost.localdomain (127.0.0.1): Not shown: 993 closed ports PORT STATE SERVICE 25/tcp open smtp 80/tcp open http 111/tcp open rpcbind 443/tcp open https 631/tcp open ipp /tcp open unknown 3306/tcp open mysql # ssh -p localhost The authenticity of host '[localhost]: ([127.0.0.1]:)' can't be established. RSA key fingerprint is eb:e7:36:5f:a3:ba:81:eb:d4:6a:f9:18:f7:25:d6:16. Are you sure you want to continue connecting (yes/no)? so i thinks that you need to open this port from firewall (to iagnostic just disable it by: service iptables stop) Hooray, yes, I have overlooked the iptables settings - I thought there wasn't any firewall rules as it was just a fresh installation, but there were! I have disabled the iptables, and everything is working fine now. Thanks, Soo-Hyun HTH -- Athmane Madjoudj -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
On Sunday 22 November 2009 13:15:44 Soo-Hyun Choi wrote: [...@foo ~] $ ssh -p 10100 mymachine ssh: connect to host mymachine port 10100: No route to host Any idea? That error indicates you cannot get packets to the host. The sshd is presumably listening on that port but the client cannot reach the host. (If you get connection refused, it indicates an icorrect port or no service listening.) -- Garry T. Williams --- +1 678 656-4579 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:15:44 + Soo-Hyun Choi s.c...@hackers.org.uk wrote: I have F12 i686, i found this in sshd_config at line 13 (just un-comment and change port number) #Port 22 Yes, what I am saying is it didn't work what it supposed to do by simply changing this value. That is if I change this value to an arbitrary high number (e.g., 10100), the ssh connection is not being made. (Yes, I did restart sshd by doing sudo /etc/init.d/sshd restart before trying logging in with the changed port number. [...@foo ~] $ ssh -p 10100 mymachine ssh: connect to host mymachine port 10100: No route to host Any idea? Ah, you didn't mention that your problem was *connecting* to the port; your original question implied the problem was with *listening* on a given port -- big difference. `netstat -untap` will show you which port ssh is actually listening on. Then, taking Athmane's advice on temporarily disabling your firewall should help eliminate the possibilities... HTH, GM -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
2009/11/22 Soo-Hyun Choi s.c...@hackers.org.uk I have been using Ubuntu for several years, but I've just installed F12 for a specific use. While using it, I have encountered an odd problem in changing the default SSH port number other than 22. In Ubuntu (like other Unix-like systems), it was very straight forward to change the default SSH port number by modifying Port 22 in /etc/ssh/sshd_config. However, for some reasons, F12 didn't work like this way. The same in Fedora. Did you recall to restart the daemon sshd after changing the port number ? command is service sshd restart (with root user) Regards Alessandro -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: ssh change port number
I think you will need to adjust selinux settings to allow sshd works in another port. On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Alessandro Boggiano boggi...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/11/22 Soo-Hyun Choi s.c...@hackers.org.uk I have been using Ubuntu for several years, but I've just installed F12 for a specific use. While using it, I have encountered an odd problem in changing the default SSH port number other than 22. In Ubuntu (like other Unix-like systems), it was very straight forward to change the default SSH port number by modifying Port 22 in /etc/ssh/sshd_config. However, for some reasons, F12 didn't work like this way. The same in Fedora. Did you recall to restart the daemon sshd after changing the port number ? command is service sshd restart (with root user) Regards Alessandro -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- Itamar Reis Peixoto e-mail/msn/google talk/sip: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br skype: itamarjp icq: 81053601 +55 11 4063 5033 +55 34 3221 8599 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: Won't start X? (was Re: Preup to F12, won't boot)
On 21/11/09 02:20, Oliver Ruebenacker wrote: Hello, Now I have almost the same problem on another computer. Except that I did not use preupgrate but upgrade via netinstal. The only thing I know the computers have in common is that they are both Dell and have flat screns. One is a desktop, the other a laptop. After it says Welcome to Fedora, it prints a number of messages most of which just say it's starting something. Then it stops and the screen flickers for a few seconds. The last message is entirely different on both computers, so I am assuming it is not relevant. I don't have access to the desktop computer, but the laptop actually did boot, and I found out I can press Alt-F2 and then log in in text mode. After I logged in, it says: Can not open display default display I am assuming its the same with the desktop computer, but can not verify. I found earlier threads describing a similar problem with F12 alpha and beta, but found no solution. Any advice? Take care Oliver On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Oliver Ruebenacker cur...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Gianluca Cecchi gianluca.cec...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:51:05 -0500 Oliver Ruebenacker wrote: If I edit away the quiet argument before booting, I see a few lines instead. The last of those few lines are (hand-copied, may contain typos): fb0: nouveaufb frame buffer device You ran preupgrade, and then reboot, but the actual upgrade phase has not happened yet, correct? Try to modify f12 upgrade kernel command line also adding at the end something like xdriver=vesa nomodeset and see if it goes better... Thanks, I will try (that computer is at a location I am usually only on Thursdays. Sicne next week is Thanksgiving, this means again in two weeks). What do you mean the upgrade has not happened yet? I am assuming it has. I also figured out that if you remove rhgb and quiet, there is some text, and it goes as far as jexec starting avahi or something like that, and then the screen flickers for a few seconds, and then it stops and nothing more happens. Until I press the power button briefly (pressing it longer would cut power) and then the system seems to shut down orderly. Before I get to the point where it stops, it says something like welcome to Fedora, press I for interactive setup, but even if I hold my finger on i (or shift and i) all the time, it never becomes interactive. Take care Oliver -- Oliver Ruebenacker, Computational Cell Biologist Systems Biology Linker at Virtual Cell (http://vcell.org/sybil) Turning Knowledge Data into Models Center for Cell Analysis and Modeling http://www.oliver.curiousworld.org Oliver, I found I had to set up the /etc/X11/xorg.conf file with the files, video card driver, screen, and monitor settings to get it to work correctly with the nouveau drivers. Unfortunately the proprietary nvidia drivers for Fedora 12 are still in testing, (they are buggy, I'm using them, avoiding the bugs), so, for nvidia, you need to disable the Livna display configuration from trying to reset to them. See below for an example of what you might need. Section Files ModulePath /usr/lib64/xorg/modules EndSection Section Monitor # HorizSync source: edid, VertRefresh source: edid Identifier Monitor0 VendorName Unknown ModelNamewhatever HorizSync30.0 - 80.0 VertRefresh 56.0 - 75.0 Option DPMS EndSection Section Device Identifier Device0 Driver nouveau VendorName NVIDIA Corporation BoardName GeForce 9800 GT EndSection Section Screen Identifier Screen0 Device Device0 MonitorMonitor0 DefaultDepth 24 Option TwinView 0 SubSection Display Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection I hope this helps get you up and running JB -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: KVM Iptables On Boot
Thanks for the quick response I'll probably end up doing the same thing you did. Tom Horsley wrote: On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:12:24 -0500 Nabeel wrote: I'm currently using KVM and trying to figure out how to reload/edit the default KVM iptable rules. Good luck with that :-). I don't know how to modify them, but I can completely eradicate them via: virsh net-destroy default virsh net-undefine default That gets rid of the default NAT scheme libvirt uses and I replace it by creating a bridge and using bridged networking I setup myself. Possibly the key to merely modifying the rules lies somewhere in the virsh net* family of commands? Might find a better answer on the fedora-virt list. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12 installs report here.
Subject says it all. Tell us about your experience. Just installed Fedora 12 on Fujitsu-Siemens Esprimo U9200 laptop (2GB RAM). Clean install from x86-64 KDE Live CD, immediately followed by a yum update. In short, everything works flawlessly! Many thanks to all Fedora devs!! :-) Specifics: - KDE is impressive and more powerful than ever - Pulseaudio Just Works - Intel graphics drivers Just Work --- no random freezing (GM965 chipset) - 3D accelerated graphics Just Works (KDE, Compiz and all...) - WirelessNM Just Work - ext4 filesystem Just Works (on all partitions, with GRUB, etc.) - SELinux policy Just Works (no complaints so far) The non-free specifics: - 64-bit flash plugin Just Works, with pulseaudio and all - mplayer Just Works (inside Compiz --- no picture jittering) - and the BIGGEST SURPRISE: SKYPE JUST WORKS !!! :-D Even more, it cooperates beautifully with pulseaudio, shares sound with other audio apps (XMMS, KDE notifications, etc..), and this is the very first time I can hear it ringing while listening to some music or watching a movie. I just had a skype-phonecall with a friend of mine, while XMMS was playing some ambiental music in the background. I reduced its volume somewhat, courtesy of pulseaudio, in order to have a comfortable conversation over skype. And as my friend told me about some website to visit, I opened it in firefox and heard audio from some flash stuff on the web page. And everything coexisted without even a hiccup! The only volume mixer I ever started in F12 was pavucontrol, and even that only to adjust the microphone level. I used app-native volume sliders in all audio apps, and it all also Just Worked. I could see the volume slider in pavucontrol moving in sync as I move the XMMS volume slider, and vice versa. Ok, just to be fair, skype did require some nontrivial work to get installed, and I am about to post the detailed HOWTO in a new thread. And there is just one thing I dislike --- in order to make skype happy, I had to taint my new and beautiful x86_64 system with a lot of ugly .i686 packages. Specifically, yum pulled in a total [r...@yoda ~]# rpm -qa | grep .i686 | wc -l 86 of those, mostly various libs, on an otherwise crystal-clear 64-bit system. Oh, yeah, there was also this thing with renaming LVDS and VGA outputs into LVDS1 and VGA1, which broke all my custom scripts involving xrandr, but that was easy to fix after I figured out that the syntax is now different. It did take some amount of head-scratching to figure it out, though... ;-) All in all, F12 appears to be a fantastic release! THANKS EVERYBODY!!! And keep up the good work! :-) Best, :-) Marko -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: Won't start X? (was Re: Preup to F12, won't boot)
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:46 AM, n2xssvv.g02gfr12930 n2xssvv.g02gfr12...@ntlworld.com wrote: I found earlier threads describing a similar problem with F12 alpha and beta, but found no solution. Any advice? If you have an NVidia graphics card, then wait. It's not ready for prime time yet. Of course, neither is openSuSE and with my NVidia card (GEFORCE 9400 GT), it is too new for Debian stable and Debian testing is, well, too raw. So, I'm still SOL and using flaky sound and video from an older release. :( Tiresome. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
