On Thursday 11 February 2010 04:21:10 Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 03:15:56AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mat Booth wrote:
If you insist on putting out major updates for released Fedoras it
will never a good time to do a re-spin. Oh well.
The updates being pushed so far are
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 12:48 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
I have now adjusted the draft -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_Fedora_privilege_escalation_policy
- to reflect all feedback from this list and from FESco. It will be reviewed
again by FESco next week. Please raise
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Adam Jackson a...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-02-09 at 08:06 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 8 February 2010 22:46, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
As a result, you'll be causing dozens of FTBFS bugs just before the
feature
freeze. I think
- Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Sadly, this means this respin includes KDE 4.3.4 when 4.3.5 got pushed
to
stable on February 5 (in fact I queued it for stable on February 2,
but it
just missed a push and the next one was only on February 5) and 4.4.0
is in
the works.
- Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
The packages available at the time it was released. ;-) I.e. not
preparing
the spin 3 days before a KDE update goes out, considering that testing
the
spin apparently takes 9 days. But nobody at Fedora Unity ever talks to
us
about KDE
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Tony Nelson
tonynel...@georgeanelson.com wrote:
On 10-02-10 15:48:39, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi, all. So the privilege escalation policy went to FESco, who
suggested some minor tweaks and a final run-by the mailing lists
before it gets approved.
I have now
- Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
The problem that Kevin is pointing out is - we can't watch every other
Fedora
projects, schedules etc. so closely - it's not just possible as it's
big
project and lot of people. It wouldn't hurt anybody to send quick note
to
On Thursday 11 February 2010 11:03:52 Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote:
- Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Sadly, this means this respin includes KDE 4.3.4 when 4.3.5 got pushed
to
stable on February 5 (in fact I queued it for stable on February 2,
but it
just missed a push and
Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote:
Kevin this is your warning we are going to try again in a month.
When exactly? March 2? We'll see if we can get 4.4.0 out to the stable
updates by that time…
Why shouldn't the KDE team wait 3 weeks now so that their update gets
released about the time of our next
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 05:19:59PM -0500, Tony Nelson wrote:
On 10-02-10 15:48:39, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi, all. So the privilege escalation policy went to FESco, who
suggested some minor tweaks and a final run-by the mailing lists
before it gets approved.
I have now adjusted the
Hi all,
Here it's
http://www.giis.co.in/giis/http://www.google.com/url?sa=Dq=http://www.giis.co.in/giis/usg=AFQjCNF-HqYzAJyM648v-oepVtmcFeB50A,
ext4 undelete tool.giis-ext4
uses ext2fs lib and sqlite,thus provides better/best performance than
giis for ext3.
giis-ext4 has less than 1000 LOC which
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 10:34 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 20:42 +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
You should add AC_CHECK_LIB(X11, XKeysymToString) to configure.in,
for example.
It's nicer to use pkg-config for libraries which provide .pc files,
isn't it? X11 does:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:48:39PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
I have now adjusted the draft -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_Fedora_privilege_escalation_policy
- to reflect all feedback from this list and from FESco. It will be reviewed
again by FESco next week.
On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 11:06 +0100, yersinia wrote:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Adam Jackson a...@redhat.com wrote:
--no-add-needed is quite different. Your binary a.out uses
symbols from
libfoo and libbar. libfoo is linked against libbar. But your
link
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=561568
Warren Togami wtog...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Adam Jackson wrote:
Also note that the runtime linker will still do recursive lookups. If
you have a binary that did not link against some needed library, but one
of its dependencies did link against it, the binary will still work.
And this makes this ld (mis)feature particularly silly, ld
On 02/11/2010 07:17 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
If your library libfoo uses symbols from libbar but does not
itself link against libbar, that's still legal (although probably
impolite).
It is not really correct, it works only by accident in most cases. If
the library with is linked with is using
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Update perl-IPC-ShareLite to 0.17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563937
Summary: Update perl-IPC-ShareLite to 0.17
Product: Fedora
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
And this makes this ld (mis)feature particularly silly, ld now gratuitously
errors on undefined symbols which would be found just fine at runtime.
No, it errors on undefined symbols that may or may not be found at
runtime. Why do you
Hello Chris,
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 09:32:11AM -0800, Chris Weyl wrote:
Or, appropriately enough, a Perl one-liner :)
perl -e 'while () { chomp; s/\s+$//; split / = /; $v{$_[0]} =
$v{$_[0]} $_[1] ? $v{$_[0]} : $_[1] } do { print $v{$_} ? $_ =
$v{$_}\n : $_\n } for sort keys %v'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 05:29:27PM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
== Remediation ==
A new update is being prepared to address this problem for Fedora 11
and 12 users, and will be pushed to our mirrors as soon as possible.
Users who are not
On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 13:32 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 05:19:59PM -0500, Tony Nelson wrote:
On 10-02-10 15:48:39, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi, all. So the privilege escalation policy went to FESco, who
suggested some minor tweaks and a final run-by the mailing
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Stepan Kasal ska...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello Chris,
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 09:32:11AM -0800, Chris Weyl wrote:
Or, appropriately enough, a Perl one-liner :)
perl -e 'while () { chomp; s/\s+$//; split / = /; $v{$_[0]} =
$v{$_[0]} $_[1] ? $v{$_[0]} : $_[1] }
Hello Chris,
The other thread had me wondering where we are in doing the perl
minimal/core change that was discussed earlier on the list... Are we
still on target for F-13?
I'm very sorry, but I'm afraid we are going to miss this. :-(
Stepan
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
When: Friday, 2010-02-12 @ 16:00 UTC (11 AM EST)
Where: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
It's that time again: blocker bug review meeting time! Tomorrow is the
second blocker bug review meeting for Fedora 13 Alpha.
Please note the adjustments to the time written in this announcement.
The
On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 11:58 -0800, Roland McGrath wrote:
Note that _libraries_ generally do not have a problem building in a
--no-add-needed world. ELF does not require that all references in a
DSO be resolvable at ld time, and this linking change does not change
that. If your library
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:23:15PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
till:fatsort:http://fatsort.berlios.de/
Upstream compared the contents of the current tarball with a old working
copy. Since there is only one developer, it's probably safe to assume,
that the code is clean.
Regards
Till
2010/2/11 Robert 'Bob' Jensen b...@fedoraunity.org:
- Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
Oh seriously, a little communication between the Unity team and the
KDE
team wouldn't hurt here. If the Unity team said hey, we're going to
do
a spin on March 6th but the KDE team wanted to slip
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:58:21PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 15:12 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
I doubt this very much. Many people don't report the bugs when the app
crashes but later, many reports in a row. Most of my reports read I
have no idea what I was
Am Montag, den 18.01.2010, 21:58 -0800 schrieb Adam Williamson:
On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 15:12 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
I doubt this very much. Many people don't report the bugs when the app
crashes but later, many reports in a row. Most of my reports read I
have no idea what I was
The unifdef package had become orphaned due to an FTBFS,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=51153. I took it over,
updated it to the latest upstream code, verified that it builds with
Koji, and committed it. I'm not sure what to do about the Status field
of the bug. I looked for
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 05:36:23PM -0800, Eric Smith wrote:
The unifdef package had become orphaned due to an FTBFS,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=51153. I took it over,
updated it to the latest upstream code, verified that it builds with
Koji, and committed it. I'm not sure
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 15:48 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 10:53 +, Leigh Scott wrote:
IMO ABRT isn't that useful as a lot of the reports don't include steps
to reproduce (I just close the bugs after a month if they don't respond
to the needinfo request).
You can
Hi all,
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora doesn't
have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Since I realized no linux distribution containing lzma sdk yet, is using a
bundled library permitted under this condition,?
Regards,
Chen Lei--
devel mailing list
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 05:36:23PM -0800, Eric Smith wrote:
The unifdef package had become orphaned due to an FTBFS,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=51153. I took it over,
updated it to the latest upstream code, verified that it builds with
Koji, and committed it. I'm not sure
On 02/12/2010 04:39 AM, Chen Lei wrote:
Hi all,
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora doesn't
have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Since I realized no linux distribution containing lzma sdk yet, is using a
bundled library permitted under this condition,?
This seems
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora
doesn't have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Fedora 12 has package lzma-libs which is generated by
lzma-4.32.7-3.fc12.src.rpm.
Perhaps you should confer with the maintainer of the Fedora lzma package
if you desire a later lzma
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Looks like you've linked to the wrong bug.
Sorry, it was a typo. The correct bug is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511553
From the description, it now builds from source, at least in rawhide.
I think you want to Close Rawhide in that case.
Great,
Matt Domsch wrote:
However, check if unifdef is really needed. The kernel team knew it
was going to be orphaned, and said that's OK, as the kernel tree has
its own copy that's maintained there. or somesuch. If not, letting
it stay dead is fine - desireable in fact.
What is the criteria
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=561568
--- Comment #17 from Muzi muzammel.li...@gmail.com 2010-02-11 04:35:54 EST ---
Kindly look here below, today cron is terminated
perl-PPI-HTML has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-PPI-HTML-1.07-6.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Document)
perl-PPI-HTML-1.07-6.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
On i386:
perl-PPI-HTML-1.07-6.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Document)
perl-Perl-MinimumVersion has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Perl-MinimumVersion-1.20-3.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Util)
perl-Perl-MinimumVersion-1.20-3.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
On i386:
perl-Perl-MinimumVersion-1.20-3.fc13.noarch
perl-PPI has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-PPI-1.206-3.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Token::QuoteLike)
perl-PPI-1.206-3.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Document::File)
perl-PPI-1.206-3.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Token::Quote::Double)
perl-Locale-Maketext-Lexicon has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Locale-Maketext-Lexicon-0.77-5.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
On i386:
perl-Locale-Maketext-Lexicon-0.77-5.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
perl-Padre has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Padre-0.50-4.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Dumper)
perl-Padre-0.50-4.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
perl-Padre-0.50-4.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Document)
perl-Module-Inspector has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Module-Inspector-1.05-6.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI) = 0:1.118
On i386:
perl-Module-Inspector-1.05-6.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI) = 0:1.118
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
perl-Module-Used has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Module-Used-1.2.0-3.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Document)
On i386:
perl-Module-Used-1.2.0-3.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Document)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extras
perl-Devel-REPL has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Devel-REPL-1.003007-4.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Dumper)
perl-Devel-REPL-1.003007-4.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
On i386:
perl-Devel-REPL-1.003007-4.fc13.noarch requires
perl-File-Find-Rule-PPI has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-File-Find-Rule-PPI-0.05-5.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
On i386:
perl-File-Find-Rule-PPI-0.05-5.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extras
perl-PPI-Tester has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On x86_64:
perl-PPI-Tester-0.06-8.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Lexer)
perl-PPI-Tester-0.06-8.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Dumper)
On i386:
perl-PPI-Tester-0.06-8.fc13.noarch requires perl(PPI::Lexer)
Hello,
the filtering macros from Chris Weyl do many useful things, but I
have an idea about one more thing it should do: filter out
non-versioned provides, if the same provide is available with a
version. Likewise, if there is a non-versioned requires with a
corresponding versioned require,
Author: mmaslano
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Template-Tiny/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv21908
Modified Files:
.cvsignore sources
Added Files:
perl-Template-Tiny.spec
Log Message:
* Mon Feb 01 2010 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 0.10-1
-
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:27 AM, Stepan Kasal ska...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
the filtering macros from Chris Weyl do many useful things, but I
have an idea about one more thing it should do: filter out
non-versioned provides, if the same provide is available with a
version. Likewise, if
From 07346383364e6a3e37d8b2f44b305a70db26ba3c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nathan Kinder nkin...@redhat.com
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 16:14:54 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Make check for threaded httpd work with Apache 2.0
The check we use for a threaded httpd doesn't properly detect a
threaded Apache
54 matches
Mail list logo
