On Sat, 04 Dec 2010 20:50:11 +0200
Jonathan Dieter wrote:
...snip...
> As far as I can see, this only affected the openoffice.org* and
> autocorr* packages in the 101202 push, and the rest of the packages in
> the push had all the proper deltarpms generated.
>
> I'm not sure where to go from he
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501227
I'm writing to devel list just if anybody can say will there be any
chance to get nautilus and tracker integration working? Is this on
anybody's radar?
Thanks,
Valent.
--
pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt
blog: http://kernelreloa
I'm not sure if there's a better list for this to go to, but there seems
to be a problem generating deltarpms for F14 OOo (and a few other
packages) on releng2. Specifically, the updates->updates deltarpms
aren't being generated, while the GA->updates deltarpms are.
When I checked the mash.out lo
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 14:06:53 +0100,
Michal Schmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 11:59:25 +0100 Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> > As you can see with a current rawhide install you might end up with
> > filesystems that have multible entries in mtab:
> > http://fpaste.org/Z7Ne/
> >
> > df also outputs t
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 16:34:05 -0800,
Jesse Keating wrote:
> "f14/user/fred/topic/mybranch" or other such craziness. When I went to
> test this, I realized that git won't allow you to have both "f14" and
> "f14/topic" as branches, because of the way the git metadata works on
Does there need
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> To prevent overzealous maintainers, who believe to understand what they
> are doing but actually don't, from doing harm to packages.
Trust me, after I'm done yelling at them, they won't do that ever again. ;-)
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedora
Package "impressive" used to be available for F13 but is orphaned; it
got marked retired for F14 and rawhide (master) because of maintainer
inactivity.
I took over ownership for F13, see:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/impressive
I fedpkg-cloned it, synced with upstream and ran
- "Jesse Keating" wrote:
> I'm working on fixing a few long standing bugs in fedpkg that have to
> do
> with our branch structure
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619979 and
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=622592).
>
> This has me examining our branch structure a
On 12/04/2010 06:54 PM, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've noticed that since the release of F14 a fairly large [1] number of
> OO updates came down the wire - non of them in deltarpm/presto form
> (read: a >100MB download per release).
>
> Is it bug or intended behavior?
> If its a bug, wo
Hello all,
I've noticed that since the release of F14 a fairly large [1] number of
OO updates came down the wire - non of them in deltarpm/presto form
(read: a >100MB download per release).
Is it bug or intended behavior?
If its a bug, wouldn't it be wise to hold off on releasing
non-security-fix
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Debarshi Ray wrote:
>> I see [1] the libical is not orphaned yet, neither in devel, nor in F14,
>> as I "only" can add myself to the package, but not take ownership as
>> with other orphaned packages.
>
> I think what happens is when the owner orphans a package one
Compose started at Sat Dec 4 08:15:03 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
balsa-2.4.9-1.fc15.x86_64 requires libesmtp.so.5()(64bit)
beagle-0.3.9-19.fc14.x86_64 requires libmono.so.0()(64bit)
beagle-0.3.9-19.fc14.x86_64
> I see [1] the libical is not orphaned yet, neither in devel, nor in F14,
> as I "only" can add myself to the package, but not take ownership as
> with other orphaned packages.
I think what happens is when the owner orphans a package one of the
co-maintainers automatically get promoted.
Cheers,
On 12/04/2010 12:19 PM, Matej Cepl wrote:
> Related issue I have with the Fedora git repositories is that one cannot
> remove any branch once it is created. After I have created in bitlbee
> repo two topic branches, only to find out that I cannot remove them
> after the merge. I can understand need
Dne 4.12.2010 06:33, Garrett Holmstrom napsal(a):
> Why tie branch names down to specific releases? While that scheme makes
> it easy for fedpkg to guess what release to attempt to build against
> when one only cares about one release, it makes little sense to call a
> branch "f14-rh123456" whe
Dne 3.12.2010 23:19, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> sigh. typo. I meant Evince not Zarafa. If you're wondering how I can
> possibly screw that up, I tested Evince by loading the Zarafa user
> manual. =)
Hmm, apparently there are not that many bugs against evince. So, that's
just my personal curse th
Hi,
I wrote a small program, that works as frontend for filesystem
defragmentation tools (ext4, xfs and btrfs)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=464699&action=edit
I want to execute it from nautilius context menu - unfortunately
nautilius-actions-config-tool seems to be busted on rawh
17 matches
Mail list logo
