The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
445
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5630/bugzilla-3.2.10-5.el5
339
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-6608/Django-1.1.4-2.el5
34
Hi Kevin,
On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
In Kaffeine's case, upstream is switching from xine-lib to MPlayer in their git
repository, so it will likely have to move to RPM Fusion sooner or later
anyway.
I took a look at kaffeine as found in F19 yesterday, and it is still
using
Hi,
On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
The following packages currently depend on xine-lib:
* gxine
* (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected)
* kaffeine (my package, the reason why I maintain xine-lib in the first place)
* oxine
* xine-plugin
* xine-ui
These packages would have
Xavier Bachelot venit, vidit, dixit 10.07.2013 10:58:
Hi,
On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
The following packages currently depend on xine-lib:
* gxine
* (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected)
* kaffeine (my package, the reason why I maintain xine-lib in the first
- Original Message -
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the
'deliverables SOP' I started several releases ago:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_releng_SOP_deliverables
(I don't really like the
On 07/10/2013 11:57 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote:
Xavier Bachelot venit, vidit, dixit 10.07.2013 10:58:
Hi,
On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
The following packages currently depend on xine-lib:
* gxine
* (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected)
* kaffeine (my package, the
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com, together with the
desktop team
We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit frontends (gpk-update-viewer and
gpk-application) by a
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Shared Certificate Tools =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SharedCertificateTools
Change owner(s): Stef Walter st...@redhat.com
Fedora now has infrastructure for sharing system trusted certificates between
the various crypto libraries.
Tools are being
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Hadoop =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Hadoop
Change owner(s): Matthew Farrellee m...@fedoraproject.org
Provide native Apache Hadoop packages.
== Detailed description ==
Apache Hadoop is a widely used, increasingly complete big data platform, with
a
Do you top-post on rpmfusion-developers? I'm sorry if I messed that up,
I'm not on that list and don't know the policy.
We were talking about restructuring the xine packages, and xine-ui was
supposed to be subsumed by another package if I remember correctly.
Do we move first than repackage?
In
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the
'deliverables SOP' I started several releases ago:
- Original Message -
From: Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:45:53 PM
Subject: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav
On Jul 10, 2013 5:25 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com, together with the
desktop team
We will replace the existing
On 07/10/2013 01:42 PM, Michael J Gruber wrote:
Do you top-post on rpmfusion-developers? I'm sorry if I messed that up,
I'm not on that list and don't know the policy.
As on most lists, no, we don't top post, but no worries ;-)
We were talking about restructuring the xine packages, and
On 07/09/2013 08:00 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Tuesday, July 9, 2013, Jonathan Masters j...@redhat.com
mailto:j...@redhat.com wrote:
Matthew,
We'll be looking into LLVM in due course. There are a few of us
capable of fixing the issue (that you were noted as being extremely
concerned about on
On 07/10/2013 12:36 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Plus, in relation to this - the llvmpipe issue brings up that one of
the 'release blocking desktops'*does not work*. This would, by definition,
block the release unless we intend to have different criteria for ARM as a
primary arch.
Then we should
On Wednesday, July 10, 2013, quot;Jóhann B. Guðmundssonquot;
johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/09/2013 08:00 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Tuesday, July 9, 2013, Jonathan Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
Matthew,
We'll be looking into LLVM in due course. There are a few of us capable
of fixing the
Hello,
Researchers at Oregon State University are striving to conduct
research to learn more about the free/open source software community
landscape as it relates to older adults. We’re looking for older
adults who are older than 50 and are currently involved with a
free/open source software
Hello All!
I've no idea how did I become an opengl-games-utils maintainer in the
first place (perhaps I applied as a co-maintainer years ago). Also I
think that the package isn't needed anymore, so I'm going to remove
myself as a maintainer. If anyone wants to take care of this package,
then
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All!
I've no idea how did I become an opengl-games-utils maintainer in the
first place (perhaps I applied as a co-maintainer years ago). Also I
think that the package isn't needed anymore, so I'm going to remove
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:02:57AM -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
I don't see a problem with different set of blocking desktops for ARM, even
as primary architecture. But it's really about resources - do we have people
willing to work for example on LXDE (I'd say more resources friendly for
Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com, together with the
desktop team
We will replace the existing gnome-packagekit
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 08:28 -0400, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I still have serious concerns regarding build times:
* arm - https://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=150248 ~ 17h
* current primary -
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=429023 ~1h 30m
This is
The lightweight tag 'perl-Dist-CheckConflicts-0.08-1.fc20' was created pointing
to:
2588498... Update to 0.08
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Great. Thank you!
Il 09/07/2013 20:35, Jochen Schmitt ha scritto:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
(and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji).
Is there any provenpackager
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Package-Stash:
423e99f76382cb71119f5f3a69c1e29e Package-Stash-0.35.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 11:12 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com, together with the
commit da9669e03c9e2bd63d82c256d6181106852a99c5
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Wed Jul 10 16:32:58 2013 +0100
Update to 0.35
- New upstream release 0.35
- Remove old, deprecated API
- BR: perl(Getopt::Long)
- perl(Package::DeprecationManager) is no
Hello All!
I'm updating leveldb from 1.9.0 to 1.12.o for Fedora 19. Actually
that's mostly a change of the number in spec-file (NOT a soname bump)
and a few compatible enhancements, however I also backported one
essential patch from Basho's fork of leveldb, which is required for
the next version
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100
Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name
wrote:
...snip...
test instances for maintainers as described here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers
On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 16:19 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
I saw this during the update:
Updating : abrt-libs-2.1.5-1.fc18.x86_64
10/76
cp: cannot create regular file
â/var/tmp/abrt/ccpp-2013-03-27-09:24:26-2877/environâ: No such file or
directory
cp: cannot create regular file
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:02:24 +0200
Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com, together with
the desktop team
We will replace
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:51 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:02:24 +0200
Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
Which hardware is supported by ARMv7 hfp 32bit builds? Will there be
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM
The list is expanding regularly and
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
Which hardware is supported by ARMv7 hfp 32bit builds? Will there be
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 07:45:53AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
I don't see a problem with different set of blocking desktops for ARM, even
as primary architecture. But it's really about resources - do we have people
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I was working on adding 2 more SOC's for packagers earlier this week.
I wanted to see how much call there was for these... should I try and
make them accessable by all packagers? Or just have a group and
interested people could be added to that group?
I for one would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:33:28 -0400
Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:50:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
llvmpipe has been known to be broken for months, and nobody on the
ARM team appears capable of fixing it. As
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:33:28 -0400
Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:50:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
llvmpipe has been known to be broken
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal
doesnt yet have it.
from redhat-rpm-config
just because gcc accepts a flag, doesn't mean it has been implemented in
the compiler.
--
devel mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:57:43 +0200
Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name
wrote:
Which hardware is supported by
On Jul 10, 2013, at 8:29 AM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
If ARM merely wants to be
able to produce something that's similar to Fedora then we should figure
out what a spin-based PA would look like, but that's not what's
currently being proposed.
For F20, this makes more
Hello, a new cfitsio (3.350) is going to land tomorrow in rawhide. This
version comes with a significant change, upstream provides a soname for the
shared library. This means that hopefully updating cfitsio won't be so
painful in the future.
Regards, Sergio
--
devel mailing list
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:43:04AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Note: As of this writing, the agenda for this week is very light. The one
known agenda item is waiting on information which hasn't been submitted yet.
If you have something to discuss, please reply to this e-mail ASAP so we
can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/10/2013 01:14 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:43:04AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Note: As of this writing, the agenda for this week is very light.
The one known agenda item is waiting on information which hasn't
been
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello, a new cfitsio (3.350) is going to land tomorrow in rawhide. This
version comes with a significant change, upstream provides a soname for the
shared library. This means that hopefully updating cfitsio won't be
On 07/10/2013 04:09 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
That doesn't mean that the release criteria as they stand aren't good
for ARM - but they're criteria for evaluating RCs, not the criteria for
ARM as a PA.
Right
It's two different things, and it's important that we not confuse them.
The question
- Original Message -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/10/2013 01:14 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:43:04AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Note: As of this writing, the agenda for this week is very light.
The one known agenda item is
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal
doesnt yet have it.
Only i?86/x86_64/ppc/ppc64/s390/s390x/sparc/sparc64/tilegx/tilepro
really have full stack protector support, while perhaps -fstack-protector
Oops as noted by jreznik, this thread took a brief detour onto the docs list
by mistake.
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:47:30AM -0400, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com
To: For participants of the Documentation Project
ARM enthusiasts and watchers,
Please join us today (Wednesday, July 10th) at 4PM EDT (8PM UTC)
for the Fedora ARM weekly status meeting in #fedora-meeting-1 on Freenode.
On the agenda so far:
1) Problem packages
2) Kernel Status Update
3) Aarch64 - Status Update, problem packages
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov
akurt...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:45:53 PM
Subject: Re: F20 System Wide
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:36:39PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
Which hardware
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal
doesnt yet have it.
Only i?86/x86_64/ppc/ppc64/s390/s390x/sparc/sparc64/tilegx/tilepro
- Original Message -
From: Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:17:49 PM
Subject: Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:28 PM,
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:06:50 -0400 (EDT)
Aleksandar Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com wrote:
Yeah, I know the reasons but still this would make it really hard for
us to push changes or test a build fix. I would like all archs to
have equal attention but not at the price of others. I still have bad
Planned Outage: koji storage move - 2013-07-18 21:00 UTC
There will be an outage starting at 2013-07-18 21:00 UTC, which will
last approximately 24 hours.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2013-07-18
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:58:22 +0200
Xavier Bachelot wrote:
Hi,
On 01/05/2012 08:56 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
The following packages currently depend on xine-lib:
* gxine
* (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected)
* kaffeine (my package, the reason why I maintain xine-lib in
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2013-06-27 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2013-07-11 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT
2013-07-11 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT
2013-07-11
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 11:32:46AM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote:
Excellent proposal. I of course think this would be just awesome!
This proposal doesn't address virtualization!
I think this is great, BUT I'd also like to see a widely available
cheap ARM platform that supports virtualization,
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 13:02 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com, together with the
desktop team
We will replace the existing
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:14:24PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I was working on adding 2 more SOC's for packagers earlier this week.
I wanted to see how much call there was for these... should I try and
make them accessable by all packagers? Or just have a group and
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:17:47PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 08:28 -0400, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I still have serious concerns regarding build times:
* arm - https://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=150248 ~
17h
* current primary -
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:14:24PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I was working on adding 2 more SOC's for packagers earlier this week.
I wanted to see how much call there was for these... should I
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 07:45 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the
'deliverables SOP' I
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:46 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100
Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name
wrote:
...snip...
test instances for maintainers as described here:
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:51 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:02:24 +0200
Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Application Installer =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AppInstaller
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 12:09 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
Is LXDE considered a release blocking desktop? I honestly don't know.
I also don't think it matters whether LXDE or FVMW2 or Gnome is the
default desktop on ARM. The criteria should probably be that it ships
with a desktop that is
Thank you everybody for joining today's Fedora-ARM meeting. For those
who were unable to attend the minutes are below. Thank you!
Minutes:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-07-10/fedora-meeting-1.2013-07-10-20.02.html
Minutes (text):
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 11:15:05PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hi,
upstream of pam_mount pointed me to OpenSUSE's gpg-offline RPM macros at
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Base:System/gpg-offline
They allow to use a keyring and detached signature as additional source
in SPECs to get
On 07/10/2013 05:34 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:46 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100
Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name
wrote:
...snip...
test instances for
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 18:01 -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
On 07/10/2013 05:34 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 09:46 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:36:39 +0100
Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 11:32:46AM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote:
Excellent proposal. I of course think this would be just awesome!
This proposal doesn't address virtualization!
I think this is great, BUT I'd also like to see a widely available
Hi,
On Wednesday 10 July 2013 at 10:51:44, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
I took a look at kaffeine as found in F19 yesterday, and it is still
using xine-lib (and does rebuild fine against the xine-lib 1.2.3 rpm I
prepared). A quick glance at upstream sources showed there are now an
mplayer and vlc
I'm not a currently approved packager, but I'd be interested in taking over
bsd-mailx. I use it constantly on other platforms and it doesn't make sense to
me to drop it.
Matt
On 2013-07-01, at 2:14 PM, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours
On Wed, 03 Jul, 2013 at 04:35:58 GMT, Alex G. wrote:
We shouldn't be surprised that update descriptions are crap. They are
just an annoyance for a lot of us, especially since we've put all that
information in a bunch of other places.
Where else would information like the information in this
On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in
the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better
to state it.
If we were only proposing headless ARM servers for primary how would
these criteria apply?
That option simply preserves the global stack canary value between tasks during
context switch. It's not really core to this. The core piece is userspace
compiler tooling. I know the option exists and I thought/was lead to believe it
works. But if Jakub has concerns I will add that to the
Hello,
I've orphaned desktopcouch in pkdg, I haven't had in interest in quite
a while and it could use some attention from more active maintenance.
--
Jeff Ollie
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Qui, 2013-07-04 at 16:47 +0400, Andrey Ponomarenko wrote:
Starting with 1.6 version of pkgdiff if you compare debug packages
and
add --details option on the command line then the tool will
automatically run abi-dumper to dump ABI of old and new shared
objects
found in the packages and
On Jul 10, 2013 6:08 PM, Brendan Conoboy b...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in
the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better
to state it.
If we were only
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 09:53:09PM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote:
But also guys, come on. We can't be having random new requirements
being added in a bike shedding exercise with the first this being
raised happening now.
Stack protector is not a new requirement in Fedora. It's been part of
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:08:33PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in
the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better
to state it.
If we were only
Stack protector is not a new requirement in Fedora. It's been part of
the distribution for years.
xterm has been part of the distribution for years also, but it's not a
release requirement.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Dne 9.7.2013 17:52, Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
On 07/09/2013 12:16 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 8.7.2013 12:00, nob...@fedoraproject.org napsal(a):
ruby-mysql [devel] was orphaned by orion
A Ruby interface to MySQL
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ruby-mysql
Was this
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 18:08 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated in
the preamble of all release criteria pages, for lack of anywhere better
to state it.
If we were only proposing
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:43:36AM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
Stack protector is not a new requirement in Fedora. It's been part of
the distribution for years.
xterm has been part of the distribution for years also, but it's not a
release requirement.
The assumption has always been that
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 20:12 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Jul 10, 2013 6:08 PM, Brendan Conoboy b...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/10/2013 02:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
No. The release blocking desktops are KDE and GNOME. This is stated
in
the preamble of all release criteria pages,
On 07/10/2013 01:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal
doesnt yet have it.
Only i?86/x86_64/ppc/ppc64/s390/s390x/sparc/sparc64/tilegx/tilepro
really have full stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982991
Bug ID: 982991
Summary: perl-DB_File-1.829 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-DB_File
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Severity: unspecified
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982990
Bug ID: 982990
Summary: perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.60 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-DateTime-TimeZone
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982993
Bug ID: 982993
Summary: perl-Getopt-Long-2.41 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-Getopt-Long
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Severity:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982995
Bug ID: 982995
Summary: perl-Perl-Critic-Tics-0.007 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-Perl-Critic-Tics
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982996
Bug ID: 982996
Summary: perl-Pod-Spell-1.05 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-Pod-Spell
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Severity: unspecified
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982998
Bug ID: 982998
Summary: perl-Time-Progress-1.8 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-Time-Progress
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Severity:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=983001
Bug ID: 983001
Summary: perl-XML-LibXSLT-1.81 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-XML-LibXSLT
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Severity:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982996
Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
commit 295593ea24e9dd6d25ad6fe47c7d20059f1349dd
Author: Petr Šabata con...@redhat.com
Date: Wed Jul 10 12:11:53 2013 +0200
1.05 bump
.gitignore |1 +
perl-Pod-Spell.spec | 16 ++--
sources |2 +-
3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Pod-Spell:
6346271b76f90c66b191ae58bd235f84 Pod-Spell-1.05.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982996
Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
