Re: dracut problems quick docs page requires help

Hi, On Thu, 2023-11-30 at 12:51 +, Ankur Sinha wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 09:23:58 +0100, David Tardon wrote: > > > The kernel command line arguments for dracut that the page mentions > > still work the same way they worked 10 years ago. (With the > > exception >

Re: dracut problems quick docs page requires help

Hi, On Tue, 2023-11-21 at 06:39 +, Ankur Sinha wrote: > Hi folks, > > We have this issue open on the quick-docs repo: > https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/quick-docs/issue/641 > > TLDR; the "debug-dracut-problems" quick doc seems to be out of date > and > needs review/updating. > >

Re: Libcmis solib bump

Hi, On Thu, 2023-10-12 at 05:38 +, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrote: > Libcmis 0.6.0 is coming to rawhide, and libreoffice-TexMaths, > openoffice.org-diafilter, python-paperwork-backend, and libreoffice > are being rebuild against it. FTR, I sincerely doubt either openoffice.org-diafilter or

Re: Explicit dependency on systemd-rpm-macros now required?

Hi, On Thu, 2022-09-29 at 10:51 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/clamav/c/35d73944ae2fa9cee3df4729c53a66ba03595d7f > "Add missing dependency on systemd as it's the systemd package itself > that ships systemd.pc, not systemd-devel." > > because clamav runs 

Re: Users with commit rights in src.fp.o but no more in packager group

Hi, On Thu, 2022-08-25 at 11:04 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > On to, 25 elo 2022, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > We use the python-maint pseudo-account to be the default Bugzilla > > assignee for Pythons, e.g. > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3.11 > > > > Note that it does *not*

Re: GNOME only: KeepassXC quirks

Hi, On Sat, 2021-05-01 at 21:10 +0200, Jan Grulich wrote: > > so 1. 5. 2021 v 17:51 odesílatel Jonas Ådahl > napsal: > > On Sat, May 01, 2021 at 10:49:57AM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > > > On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 10:09 AM Neal Gompa > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 9:48 AM Owen

Re: Switching package to fragmented default configuration

Hello, On Mon, 2020-08-31 at 23:46 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > On Monday, August 31, 2020 11:24:57 PM MST David Tardon wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-08-31 at 00:08 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, August 29, 2020 3:36:33 PM MST Colin Walters wro

Re: Switching package to fragmented default configuration

On Mon, 2020-08-31 at 00:08 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > On Saturday, August 29, 2020 3:36:33 PM MST Colin Walters wrote: > > https://blog.verbum.org/2020/08/22/immutable-%E2%86%92-reprovisionable-anti-> > > hysteresis/ > > touches on some of the benefits of "fragmented" configs. > > Perhaps

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: ELN Buildroot and Compose

On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 13:09 +0100, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 12:48 PM Miro Hrončok > wrote: > > On 25. 03. 20 12:37, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > > So let's assume for the sake of the argument, that Python is > > > > broken in ELN and > > > > the Python maintainers

Re: F30 System-Wide Change proposal: Replace Comps Language Group With Langpacks

Hi, On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 14:56 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > E.g. if you net-install Fedora in Japanese language then installation > of any base package like libreoffice-core or man-pages are installing > automatically libreoffice-langpack-ja or man-pages-ja but langpacks- > ja > is not installing

orphaning libgltf

Hi all, I just orphaned libgltf, as it's not needed by libreoffice anymore since F-28. There is one co-maintainer, caolanm, but I expect he's going to follow my lead... So if there is anyone interested, the package is up for taking :-) D. ___ devel

Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

Hello, On Sat, 2018-11-17 at 08:10 +, Leigh Scott wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 5:36 PM, Matthew Miller > > > > > "Canonical Extends Ubuntu 18.04 LTS Linux Support to 10 Years" > > > > https://www.serverwatch.com/server-news/canonical-extends-ubuntu-18.04-lt... > > > > I just don't

Re: tool to order packages by build dependencies (rpmbuild-order)

On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 14:20 +0900, Jens-Ulrik Petersen wrote: > You can try it from my copr repo: > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/petersen/rpmbuild-order Error: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides

Re: [HEADS UP] Removal of GCC from the buildroot

On Tue, 2018-07-10 at 08:42 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 06:37, David Tardon > wrote: > [..] > > > My proposition is *not* to add gcc/g++ explicit to BuildReequires > > > and > > > use instead glibc-devel and libstdc++-devel modificatio

Re: [HEADS UP] Removal of GCC from the buildroot

On Mon, 2018-07-09 at 17:45 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 at 16:42, Przemek Klosowski > wrote: > [..] > > > > After which, I'm going to ask rel-eng to finally remove it from > > > > buildroot. This will happen before mass rebuild. Stay tuned. > > > > > > After adding

Re: [ACTION NEEDED] Missing BuildRequires: gcc/gcc-c++

Hi, On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 18:09 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > If you fixed package(s), found false positive, found missing packages > in list > or anything else -- please let me know. Done: boost-gdb-printers cppunit libabw libcdr libcmis libcss libe-book libeot libepubgen libetonyek

[HEADS UP] poppler-qt4 going away

Hi, The latest release of poppler, 0.62.0, drops the Qt4 frontend. As there are still 7 packages in Fedora that use it, I'll revert that change to give these packages more time to get ported--or finish porting--to Qt5. The "grace period" will end before F29 branch-off. The affected packages are:

Re: [heads-up] soname version bump for evolution-data-server in rawhide

Hello, On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 08:58 +0100, Milan Crha wrote: > The list of dependencies according to: ># dnf repoquery --whatrequires evolution-data-server-devel -- > alldeps > follows: >evolution >folks >maya-calendar > but it seems surprisingly low number of packages, because I

Re: RFC: -Wl,--as-needed by default (and glibc ldconfig file trigger)

Hello, On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 01:54:13PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 21 November 2017 at 10:43, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:26 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > >> So is it

Re: [HEADS-UP] poppler soname bump

Hi all, On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 01:13:15PM +0100, David Tardon wrote: > Hi all, > > I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname > bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: > > boomaga > cups-filters > gambas3 > gdcm >

Re: [HEADS-UP] poppler soname bump

Hi, On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 01:10:15PM -0600, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > On 2017-11-06 06:13, David Tardon wrote: > > I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname > > bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: > > While ultima

[HEADS-UP] poppler soname bump

Hi all, I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: boomaga calligra cups-filters gambas3 gdcm inkscape kf5-kfilemetadata libreoffice okular pdf2djvu poppler poppler-sharp texlive texworks Note that packages

[HEADS-UP] poppler soname bump

Hi, I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: boomaga calligra cups-filters evas-generic-loaders gambas3 gdal gdcm inkscape kf5-kfilemetadata libreoffice okular pdf2djvu poppler-sharp texlive texworks Note

Re: heads up: poppler soname bump

Hi, On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 04:08:55PM +0200, David Tardon wrote: > I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname > bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: Done. The status is as follows: > boomaga > cups-filters > evas-generic-lo

heads up: poppler soname bump

Hi, I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: boomaga calligra cups-filters evas-generic-loaders gambas3 gdal gdcm inkscape kf5-kfilemetadata libreoffice okular pdf2djvu poppler-sharp texlive texworks Note

heads up: poppler soname bump

Hi, I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: boomaga calligra cups-filters evas-generic-loaders gambas3 gdal gdcm inkscape kf5-kfilemetadata libreoffice okular pdf2djvu poppler-sharp texlive texworks Note

Re: Split translations to noarch packages?

Hi, On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 06:15:49PM +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 08:18 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > If we went this route, I'd love to see us attempt to solve this > > generically for all packages if at all possible. > > My main issue with libreoffice langpacks

Re: a rawhide build not tagged into f27-build

Hi, On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 03:51:48PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > My build of updated poppler in Rawhide was not tagged into f27-build > > automatically, as it used to be in the past: > > > > $ koji wait-repo --build=`fedpkg verrel` f27-build > > Warning: nvr poppler-0.53.0-1.fc27 is not

Re: a rawhide build not tagged into f27-build

Hi, On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 03:51:48PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > My build of updated poppler in Rawhide was not tagged into f27-build > > automatically, as it used to be in the past: > > > > $ koji wait-repo --build=`fedpkg verrel` f27-build > > Warning: nvr poppler-0.53.0-1.fc27 is not

a rawhide build not tagged into f27-build

Hi, My build of updated poppler in Rawhide was not tagged into f27-build automatically, as it used to be in the past: $ koji wait-repo --build=`fedpkg verrel` f27-build Warning: nvr poppler-0.53.0-1.fc27 is not current in tag f27-build latest build in f27-build is poppler-0.52.0-1.fc26 I had

poppler soname bump

Hi, I will build a new release of poppler this week, which includes soname bump. I will take care of rebuilding the affected packages: boomaga calligra cups-filters evas-generic-loaders gambas3 gdal gdcm inkscape libreoffice okular pdf2djvu texlive texworks Note that packages that only use one

Re: Firebird update and Libreoffice dependency

Hi, On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 12:16:53PM +0200, Philippe Makowski wrote: > Hi, > > Firebird 3.0.1 is released, I can upgrade the package in Fedora, I have a > Copr repo with it : > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/makowski/firebird/ > > The problem is that Firebird 3 don't provide anymore

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libpsl

On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 11:27:30PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > > This is the hazard of using %{_libdir}/*.so.* in %files. Is there any > > reason why such a syntax should NOT be formally discouraged in the > > packaging guidelines? > > There is: I do not want to have

Re: Unannounced soname bump: libpsl

Hi, On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 05:10:43AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > Ideally, every > line in a package definition (specfile or what have you) is only there > because of some exception from the typical case. For well-behaved > upstreams, the perfect packaging description would be _empty_. With

Re: DNF could improve messages about package auto-removal

Hi, On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 04:13:56PM -0500, James Antill wrote: > That helps, but then what? The user understands (s)he now has to find > out how to fix it, and they have two options: > > 1) Some magic command to mark some/all of the unused deps. as used, > and repeat as necessary the

Re: LibreOffice packaging is a messy dependency graph

Hi, On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:20:34AM -0500, Dan Book wrote: > I have run into this before and it was very confusing, it really should be > a separate command from remove for when you actually want to remove what > dnf thinks is now "unused". Why? Remove is the opposite of install. "dnf install

Re: rawhide report: 20150927 changes

Hi, On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 02:50:34PM +, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Sun, 27 Sep, 2015 at 12:07:01 GMT, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: > > [ranger] > > ranger-1.7.1-1.fc24.noarch requires /bin/python > > So I'm not sure where this dependency is coming from. The only shebang > lines in the

Re: Review Swap

Hi, On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 05:42:52PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: Hi all, I'm looking for reviews of following tiny libraries: libnsgif: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128337 A library being used by netsurf browser. (GIF decoding) I will take this in exchange for:

Re: New openCOLLADA built for rawhide

Hi, On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 08:29:00AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: I wasn't aware the openCOLLADA picked up a new dependent, libreoffice. I was used to it just being blender! The latest blender, 2.75 would not build with the version in Fedora so an update was necessary. Okay. I hope

Re: Boost updated to 1.58.0 in rawhide and f23

Hi, On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 12:46:51PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Any problems rebuilding either open a bug or feel free to email me or ping me on IRC (my freenode nick is 'redi') and I'll be happy to help. This is a work-in-progress list of FTBFS packages: * Build failures: - F23 +

Re: Boost updated to 1.58.0 in rawhide and f23

Hi, On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 02:27:33PM +0200, David Tardon wrote: Hi, On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 12:46:51PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Any problems rebuilding either open a bug or feel free to email me or ping me on IRC (my freenode nick is 'redi') and I'll be happy to help

Re: Boost updated to 1.58.0 in rawhide and f23

Hi, On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 12:46:51PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Hi, I've pushed a new version of Boost, 1.58.0, to rawhide and f23, which will require all packages that depend on Boost to be rebuilt. The plan was to update to 1.59.0 but that isn't going to be released in time for the

Re: Boost updated to 1.58.0 in rawhide and f23

Hi, On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 01:47:49PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 22/07/15 13:30 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 22/07/15 14:08 +0200, David Tardon wrote: Hi, On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 12:46:51PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Hi, I've pushed a new version of Boost, 1.58.0

Re: gtkmm30 gcc5 rebuild

Hi, On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 01:24:48AM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: Hi, I'd need gtkmm30 rebuilt for gcc5 to build gimagereader. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9616239 D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Another C++ ABI change?

Hi, On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 08:33:36AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 07:26:58AM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: On 2015.04.10 at 00:48 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 11:40:17 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: With gcc 5.0.0-0.22.fc23 I'm

Re: Another C++ ABI change?

Hi, On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 07:26:58AM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: On 2015.04.10 at 00:48 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 11:40:17 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: With gcc 5.0.0-0.22.fc23 I'm getting new build failures:

Re: Results of a test mass rebuild of rawhide/x86_64 with gcc-5.0.0-0.5.fc22

On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 06:17:56PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: libixion-0.7.0-3.fc22.src.rpm liborcus-0.7.0-5.fc22.src.rpm Fixed. D, -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: rawhide report: 20150206 changes

Hi, On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 08:54:34AM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: Compose started at Fri Feb 6 05:15:03 UTC 2015 Broken deps for i386 -- [pam_mapi] pam_mapi-0.2.0-3.fc22.i686 requires libmapi.so.0

Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?

Hi, On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 08:43:52PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote: Thanks David and Mikolaj. I am not sure if separate tag for libicu could have finished its rebuilds earlier than building it with boost tag. Faster, yes. Earlier, no. It is not possible to do the two rebuilds independently,

Re: Results of Boost rebase

Hi, On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 07:11:20PM +0100, Petr Machata wrote: openoffice.org-diafilterdep: libreoffice Rebuilt. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: Why there is no sync for libicu soname rebuilds?

Hi, On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:51:46PM +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote: Hi, I remember one year back also harfbuzz was attempted by 2 people on the same day for libicu rebuilds and now this time 3 builds by 2 people. We did the rebuild in a side tag (together with the boost update, to save time

Re: Renaming autocorr-*.rpm into libreoffice-autocorr-*.rpm

Hi, On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0100, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi all, because of the fact that the autocorr-* packages belong to libreoffice, why not rename them to libreoffice-autocorr-*? Because they are used outside libreoffice, namely by virtaal

Re: iccjpeg.h errors

Hi, On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 06:16:33PM +0100, Antonio Trande wrote: Hi David. On 11/06/2014 01:03 PM, David Tardon wrote: Hi, On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 06:17:27PM +0100, Antonio Trande wrote: Hi all. I don't know how to fix these errors during IceCat compilation. Lately I tried

Re: iccjpeg.h errors

Hi, On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 06:17:27PM +0100, Antonio Trande wrote: Hi all. I don't know how to fix these errors during IceCat compilation. Lately I tried to adapt Fedora compilations flags but there is wrong something. Here the log:

ICU upgraded to 53.1 with soname bump

Hi all, ICU has been upgraded to 53.1 in Rawhide. This includes a soname bump, as usual. I will start rebuilding dependencies when the build gets into the buildroot. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of

Re: Lots of /usr/lib64 rpaths returning

Hi, On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 05:11:17PM -0600, Jerry James wrote: How about adding this to the top of %check? export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD/.libs I use export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=%{buildroot}%{_libdir}. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Compiling with system hunspell - texmaker

Hi, On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 09:22:29PM -0500, Mukundan Ragavan wrote: The source tarball has a directory hunspell which is removed in %prep and system hunspell libraries are used instead. This works without any problems with version 4.2. However, in 4.3, I get WARNING: Failure to find:

libmspub license change

Hello all, libmspub changed license from GPL 2+ / LGPL 2.1+ / MPL 1.1 to MPL 2.0 in 0.1.0 (built for Rawhide today). AFAIK the only users of libmspub in Fedora are libreoffice and writerperfect. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

libvisio license change

Hello all, libvisio changed license from GPL 2+ / LGPL 2.1+ / MPL 1.1 to MPL 2.0 in 0.1.0 (built for Rawhide today). AFAIK the users of libvisio in Fedora are calligra, inkscape, libreoffice and writerperfect. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

liborcus license change

Hello all, liborcus changed license from MIT to MPL 2.0 in 0.7.0 (built for Rawhide yesterday). AFAIK the only user of liborcus in Fedora is libreoffice. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: libreoffice broken again in updates-testing

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:48:47AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: why do whe have that always with libreoffice? I will send a note to the editors of Oxford English Dictionary that always has been redefined to mean in less than 10 % of cases. If I count correctly, we have issued 26 updates for F-20

libcdr license change

Hello, libcdr has changed license from GPLv2+ / LGPLv2+ / MPLv1.1 to MPLv2.0 in version 0.0.16. D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: rawhide report: 20140404 changes

Hi, On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 01:42:49PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 11:32:57AM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote: As far as I am concerned they are very useful. In more detail I am looking mostly at Broken deps and Summaries, with only an occasional peek at a changelog

Re: Why libicu soname bump required harfbuzz package to be built twice?

Hi, On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 08:47:25AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 21:44:12 -0800 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: icu requires quite a large number of rebuilds, including some tricky ones (I just did tracker, which has to be bootstrapped, and libreoffice is

Re: libicu soname bump in rawhide

Hi, On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 01:40:26PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:41:09PM +0100, Eike Rathke wrote: As pre-announced on devel@ I'm updating libicu to 52.1 Note, e.g. texlive hasn't been rebuilt yet in rawhide, it is broken for more than 2 days now, which e.g.

Re: Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center

Hi, On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 01:00:29AM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 04:53:47PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:26:24 -0800 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: I think ideally any process around this should have at least two

Re: Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 08:18:16AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 01/24/2014 05:50 AM, Christopher Meng wrote: But, never deem that 5k components is the best number, comparing to other Linux, we are far away behind. They can be used still at the moment, why do we burden ourselves by

Re: Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 04:37:07PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 01/22/2014 03:47 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: On 22 January 2014 12:09, Richard Hugheshughsi...@gmail.com wrote: That's a long way from what I'd like to see, but it's going up at about 1% per month, which is

Re: Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center

Hi, On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 12:09:25PM +, Richard Hughes wrote: Hi, As the subject suggests, Fedora 22 will require applications to have a long description to be shown in the software center. We're introducing this change so that we can show a powerful application full of high-quality

Re: Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 09:23:49AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 01/23/2014 08:07 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 04:37:07PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 01/22/2014 03:47 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: On 22 January 2014 12:09, Richard Hugheshughsi...@gmail.com

Re: Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center

Hi, On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 08:51:53AM +, Richard Hughes wrote: On 23 January 2014 08:34, David Tardon dtar...@redhat.com wrote: I have noticed that there are applications on the list that have NoDisplay=true in their desktop file, e.g., libreoffice-startcenter. I've just downloaded

Re: Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center

Hi, On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:06:16AM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: What I wanted to point out is that forced removal of packages _is not_ going to guarantee more packager's attention to the rest of the distribution. Is there a reading comprehension problem in this thread? I don't recall

Re: GIT development branches for packagers?

Hi, On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:41:42PM -0800, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: I have some trivial cleanups I want to make to a package a maintain. These cleanups are trivial enough that I don't think they're worth a new build. Should I commit them to the master branch? The normal GIT approach

Re: AppData - how to properly handle them

On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 11:19:24PM +1100, Ankur Sinha wrote: On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 09:34 +0100, Mattia Verga wrote: /usr/share/appdata is owned by filesystem, so I think there's no need of co-own it for every single package, because filesystem is always installed for sure... Oh! What

Re: Red Hat and Fedora Working Groups

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:24:33AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/08/2013 08:02 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 03:29:57AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: Shall we talk about how Red Hat employees have been granted all kinds of privileges within our community without

Re: Red Hat and Fedora Working Groups

On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 03:29:57AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: Shall we talk about how Red Hat employees have been granted all kinds of privileges within our community without as even bother to introduce themselves to the community even to the extent that fesco is now judging people if

Re: Red Hat and Fedora Working Groups

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:27:18AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 10/08/2013 06:02 AM, David Tardon wrote: I respectfully suggest that you be silent if you do not know the facts. Your credibility is diminishing rapidly with every untrue statement you put forth. You did comprehend I

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring long-term FTBFS packages for Fedora 20 v2

On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 12:07:27AM +0200, Till Maas wrote: Hi, hunspell-da caolanm Fixed. The only problem with it was a wrong month in a changelog entry... D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 02:17:28PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/12/2013 12:08 PM, David Tardon wrote: I dont argue that this should be a blocker for architectures quite the opposite as far as I see it the only requirement for an architecture to be come a primary ( thou arguably

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:49:21AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/15/2013 07:42 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 02:17:28PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/12/2013 12:08 PM, David Tardon wrote: I still think... We should limit the number of packages

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

For the record: this is my last reply in this thread. I have better things to do... D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 06:06:04PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/11/2013 02:04 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote: Each sub-community ( be it spins be it various arch ) should need to provide the necessary

Re: bugzilla.redhat.com vs upstream bug trackers

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 09:49:37PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 06/17/2013 07:57 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: In my view these expectations imply that a packager has some involvement with upstream. I think that the level of involvement is going to depend on the packager and the package.

Re: bugzilla.redhat.com vs upstream bug trackers

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 03:55:57PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: Because if you cannot properly maintain the component in the distribution the community is better of without it. ... Then you should not be maintaining that component ... We do not need unresponsive or poor

Re: bugzilla.redhat.com vs upstream bug trackers

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 09:13:23AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 06/18/2013 06:24 AM, David Tardon wrote: Agreed but at least they should know how to debug their own components which when I started the how to debug initiative a while back in QA revealed many of them did not even

Re: Software Management call for RFEs

Hi, On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:08:06AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: A 'metapackage' is an actual package shipped in the repositories which contains no files, and whose raison d'etre is to express some dependencies. There are a few of these in Fedora, xorg-x11-drivers being the classic

Re: Review swap (GtkSpell C++ bindings)

Hi, On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 02:02:27AM +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: Hello, I'd like to swap reviews for [1] (gtkspellmm30, i.e. the C++ bindings for GtkSpell3 - should be fairly quick and easy). I will do it in exchange for libmwaw: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=928226 . D. --

license change: libwpd

Hi, libwpd 0.9.7 changes license from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv2+/MPLv2+ . D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

license change: libwps

Hi, libwps 0.2.8 changes license from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv2+/MPLv2+ . D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

license change: libwpg

Hi, libwpg 0.2.2 changes license from LGPLv2+ to LGPLv2+/MPLv2+ . D. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: package, package2, package3 naming-with-version exploit

On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 07:11:44AM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: Why was Java 1.4 succeeded by Java 5? Why was ICU 4.8.1 succeeded by ICU 49.1? Why does systemd have version 197 instead of 1.9.7 or somesuch? If you look at the source code and the package names, Java wasn't really

Re: package, package2, package3 naming-with-version exploit

On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 01:55:06PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: Yes, I am exaggerating here, but does it make sense to have package python3-3.3? Why we don't have python3-1.0? Where is the version 1.0 of python 3? Why we duplicating the version? Non of these question makes you think that we are

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 02:36:36AM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Miloslav Trmač wrote: On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:31 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 11:26:35PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: $ rpm -ql libreoffice-core | grep bin/ | xargs ls -ld -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 362 Dec 6 18

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

Hi, On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 11:26:35PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com said: My understanding is that /usr/bin/soffice is a symlink in order to keep backwards maintainability. Personally I say both packages drop it because star office is

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd features

On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 07:24:39AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 07:12 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 06:20:18AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 05:57 AM, Chris Adams wrote: If you can't handle that, then Fedora development might

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd features

On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 07:43:48AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 07:33 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 07:06:12AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 07:03 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 02:08:00AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd features

On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 08:19:29AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 07:57 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 07:24:39AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 07:12 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 06:20:18AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd features

On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 02:08:00AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: When I meet a maintainer in the project that stated to me I have to talk to my manager first before upgrading his component that rings alarm bells to me, That gives me the feel that they are maintaining their components as

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd features

On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 06:20:18AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 05:57 AM, Chris Adams wrote: If you can't handle that, then Fedora development might not be the right place for you. Get the fuck out before you get in my business. If you want to test me here I am deal

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd features

On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 07:06:12AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 02/02/2013 07:03 AM, David Tardon wrote: On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 02:08:00AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: When I meet a maintainer in the project that stated to me I have to talk to my manager first before

  1   2   >