Hello all,
there is currently not so much things to configure in PostgreSQL from
systemd's service point of view (not taking postgresql.conf into account),
concretely, we configure PGPORT and PGDATA, from which the later is
important (and often re-configured to point e.g. to some dedicated mount
p
> Yes, I should have mentioned that. Thanks for comment.
I mean, yes, it is mentioned to be rebased only in Rawhide. :)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> >Hello all, I would like to inform you that I plan to realize ${Subject}
> >during Thursday & Friday (#976973), if there are no objections.
>
> Is this just for rawhide? It may not be the best timing for f20 as we
> are close to beta freeze and if there is a risk of breaking package builds,
>
Hello all, I would like to inform you that I plan to realize ${Subject}
during Thursday & Friday (#976973), if there are no objections.
Even if it does not seem to be, it is just a minor version update, see
NEWS file in tarball (new versioning scheme).
To sum actual changes up for distro POV: no
> Yes, of course I can help with testing.
Update is submitted here:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/postgresql-9.3.0-1.fc20
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-
> I know that currently Fedora 20 is in feature freeze state. But Alpha
> version is still not released and PosgreSQL developers released new latest
> and greates version
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/release-9-3.html with cool
> features. Are there chances to get this version for F20
Same as automake15 & automake16 are, I would like to make automake{14,17}
retired. I'll do so probably during the next week, if there are no
objections (and once the already filled bugs against dependant packages
gets resolved).
Pavel
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://
> Without the fix, `perl' package declared it provides Carp module on RPM
> level, which was not true on Perl code level, so while yum got satisfied
> with `perl' package, none Carp module was installed into the system and
> that made other Perl code using the Carp module, like autconf, unhappy.
W
> That perl issue was fixed a while back.
>
> There's not enough info here for me to help you.
I'm really curious what happens here also. Richard, could you specify
more info?
The 'repoquery -q --requires autoconf' correctly shows 'perl(Carp)'
dependency in my rawhide mock instance. So it shoul
On Friday, March 29, 2013 12:31:45 PM Frantisek Kluknavsky wrote:
> On 03/29/2013 11:22 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > What was the package?
> GMP with configure 2.69 (apparently). Autoreconf -fi in use for a long time.
>
> Thank you for the confirmation. What is the right course of action
> expecte
>> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> Of course (BTW the Automake maintainer now confirmed to me privately
>> that he'd accept such a patch), though it would probably would make
>> sense to put it in Fedora even before 1.13.2.
>>
>> I'll try to put together the patch tomorrow, unless a
401 - 411 of 411 matches
Mail list logo
