. I pushed the new version of libwebp after verifying the
dependencies did rebuild fine but hadn't gotten to do that in Koji yest
night.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
else take
over as well if you are so inclined. Thanks
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 12/29/2012 01:23 AM, Vascom wrote:
Are you plan package only stable versions or versionf from SVN?
For now, the focus is to get the packages through the review process.
SVN builds can be scripted if there is sufficient interest
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 12/03/2012 09:20 AM, Tom Callaway wrote:
I'll try to take a look at this later this week (I'd do it now, but I'm
in all day meetings).
Hi Spot,
Did you have a chance to take a look at this?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
mode or whatever, just announce that instead and
switch on to using the updates-testing repo at that point
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
for engineering decisions in Fedora and
can and should get involved if a issue has been raised. You are a
stakeholder. Please address the issue in question.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877623
Why was this rejected as a blocker? Even if one considers that it isn't
a regression compared to PreUpgrade, the situation has changed now that
Anaconda itself doesn't provide any upgrade method directly.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
build a Fedora LTS which merely extends Fedora release by a few
months or a couple of years with no goal of retaining EL compatibility
and in that case, the community around EL rebuilds won't participate in
it.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
, please post a enhancement request or bug
report in bugzilla. A assortment of various issues posted to this list
is just going to get lost
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi
Isn't it not a regression because _Anaconda_ never verified the source?
(That is, good old bug #998.)
I am aware of that bug but then media based upgrades have always been
supported as a workaround. Is that still the case?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi
fedup is supposed to support media upgrades yes.
At this point, fedup doesn't
--iso ISO[TODO] installation image file
So unless that feature is marked as a blocker, we would be releasing Fedora
18 with no secure method to upgrade to it. That seems irresponsible.
Rahul
no supported upgrade path that is secure is I think is just
unacceptable.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
to do it
If they are passionate about it, more drive by emails are hardly going
to change anything. Show and tell.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
any
unnecessary steps. We have people including me who have guided several
new contributors through the process and if there is anything we can do
to reduce the friction, we would be happy to take suggestions which are
specific
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
install the new packages in
order to be in any way 'affected' by them. I thought the updates
policy mentioned this, but I can't find it any more.
You can propose that as a revision for FESCo
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo
process? What would it take for you to get
started?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
with absolutes when it comes to security. Fedora with updates
is *more* secure than a Fedora version which doesn't get any updates any
more. Therefore, in general it is a bad idea to run a unmaintained
Fedora on a system that is connected to the network.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel
One approach: a convention where each feature gets a tracking bug, and then
various tasks can be marked as blocking that. *Then*, each release can have
a tracking bug for accepted features themselves, and the tool to produce
the
chart can simply be pointed at that and follow the tree
for development, offering more version choices to our users
would be a strength.
While I can see why it might be useful to SC overall, why isn't packaging
two different versions of Ruby an option for this specific case?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
care of the package.
If we can convert runtime errors to buildtime errors by enforcing a
additional check, that's a good thing regardless of where the problem lies.
Question is, can rpmbuild do anything automatically instead of per spec
changes?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel
.
Sysadmins are not typically familiar with Javascript. A lot of GNOME
developers these days are but that doesn't translate into a good design for
PolicyKit.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
possible but it
doesn't do enough to keep simple things easy.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora community has any real idea what dnf or the
seemingly newly created packaging team plans are
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
feature set.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
installers and not just Anaconda.Really, you
shouldn't be even arguing about this at all.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
well, it would maybe a start to DROP packages which are still
missing systemd-units
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/18/FeatureList
60%
SysV to Systemd
Dropping 40% of packages isn't going to happen. Sorry
Rahul
--
devel
On 11/01/2012 06:06 PM, Damian Ivanov wrote:
And whoever want to install unity or these packages, can just use
GNOME:Ayatana from the open build service :)
Unfortunately that replaces many important components with forked
versions. If it was a pure add-on repository, that would be ok.
Rahul
must note however that I am very much in favour of the new UI and any
criticism directed towards the process doesn't change that at all. The
end result of this is that Fedora is suffering through several
unexpected and unprecedented release delays.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel
the openslide, vips, and nip2 packages in Fedora.
Welcome to Fedora. Thanks for getting involved
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
for review.
You can submit it for review right away noting that it isn't expected to
be functional. Others can review the spec meanwhile. Work can move
forward in parallel. We have done that before.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
everyone for listening to these
concerns. I'm optimistic that we can make this all work very nicely.
Is this documented in the relevant man pages as well?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
for various web hosting companies and a
number of them use openvz to provide root access which were
essentially openvz containers. It would be nice to finally see openvz
upstream and in Fedora regardless of the cloud
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
a RFE against Anaconda
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
in F18+, how is the policy
being ignored? Are you objecting to the name of the macro?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
see a workaround.
Fedora is not LSB compatible. Is it? Why do we even care about this at
all?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
synapse
from being removed.
Michel, if you want to maintain it, feel free to ask.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
dropping the LSB
package itself would be a appropriate move
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
around would be
too much :)
How can I package Fedora packages under these circumstances from Mo-Fr?
Any ideas appreciated.
Running it under a VM would be a option. Also
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainers
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel
links aren't enough.
You will have to make it available in Fedora and EPEL to be even
considered as a alternative. It is probably just easier to file a few
feature requests (preferably with patches) for Koji.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
On 07/28/2012 09:33 PM, devzero2000 wrote:
why don't use lauchpad instead ? Because it use bazar as dvcs ?
Really ? But no.
Launchpad is not a build system.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
the LiberationSansNarrow
licensing problem is.
The problem is that particular variant was donated by Oracle under the
Liberation license and Google croscore doesn't have that variant either.
So we are basically struck with it for now.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
Is there a build compatible with WM8650 ARM 926 EJ-S or Cortex Nuvoton M0?
Regards,
Rahul.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Paul Whalen pwha...@redhat.com wrote:
The Fedora ARM team is pleased to announce that the Fedora 17 GA release
for ARM is now available for download from:
http
opinion.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
to the discussion.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
but pretending that problems don't exist isn't the right way. Of
course, you want to do that, you are free to continue using yum and
ignore this solution.
I believe there is or was an effort to replace dbus by something
AMQP-based. However I can't find that right now.
Good luck with that.
Rahul
using yum on them as always.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 06/19/2012 07:04 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
On 18/06/12 21:18, Jesse Keating wrote:
On 06/18/2012 01:43 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
what competition damned?
grub is the best example for things which did not reinvented
grub1 was easy to understand and configure
And grub1 would get left behind as
. Not a bureaucracy to rubber stamp merely a rebase.
Use it only where it makes sense. In this case, you only need it if you
want to advertise this change heavily.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
with secure mode enabled we would reject the license as
unfree.
Nobody else was talking about license restrictions. If such a license
is written, then, yes it would be non-free.
Rahul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http
spins.fedoraproject.org and Fedora includes KDE,
Xfce etc and Cinnamon is under review at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252. There were genuine
concerns about the maintenability of MATE and that has nothing to do
with pushing GNOME or whatever else.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel
On 06/03/2012 03:41 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Just because people have the ability to install Fedora and post in a
forum doesn't mean that you can reliably assume that they are willing to
fiddle with BIOS settings on their system or they would prefer that over
On 06/05/2012 12:26 AM, Richard Körber wrote:
and Cinnamon is under review at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252.
Yes, it's under review for 6 months now... :(
So help out if you can. Going on a rant isn't going to contribute
towards that.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
On 06/02/2012 11:32 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
You are responsible as a package maintainer for bugs against
the package. If you don't want to deal with it, give up the package or
find a co-maintainer who will deal with such issues. When you
example of a
situation where you believe one of the packages you maintain will be
affected by this feature?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
that it is a usability regression that would affect a number
of users.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
on which bugs you can reasonably ignore.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hi
Quick note: rssh has a security bug unfixed by upstream and has been
orphaned
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820415
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
a question.
Just wait for a reply first. Don't pile on top. Before pressing send,
reread to make sure you don't appear to be demanding and shouting. You
continue to behave in a obnoxious way in the users list as well as
others have pointed out there too.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel
On 03/28/2012 10:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
ah - i am not permitted to say my opinion of a very very bad
idea before i become green light
You are fighting a strawman and being repeatedly obnoxious about it. If
you can't change how you voice your opinions, be silent.
Rahul
--
devel
in a different way. If
someone is so frustrated by Fedora that they feel compelled to behave
this way, then they should pick something more suitable for them.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
like something peeled out of the early 90's web ;-)
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 03/23/2012 12:41 PM, Kushal Das wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/23/2012 12:22 PM, Kushal Das wrote:
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Darkserver
[2] https://darkserver.fedoraproject.org/
Congrats Kushal. You should cross reference
only do so because they are a non-profit and the
worst case scenario is a injunction until they remove the infringing
parts so realistically noone is going to go after them because one
cannot extract money from Debian.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
-infringing because they don't have share the
same risks.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
includes the codecs which is not the case for Fedora by default
although assuming they switch over to using Gstreamer instead of
bundling codecs, any user will be install the codecs they want later.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
includes the codecs which is not the case for Fedora by default
although assuming they switch over to using Gstreamer instead of
bundling codecs, any user will be install the codecs they want later.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
for this reason) I would
miss them.
I guess this should be filed as a RFE with logwatch
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
/wiki/Common_F17_bugs
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
have 3.2.5. Am I allowed to update that at this
point in time or is it too late?
These should be fine. Refer to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 03/02/2012 10:04 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Yes the automation would just automate these steps ending with posting
the formal request to devel for fesco to pick up.
The best way to convince people is to actually just do it. Post a
script and show that it can be done.
Rahul
On 03/02/2012 10:15 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 03/02/2012 04:42 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Yes the automation would just automate these steps ending with
posting
the formal request to devel for fesco to pick up.
The best way to convince people is to actually just do it. Post
projects including upstream development to take care of. If you
think you are more efficient at it, you are welcome to sign up as
package maintainer and demonstrate that. Talk is cheap.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 03/02/2012 10:26 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 03/02/2012 04:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
What access do you need? If you need something to test and you don't
have access, run your own instance.
Here you assume that people have enough hw or vm capable hardware to do
so which
need to file individual bug reports and if you want to go further,
sign up as a package maintainer, get commit access and do the work
yourself.
Rahul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
On 03/02/2012 10:53 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 03/02/2012 05:10 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Again, what access do you need and who have you asked for it?
It's pretty obvious that this is a proposal I made today thus I have
asked no one for it nor can I since infrastructure has made
On 03/02/2012 11:20 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 03/02/2012 05:29 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
That was completely uncalled for.
I disagree
Let me put in another way then. Cut that out. Talking about your world
vs my world makes it personal not to mention sarcastic there is zero
room
occasionally.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 02/21/2012 10:25 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
File a ticket with FESCo with your proposed change in the policy.
Why does it need a policy change at all to apply a 1-2 day grace period?
Any change in policy requires you to file a ticket with FESCo. If you
just want
for NO
reason whatsoever.
File a ticket with FESCo with your proposed change in the policy.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
is not successful, and preserves the
complete anaconda logs for debugging. So now we can know, daily, whether
the Branched tree is in an installable state or not.
That's awesome. Is it possible to test upgrades?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
instead of completing the filename in
my local path. I would prefer local completion first.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
understandable but there seems to be a big slowdown when
doing rpmlint tab completion as well. Not sure why. rpmlint foo tab
is much slower with bash-completion installed.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
. Obviously only a small
percentage of users are going to use it. This isn't something you need
to debate about. If it was used by the majority, it would be there by
default already.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
be more sensitive here - especially since the old
/sbin/service had completion like a charme!
Have you filed a bug report yet?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 02/15/2012 10:48 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com said:
bash-completion is not a default package.
Wrong since F16 - it is default in the Base group in comps.
Ah. didn't notice that. I haven't done a fresh installation since
Fedora 11 or so
report which makes it harder to keep track of bugs and
mark them as fixed. Do file seperate bug reports from now on.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
yumdb will be consistent if you stick to yum and that allows
rollback etc.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora to show that it is the case. FWIW, Red Hat is
heavily invested in GCC and Apple has a strong control over LLVM.
Considering the recent changes that Apple has been making to CUPS, I
think it is more than a pure technical choice.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
the
problem, I think there is time now to file a bug report and try and get
the problem fixed. It is a far more efficient way.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
. It is not
fair to expect maintainers or developers to fix unreported problems.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
a bug
report or your bug report has been shown to be invalid but you continue
repeating yourself all the time. This is not the way to convince
anyone. I suggest you change your approach
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
on this
matter. It is not something written in stone and could change but it
requires a set of contributors to step forward to do the work involved.
If you are willing to lead such a effort, feel free to.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
On 02/07/2012 11:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 13:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com
wrote:
Again, citing FHS:
Distributions may install software in /opt, but must
criteria and is there a way I can ask to reconsider this?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
meeting and discuss
it even if you are opposed to it. As far as Fedora 16 alpha problem is
concerned, I think you are optimizing at the wrong level. Changes that
destabilize the release to that extend has to be handled in a different
branch or split out or postponed.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
this be interpreted as non-OS vendor supplied?
This is one of many places in which FHS is vague but that's the common
interpretation all distributions rely on
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com wrote:
--
Distributions may install software in /opt
What do you find vague about this sentence?
Refer to what Ralf quoted and compare and contrast.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel
exercise to look at how other distributions interpret it as well. What
does add-on software mean? If you want to get a official interpretation,
talk to whoever is supposedly trying to revise it now.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
want to talk about usrmove, there were other threads
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
501 - 600 of 1121 matches
Mail list logo
