Re: F24 System Wide Change: Fedora 24 Boost 1.60 uplift

Am 01.12.2015 um 22:15 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones: On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:57:53PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 28/11/15 20:05 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:24:21AM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: = System Wide Change: Fedora 24 Boost 1.60 uplift = Does this

Re: Dealing with rolling release versioning

Am 30.11.2015 um 18:58 schrieb Till Maas: On Mo, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:28:57 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: Is there any reason not to use the date as the version? It's in MMDD format so there shouldn't be a upgrade path issue but this isn't explicitly covered in the packaging guidelines that I

Re: wayland in rawhide

Am 25.11.2015 um 21:40 schrieb Przemek Klosowski: On 11/25/2015 03:25 PM, drago01 wrote: On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 14:34 +, Ian Malone wrote: [1] Apparently middle mouse buttons are rare. I'm in an office

Re: wayland in rawhide

Am 20.11.2015 um 15:34 schrieb Ian Malone: On 12 November 2015 at 14:59, Ray Strode wrote: Hi, On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Jared K. Smith wrote: I've been testing Wayland myself since around the F22 time period, but "middle click paste"

Re: wayland in rawhide

Am 20.11.2015 um 17:45 schrieb Steve Clark: On 11/20/2015 09:34 AM, Ian Malone wrote: [1] Apparently middle mouse buttons are rare. I'm in an office surrounded by them and them only computers I've used without one for roughly the past decade are my old laptop (now moved on, but had emulated

Re: Some analysis on the size of the minimal and Server installs of Fedora 23

Am 19.11.2015 um 01:46 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: 2. What about non-glibc stuff? /usr/share/locale/ is 800MB on my system. It would be nice to trim this down too. Afaics, #156477 or the glibc subpackaging proposal will not help here at all 800 MB? on my desktop it's 459 MB

Re: On running gui applications as root

Am 19.11.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Simon Farnsworth: Put another way: "sudo emacs /etc/hosts" will break under Wayland than wayland is currently not useable and ready to replace X11 as user i don't care if the application needs to be fixed or wayland lacks whatever but given that there are a

Re: On running gui applications as root

Am 19.11.2015 um 01:00 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 19.11.2015 um 00:57 schrieb Ian Malone: On 18 November 2015 at 23:38, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: Am 18.11.2015 um 19:49 schrieb Adam Jackson: That's kind of a non sequitur. To a first order, there are zero root-

Re: On running gui applications as root

Am 18.11.2015 um 19:49 schrieb Adam Jackson: On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 17:30 +, Andrew Haley wrote: On 11/02/2015 03:05 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: But, why take the risk exposure, when you could simply not? How else would I edit root-owned files? I don't get it. I mean, I guess I could run

Re: On running gui applications as root

Am 18.11.2015 um 21:09 schrieb Adam Jackson: On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 11:53 -0800, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: I don't understand. If a user who has the right to act as root asks to authorize a program to run as root on their behalf, we should grant that request. And, once we grant it, we

Re: On running gui applications as root

Am 19.11.2015 um 00:57 schrieb Ian Malone: On 18 November 2015 at 23:38, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: Am 18.11.2015 um 19:49 schrieb Adam Jackson: On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 17:30 +, Andrew Haley wrote: On 11/02/2015 03:05 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: But, why take th

Re: On running gui applications as root

Am 17.11.2015 um 19:04 schrieb Joonas Sarajärvi: 2015-11-17 19:56 GMT+02:00 Florian Weimer : Doesn't most proprietary software come with GUI installers? No idea if "most" are, but at least I have seen many proprietary programs that do not require a GUI in installation.

Re: On running gui applications as root

Am 17.11.2015 um 18:56 schrieb Florian Weimer: On 10/30/2015 10:48 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: Anyone running any X (or wayland) application as root in their desktop session is completely bonkers and deserves every consequence of their poor decision. Doesn't most proprietary software come with

Re: where is mariadb-10.0.21-1.fc23 ?

Am 12.11.2015 um 16:26 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 12.11.2015 um 16:16 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: On Nov 12, 2015 6:39 AM, "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net > who says you that a update for F22 would behave identical on F23 or the other direction when half of the

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

geressions are noticeable all day long On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net <mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net>> wrote: Am 13.11.2015 um 12:13 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 13.11.2015 um 12:09 schrieb Honza Šilhan: From:

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

Am 13.11.2015 um 12:13 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 13.11.2015 um 12:09 schrieb Honza Šilhan: From: "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net> would not be a topic if DNF would not be completly broken for "dnf update *.rpm", in F22 it works sometimes while in F23

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 12.11.2015 um 21:49 schrieb Przemek Klosowski: On the other hand, Harald, I have to say that in this case my irony detector bent the needle. You often voice your displeasure in this forum that some setup you used for years was broken by new stuff, and yet you say you CAN NOT HAVE both -

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

Am 13.11.2015 um 12:09 schrieb Honza Šilhan: From: "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net> would not be a topic if DNF would not be completly broken for "dnf update *.rpm", in F22 it works sometimes while in F23 it is just unuseable 99.9% of the time That'

Re: wayland in rawhide

Am 12.11.2015 um 15:31 schrieb Dominique Martinet: It really didn't take me long after first using X-based interfaces to make use of the primary buffer, and I've pretty much never used ^C/^V ever since. I only ever touch the mouse when I need to select something to copy/paste it, so I'm not

Re: wayland in rawhide

Am 12.11.2015 um 15:10 schrieb Chuck Anderson: On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:59:02AM +, Tom Hughes wrote: On 12/11/15 10:51, Jared K. Smith wrote: On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:10 AM, Tom Hughes > wrote: You forgot primary selection/middle click

Re: wayland in rawhide

Am 12.11.2015 um 15:31 schrieb Dominique Martinet: It really didn't take me long after first using X-based interfaces to make use of the primary buffer, and I've pretty much never used ^C/^V ever since. I only ever touch the mouse when I need to select something to copy/paste it, so I'm not

Re: where is mariadb-10.0.21-1.fc23 ?

Am 12.11.2015 um 15:34 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: On Nov 11, 2015 11:34 PM, "Petr Pisar" In otherwords always disable autokarma. I push builds into testing and > sombody raises karma over a weekend and when I come to the mailbox > later, I only see F22 was pushed into

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

Am 12.11.2015 um 16:45 schrieb Emmanuel Seyman: * Honza Šilhan [12/11/2015 06:38] : Personally I find "install"/"update" naming more readable than "-Uvh"/"-Fvh". Note that -U and -F aren't meant to be readable. They're shorthand for "--upgrade" and for "--freshen" respectively but it's

Re: where is mariadb-10.0.21-1.fc23 ?

Am 12.11.2015 um 16:16 schrieb Andrew Lutomirski: On Nov 12, 2015 6:39 AM, "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net > who says you that a update for F22 would behave identical on F23 or the other direction when half of the OS has different versions of libraries and th

Re: systemd package bloat

Am 06.11.2015 um 16:48 schrieb Haïkel: 2015-11-06 16:35 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net>: it's one thing that there is a common tarball containing everything, but 26 MB, 821 files including /usr/bin/machinectl and /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-machined useless on tiny v

Re: Unexpected NIC naming f23 firewall implications

Am 11.11.2015 um 16:23 schrieb Björn Persson: I tend to not listen much to people who tell me to do stuff without stating any reasons. If you want me to change, and you're not in a position to give me orders, then you need to explain why the thing I'm doing is bad. For MAC based name

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 11.11.2015 um 21:20 schrieb Fred New: On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net <mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net>> wrote: Am 07.11.2015 um 05:00 schrieb Luya Tshimbalanga: On 06/11/15 07:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: But

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 11.11.2015 um 21:54 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 11.11.2015 um 21:20 schrieb Fred New: On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net any system not older than 10 years has SSE3 and frankly systems older than 10 years are hardly a traget for Fedora at

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 11.11.2015 um 22:35 schrieb Felix Miata: Reindl Harald composed on 2015-11-11 22:10 (UTC+0100): when you and the other 5 users think they can demand support for ancient hardware forever because these days cheap hardware is too much cost i tell you that my lifetime for adpot a ton

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 10.11.2015 um 00:52 schrieb Alexander Ploumistos: On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 1:34 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: about money: with the energy costs i saved going away from P4 computers many years ago my current one is already paied Nobody is saying that a newer co

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 09.11.2015 um 22:31 schrieb Samuel Sieb: On 11/07/2015 10:23 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: these days (and i talk about hardware from 2011) you can virtualize things fast, easy and efficient and consolidate machines on more or less cheap hardware For servers, sure, but that doesn't work

Re: F24: no rsyslog forwarding

Am 07.11.2015 um 17:20 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 01:31:11PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 07.11.2015 um 12:59 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 06:20:39PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 06.11.2015 um 18:15 schrieb Subhendu

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 09.11.2015 um 23:57 schrieb Samuel Sieb: On 11/09/2015 02:22 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 09.11.2015 um 22:31 schrieb Samuel Sieb: So yes, I'm using 10 year old hardware with the latest Fedora and it works great. (I'll update them to F23 next time I'm there.) well, i tell you know

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 08.11.2015 um 11:56 schrieb drago01: On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: There is no such thing as "the complete distribution" ... the flags used to compile libreoffice won't affect http or firefox surely, there is such a thi

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 08.11.2015 um 09:47 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: Am 07.11.2015 um 20:36 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: the point is compile a single applicat

Re: Unexpected NIC naming f23 firewall implications

Am 08.11.2015 um 21:25 schrieb Christopher: On Sun, Nov 8, 2015, 14:29 Richard W.M. Jones enp3s0. It was annoying because I had to boot each one with a display

Re: Unexpected NIC naming f23 firewall implications

Am 08.11.2015 um 20:42 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones: On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 08:36:57PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 08.11.2015 um 20:29 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones: On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 05:28:54PM +, Christopher wrote: I recently updated my desktop to f23, and it went smoothly

Re: Unexpected NIC naming f23 firewall implications

Am 08.11.2015 um 22:59 schrieb Björn Persson: Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: a skilled sysadmin can solve all that problems at his own, a non-skilled has repeatly problems to solve which did not exist in the past where eth0 was normal I guess you were lucky in the pa

Re: Unexpected NIC naming f23 firewall implications

Am 08.11.2015 um 20:29 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones: On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 05:28:54PM +, Christopher wrote: I recently updated my desktop to f23, and it went smoothly, for the most part. However, it broke my mediatomb server because the NIC changed from em1 to eno1. Is this something

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 08.11.2015 um 22:21 schrieb drago01: On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: Am 08.11.2015 um 22:17 schrieb Rex Dieter: Felix Miata wrote: For those without SSE2, Plasma 5 is completely unusable, but OK with any of the lightweigh Qt

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 08.11.2015 um 22:17 schrieb Rex Dieter: Felix Miata wrote: For those without SSE2, Plasma 5 is completely unusable, but OK with any of the lightweigh . Qt5 (Gui and Declarative) pretty much requires sse2, and I/kde-sig asked about pushing the minimum i686 fedora spec to include sse2,

DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1263888 Error: nothing provides rpm-libs(x86-64) = 4.13.0-0.rc1.5.fc23 needed *what* is that hard to solve the dependencies of packages given with * on the commandline when yum does that fine for a decade, frankly if you are trying to early test

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 16:01 schrieb Felix Miata: Kevin Kofler composed on 2015-11-07 14:05 (UTC+0100): Reindl Harald wrote: come on and don't tell me 99% of i686 users have machines older than 10 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSE3 because "ntel introduced SSE3 in early

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

Am 07.11.2015 um 16:24 schrieb Michael Schwendt: On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 15:48:20 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Fedora 23 was *released* with rpm-4.13.0-0.rc1.3.fc23.x86_64.rpm Yes. Multiple people have touched the package, keeping this different versioning scheme. It's a lost cause. your

Re: F24: no rsyslog forwarding

Am 07.11.2015 um 12:59 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 06:20:39PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 06.11.2015 um 18:15 schrieb Subhendu Ghosh: On Nov 6, 2015 9:52 AM, "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net <mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.ne

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

Am 07.11.2015 um 15:41 schrieb Michael Schwendt: On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 13:20:03 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Error: nothing provides rpm-libs(x86-64) = 4.13.0-0.rc1.5.fc23 needed 0.rc1.5.fc23 ??? *sigh* My motivation to do package reviews is hurt a lot by bad examples like that. It's as if some

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 16:40 schrieb Felix Miata: Reindl Harald composed on 2015-11-07 16:12 (UTC+0100): Felix Miata composed: Any demarcation that is calendar based is purely arbitrary. 64 bit was introduced far more than 10 years ago. There is plenty of 32 bit hardware perfectly capable of doing

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 05:41 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: On 11/07/2015 05:03 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 07.11.2015 um 05:00 schrieb Luya Tshimbalanga: On 06/11/15 07:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: But if upstream doesn't care, it's going to be a problem. :-( Exactly - That's the actual problem

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 20:36 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: the point is compile a single application with new features won#t gain that muc 8until you do the same with most libraries used by the software) but having the

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 18:30 schrieb Kevin Kofler: Felix Miata wrote: I have a computer without SSE3. It runs Fedora just fine. I initially had 1 GiB of RAM in it, I upgraded it to 3 GiB. I have approximately 40 Fedora installations on 32 bit CPUs. About half of those are on Prescotts. I'm unable

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 19:26 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net maybe you did not get "not that i say Fedora should go ahead and build with -mavx" but we talk about SSE3 talking about a rapid moving distributio

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 19:27 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 7:23 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: maybe you did not get "not that i say Fedora should go ahead and build with -mavx" but we talk about SSE3 Compiling everything with sse3 does have a cost (

Re: DNF is completly unable to act with local packages

Am 07.11.2015 um 17:11 schrieb Michael Schwendt: On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 16:35:41 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: simple example: * on my machines i try to uninstall all unneeded stuff * koji download for testing * a dozen of subpackages * instead compare 5 minutes which one i need click on all

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 19:01 schrieb Kevin Kofler: Reindl Harald wrote: well, who's to say that we stay forever on a level of CPU feature-support while there are instruction sets available for a whole decade which improve performance, save power in case you need fewer instructions doing the same

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 08.11.2015 um 00:56 schrieb Kevin Kofler: Reindl Harald wrote: if there would be no difference kernel upstream won't invest that much time for runtime-cpu-detection (look at the bootlog on different hardware) Exactly BECAUSE performance-critical software normally does runtime detection

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 07.11.2015 um 05:00 schrieb Luya Tshimbalanga: On 06/11/15 07:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: But if upstream doesn't care, it's going to be a problem. :-( Exactly - That's the actual problem. Upstream does not care and Fedora seems unable to address this issue. Ralf According to my

Re: Retire a package from Fedora i686 (not x86_64)

Am 06.11.2015 um 20:11 schrieb Germano Massullo: For example, SSE3 instructions set is one of the minimum requirements and 99% of 32 bit only CPUs do not support it. Only Pentium 4 >= Prescott architecture supports it seriously? with that argumentation Fedora would drop i686 at all well, i

F24: no rsyslog forwarding

who is responsible that nothing is forwarded to the traditional syslog? systemd or rsyslog? /var/lib/rsyslog/imjournal.state exists and get re-created when it is deleted __ imjournal is configured $ModLoad imjournal $MainMsgQueueSize 10

systemd package bloat

it's one thing that there is a common tarball containing everything, but 26 MB, 821 files including /usr/bin/machinectl and /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-machined useless on tiny virtual machines is too much and the beast is growing slightly F21: 22 MB F22: 24 MB F23: 26 MB there should be

bodhi should strip subjects

don't get me wrong, but subjects above 1 KB are a joke and typically spammers which try to bypass contentfilters by put the payload in the subject header Nov 4 16:27:42 mail-gw postfix/cleanup[27083]: 3nrX0s6JB2z28: reject: header Subject: [Fedora Update] [comment]

Re: systemd package bloat

Am 06.11.2015 um 17:19 schrieb Matthew Miller: On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 04:48:34PM +0100, Haïkel wrote: Excellent idea, please file a ticket and it'd be appreciated if you could send patches. Well, see However, it probably _is_ the case

Re: F24: no rsyslog forwarding

Am 06.11.2015 um 18:15 schrieb Subhendu Ghosh: On Nov 6, 2015 9:52 AM, "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net <mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net>> wrote: > > who is responsible that nothing is forwarded to the traditional syslog? > systemd or rsyslog? >

Re: configure: error: POSIX thread library is required

Am 03.11.2015 um 14:44 schrieb Florian Weimer: On 11/03/2015 02:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: how is "configure: error: POSIX thread library is required" possible when things like MariaDB and even libevent are building fine? What does config.log contain around the failing

configure: error: POSIX thread library is required

buildroot} rm -f %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/*.la strip -s %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/%{name}\.so\.* %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/%{name}.so %post -p %{_sbindir}/ldconfig %postun -p %{_sbindir}/ldconfig %files %{_libdir}/%{name}\.so\.* %files devel %{_includedir}/zdb %{_libdir}/%{name}.so %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/zd

Re: configure: error: POSIX thread library is required

Am 03.11.2015 um 15:16 schrieb Florian Weimer: On 11/03/2015 02:58 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 03.11.2015 um 14:44 schrieb Florian Weimer: On 11/03/2015 02:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: how is "configure: error: POSIX thread library is required" possible when things like MariaD

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

Am 02.11.2015 um 02:28 schrieb Sérgio Basto: On Dom, 2015-11-01 at 17:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote: On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: On Sex, 2015-10-30 at 17:47 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: At the third round of Fedora 23 Final Go/No-Go Meeting, that just

Re: gcc 5.2

Am 02.11.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Xose Vazquez Perez: Hi, Will it be updated/included in F23? troubles with ARM? no, dunno why there where builds long ago for F22 which never became testable because dependencies https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=40

Re: Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !

Am 01.11.2015 um 23:20 schrieb Michael Catanzaro: On Sun, 2015-11-01 at 17:53 +, Peter Robinson wrote: The problem is we have to freeze sometime to ensure stability in the installer platform, the live and other images which are static. If not it's too much of a moving target to try and QA

Re: Updates (was Fedora 23 Final RC10 status is GO !)

Am 02.11.2015 um 00:36 schrieb Michael Catanzaro: *who* if not the package maintainer which hopefully uses his own packages should have the final say? some group of people not understanding the issues really? The counterargument is that we keep seeing major version updates that violate our

Re: To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Am 29.10.2015 um 13:24 schrieb Honza Šilhan: From: "Miroslav Suchý" <msu...@redhat.com> From: "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net> the software upgrade just have to mention the conflicting packages and stop until somebody enables a --force switch and in

Re: To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Am 29.10.2015 um 14:11 schrieb Sérgio Basto: On Qui, 2015-10-29 at 13:44 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.10.2015 um 13:37 schrieb Sérgio Basto: On Qui, 2015-10-29 at 17:09 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: You have a chance to get your rpmfusion softwares wiped after the sync. [1]---https

Re: To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Am 29.10.2015 um 14:18 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 01:44:34PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.10.2015 um 13:37 schrieb Sérgio Basto: On Qui, 2015-10-29 at 17:09 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: You have a chance to get your rpmfusion softwares wiped after

Re: To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Am 29.10.2015 um 13:37 schrieb Sérgio Basto: On Qui, 2015-10-29 at 17:09 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: You have a chance to get your rpmfusion softwares wiped after the sync. [1]---https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1263677 yep, so not distro-sync nonsense when i read the

Re: To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Am 29.10.2015 um 16:30 schrieb Przemek Klosowski: On 10/29/2015 08:33 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.10.2015 um 13:24 schrieb Honza Šilhan: dnf has `--allowerasing switch - it will resolve the conflicts by uninstallation of conflicting packages. Installing the packages regardless

Re: To distro-sync or not distro-sync?

Am 29.10.2015 um 10:09 schrieb Christopher Meng: You have a chance to get your rpmfusion softwares wiped after the sync. [1]---https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1263677 unacceptable the software upgrade just have to mention the conflicting packages and stop until somebody

Re: System V to systemd unit migration

Am 28.10.2015 um 22:27 schrieb Tom Hughes: On 28/10/15 19:47, Adam Jackson wrote: As a quick audit (based on 'grep _initrddir' and 'grep _initddir' over a fairly recent checkout of the spec files in pkg git, and then some manual inspection) I think the following packages will be affected:

Re: make unmaintained ??

Am 24.10.2015 um 19:45 schrieb Craig Garner: Hi. I think the current one is still 4.1 no idea what you try to tell us when we have "make-4.0-3.1.fc22.x86_64" and 4.1 was released a year ago without making it into Fedora On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez

Re: dnf and file provides

Am 24.10.2015 um 03:55 schrieb Adam Williamson: On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 18:19 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: Got this is a resent koji rawhide build: DEBUG util.py:393: No matching package to install: '/bin/csh' I'm assuming this is a quirk of dnf now being the default, but needs to get

Re: Koji: no space left on device

looking at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds all builds started to fail, including the new F22 kernel i was waiting for to test people pretending disk space and wasted ressources don't matter all the time should see here that it's not true - ressources are not cheap nor endless

Re: To someone with power to push packages on Fedora 21

Am 23.10.2015 um 04:37 schrieb Kevin Kofler: Reindl Harald wrote: it *is* useful in case nobody reports a problem because you get the confirmation the package not only works for you Sorry, "it is not useful" was too strong a statement. I mean it is not *as relevant* for the decisi

Re: To someone with power to push packages on Fedora 21

Am 21.10.2015 um 02:22 schrieb Kevin Kofler: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: The testers write "works for me" or report a new bug. When things work, there's nothing to evaluate. Doing the counting by hand is just a way to waste time. 10 "works for me" and 1 "deletes all my data" do not

Re: Announcing the release of Fedora 23 Beta!

Am 19.10.2015 um 20:35 schrieb Gerard Ryan: On 10/18/2015 06:49 PM, Andreas Tunek wrote: I still can't upgrade, I get: dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=23 --distro-sync dnf system-upgrade reboot Yes, I'm in the same situation. Would you mind adding the info of what you get to the

Re: Packaging of PlayOnLinux

Am 15.10.2015 um 13:09 schrieb Bastien Nocera: - Original Message - On 2015-10-14, Alexandre Moine wrote: But, we have to be very careful with this software since it downloads scripts and icons from the web (in the automated installer part)... And it can install

Re: Packaging of PlayOnLinux

Am 14.10.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Miroslav Suchý: And emulators aren't allowed in Fedora. What? You mean like Wine Wine.Is.Not.Emulator signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Packaging of PlayOnLinux

Am 14.10.2015 um 19:42 schrieb Sérgio Basto: On Qua, 2015-10-14 at 17:15 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.10.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Miroslav Suchý: And emulators aren't allowed in Fedora. What? You mean like Wine Wine.Is.Not.Emulator Is Wine functional or useful without code

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

Am 10.10.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Haïkel: Engineering is not science really? as previously stated, it's about compromises well, that can end in something like "the cleverer give in until he becomes the dumber itself" in german "Der Klügere gibt solange nach bis er selbst der Dümmere ist"

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

Am 10.10.2015 um 12:46 schrieb Haïkel: 2015-10-10 12:17 GMT+02:00 Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net>: Am 10.10.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Haïkel: Engineering is not science really? as previously stated, it's about compromises well, that can end in something like "the cl

Re: repodata size

Am 09.10.2015 um 21:41 schrieb Orion Poplawski: On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata pulled down so DNF can operate is basically the same size as the entire (compressed) Fedora Cloud Base image. It'd be very nice

Re: repodata size

Am 10.10.2015 um 01:59 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net the problem are not only the metadata, but the .solv stuff which did not exist before DNF was introduced - what the hell is that, why is it that large and how so

Re: install custom rpm package: failed dependencies

Am 08.10.2015 um 21:06 schrieb arnaud gaboury: Downloading from Intel website the parallel studio 2016. There is a folder with all rpm packages and a script to install them. I understand this package is NOT part of Fedora, but neither part of RPM fusion. So I must not installed it? no, but

Re: install custom rpm package: failed dependencies

Am 08.10.2015 um 20:44 schrieb arnaud gaboury: On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On 10/08/2015 11:10 AM, arnaud gaboury wrote: I wrote a .spec file to build a pacakge with many shared librairies installed by Intel parallel studio 2016. This

Re: install custom rpm package: failed dependencies

Am 08.10.2015 um 20:44 schrieb arnaud gaboury: I must have done some errors in my spec file and I am looking for any hint why my rpm claims these shared libraries when they are installed installed how? if the are not present in any RPM, well, they are not installed even if they are

Re: SPF records @fedoraproject.org versus @lists.fedoraproject.org

Am 05.10.2015 um 16:16 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen: On 4 October 2015 at 03:03, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: is there a reason that the list-subdomain has a SPF record but the main domain not? now that as example "bo...@fedoraproject.org" sends a lot of mai

Re: SPF records @fedoraproject.org versus @lists.fedoraproject.org

Am 05.10.2015 um 16:47 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz: W dniu 05.10.2015 o 16:43, Reindl Harald pisze: well, that people should send their mail from the Fedora servers and not from a wrong configured random MTA allowing random envelope senders Many of those people send their mail from properly

Re: SPF records @fedoraproject.org versus @lists.fedoraproject.org

Am 05.10.2015 um 17:12 schrieb Kevin Fenzi: On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:04:40 -0400 Paul Wouters wrote: And openpgpkey-milter :) And put in a TLSA record for their MX :) I don't think it makes much sense for Fedora Infrastructure to get into the business of being a SMTP server

Re: SPF records @fedoraproject.org versus @lists.fedoraproject.org

Am 05.10.2015 um 17:43 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz: W dniu 05.10.2015 o 16:58, Reindl Harald pisze: Am 05.10.2015 um 16:47 schrieb Marcin Juszkiewicz: Many of those people send their mail from properly configured MTA allowing random envelope senders for authenticated users well

SPF records @fedoraproject.org versus @lists.fedoraproject.org

is there a reason that the list-subdomain has a SPF record but the main domain not? now that as example "bo...@fedoraproject.org" sends a lot of mails it would make sense to shortciruit them as ham on spamfilters as it is possible for the mailing-lists

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

Am 01.10.2015 um 23:27 schrieb Matthew Miller: On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:01:29PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: * All packages not in the critical path whose upstreams have no mechanism to build against system libraries '''may''' opt to carry bundled libraries, but if they do,

Re: f23: dnf returns nothing

Am 30.09.2015 um 13:35 schrieb Vít Ondruch: Or simpler: dnf update https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/dnf/1.1.2/3.fc23/noarch/dnf-1.1.2-3.fc23.noarch.rpm https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/dnf/1.1.2/3.fc23/noarch/dnf-automatic-1.1.2-3.fc23.noarch.rpm

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

Am 30.09.2015 um 16:13 schrieb Orion Poplawski: On 09/30/2015 07:45 AM, Fabian Deutsch wrote: Yes, I also see this as a good compromise. We then have the ability to at least track bundling. I'd just like to point out that we have always had the requirement for package that bundled libraries

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >