Re: Announcing creation of Fedora Source-git SIG

On 14.04.21 10:45, Tomas Tomecek wrote: > Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git > > Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development > workflow for Fedora Linux packages using repositories with

Re: Ars claims: Fedora 32 is sluggish

Am 11.02.21 um 15:28 schrieb Peter Robinson: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 1:03 PM Ondrej Mosnacek wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:14 AM Viktor Ashirov wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 5:54 PM Michael Catanzaro >>> wrote: > […] >>> This was bugging me for a while. I also noticed that Fedora

Re: Using amdgpu as default for all GCN cards

Lo! On 25.09.2017 20:28, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote: > On 25/09/17 04:51 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > […] > So far, Sea Island cards are enabled by default from kernel 4.13.x while > only the old GCN cards (South Island) are the last to remain > experimental. Source? Afaics it's more like: Yes, GCN is

Re: Kernel 4.13 rebase plans

On 05.09.2017 18:59, James Hogarth wrote: > On 5 Sep 2017 5:42 pm, "Laura Abbott" > wrote: > > Kernel 4.13 was released this past weekend. This kernel has been > built for rawhide and is building for F27 as well. We will be > following

Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support

Lo! On 05.01.2017 17:03, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > [...] > ## Advantages > > * Simplification of build-tree creation. We wouldn't have to maintain the > lists > and hacks that are required to make sure that multilib packages land in the > correct repositories. > [...] Just wondering: Why don't

Re: RPM %changelog?

On 23.10.2016 19:31, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 10:37:17AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >> In Mageia, we use the VCS log as input to dynamically generate the RPM >> changelog and append it to the spec as part of the SRPM build process >> for the package build. > This would be

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default reposdir

Peter Robinson wrote on 12.05.2016 10:11: >>> = Proposed System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default reposdir = >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReposInEtcDistroReposD >>> >>> Change owner(s): >>> * Neal Gompa >>> * Jan Silhan >>> >>> >>> == Detailed Description == >>> For

Can soft dependencies help to get the proper kernel-devel packages? (Was: Soft- Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package)

Josh Boyer wrote on 12.06.2015 13:55: On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: [...] As I said, there are no great solutions here. A works most of the time-solution would be: Install kernel-devel by default. But I'm not seriously suggesting that, because I fully

Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package

and ignoring others (those that use kernel-PAE for example). [...] CU thl On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis fed...@leemhuis.info mailto:fed...@leemhuis.info wrote: On 09.06.2015 21:04, Neal Gompa wrote: I've noticed that when dkms is installed, it's not grabbing the right

Re: DKMS is not installing the right kernel-devel package

On 09.06.2015 21:04, Neal Gompa wrote: I've noticed that when dkms is installed, it's not grabbing the right kernel-devel package as a dependency. Because that's not possible with ordinary dependencies (might be possible with soft dependencies [Suggests, Enhances etc]) unless we change

Re: RFC: xserver update strategy in F21+

Lo! Adam Jackson wrote on 17.11.2014 20:06: With that in mind, I ask for feedback on how we'd actually like that to work. The kernel rebase policy seems like a pretty reasonable model: F21 would stay on 1.16.x until there's an upstream 1.17.1 release, and (if F20 were to be affected by this

Re: btrfs as default filesystem for F22?

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote on 08.10.2014 07:52: Josh Boyer wrote on 07.10.2014 21:15: On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Josef Bacik jo...@toxicpanda.com wrote: […] I think the point is somewhat valid though. To just keep repeating the mantra 'its not ready' is not going to make it any more ready

Re: btrfs as default filesystem for F22?

On 08.10.2014 14:50, Josh Boyer wrote: On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis fed...@leemhuis.info wrote: Josh Boyer wrote on 07.10.2014 21:15: On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Josef Bacik jo...@toxicpanda.com wrote: [...] http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel-source/tree

Re: btrfs as default filesystem for F22?

Josh Boyer wrote on 07.10.2014 21:15: On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Josef Bacik jo...@toxicpanda.com wrote: […] I think the point is somewhat valid though. To just keep repeating the mantra 'its not ready' is not going to make it any more ready. If suse can identify a stable subset of btrfs

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Wayland

Hi! Jaroslav Reznik wrote on 29.04.2014 14:04: Port the GNOME desktop to Wayland. Sorry, but what is actually proposed here? The above sentence for me doesn't make any sense(¹), as Gnome 3.12 is able to run on Wayland already (not perfectly, but it works afaik), so it was ported already I'd

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Wayland

Hi! Jaroslav Reznik wrote on 30.04.2014 16:27: - Original Message - Jaroslav Reznik wrote on 29.04.2014 14:04: Port the GNOME desktop to Wayland. Sorry, but what is actually proposed here? The above sentence for me doesn't make any sense(¹), as Gnome 3.12 is able to run on Wayland

Re: Fedora.next in 2014 -- Big Picture and Themes

Hi! On 23.01.2014 19:26, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis fed...@leemhuis.info wrote: […] Thx for your answer, just replying to some parts of it where I feel that making additional statements bring the discussion forward. What really gives me

Re: Fedora.next in 2014 -- Big Picture and Themes

Hi! On 23.01.2014 20:57, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:03:02PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: Okay, I'll bite (after thinking whether writing this mail is worth it): Thanks. I hope that I can make you feel that it was. Thx for your answer – yes, I think it was worth

Re: Fedora.next in 2014 -- Big Picture and Themes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi! On 23.01.2014 22:33, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:03:02 +0100 Thorsten Leemhuis fed...@leemhuis.info wrote: On 03.01.2014 19:14, Matthew Miller wrote: […] So those are my things. What do you think about them? What else should

Re: Fedora.next in 2014 -- Big Picture and Themes

Hi! On 23.01.2014 22:45, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:03 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: wikipedia page. Further: kororaproject.org, fedorautils-installer and similar project show that there are people that want to make Fedora better. But they do their work outside

Re: Fedora.next in 2014 -- Big Picture and Themes

On 25.01.2014 17:35, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2014-01-25 at 11:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: Debian, who has a similar stance on non-free Software, does a way better job in that area than Fedora does. Well, not really - they don't have a 'similar stance', they have an official

Re: Fedora.next in 2014 -- Big Picture and Themes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi! On 03.01.2014 19:14, Matthew Miller wrote: […] So those are my things. What do you think about them? What else should be included? What different directions should we consider? How will we make Fedora more awesome than ever in the coming

Re: ntfs-3g critpath update for F18 needs karma

On 18.02.2013 16:26, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1536/testdisk-6.13-5.fc18.1,ntfs-3g-2013.1.13-1.fc18.1 This update needs karma. Apparently I can't push it otherwise, even though it works fine for me. Note that there are two -1's on that

Re: Kernel 3.7 in Fedora 18

On 27.12.2012 10:34, M.M. wrote: Is kernel 3.7 expected to be available for Fedora 18? If so, can you estimate how long it will take? Thank you. See http://jwboyer.livejournal.com/46002.html Quoting one part: Fedora 18: […] The 3.7 kernel rebase will be available as an update via the

Re: PSA: updates-testing default disabled now

Hi! On 21.12H.2012 18:34, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Just a heads up to everyone using f18 right now: with fedora-release-18-1 that just pushed out to updates-testing yesterday, the updates-testing repo is now by default disabled. [...] I for one find it annoying having to fiddle with the repo

Re: fedpkg / koji error

Lo! On 23.10.2012 17:23, Tom Callaway wrote: On 10/22/2012 10:37 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/22/2012 10:43 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: On 10/22/2012 12:09 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: There is currently no way to undefine a macro at the rpm commandline, rpmbuild --define %{nil} ? Huh,

Re: Wayland update broke mesa?

On 19.10.2012 16:10, Jerry James wrote: I'm working my way through Rawhide rebuilds for the recent OCaml update. One of my builds failed last night like this: […] File ide/coqide_main.ml4, line 1: Error: Error on dynamically loaded library: /usr/lib/ocaml/stublibs/dlllablgtk2.so:

Re: Wayland update broke mesa?

On 19.10.2012 22:54, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: I'd assume mesa in Fedora needs this three patches: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/commit/?id=0229e3ae41be109ac423b2eb2ddf79e24b799d60 http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/commit/?id=2b8e90a33826dcd30b0cbbf464fbd191bf299d38 http

Re: fedpkg / koji error

Lo! On 09.10.2012 20:03, Jesse Keating wrote: On 10/09/2012 07:14 AM, Simone Caronni wrote: On 19 September 2012 00:26, Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com wrote: On 09/05/2012 08:07 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: Jesse, I'm not sure if you're still the correct upstream here, please correct me if

Re: fedpkg / koji error

On 18.10.2012 10:45, Simone Caronni wrote: On 18 October 2012 09:57, Thorsten Leemhuis fed...@leemhuis.info mailto:fed...@leemhuis.info wrote: --with-egl-platforms=x11,drm%{!?rhel:,wayland} \ The ,wayland is not added, as rhel is defined now as 0 when building with fedpgk. If you

Re: Firefox / Thunderbird 17 ESR for Fedora 16/17

On 22.09.2012 13:02, Julian Sikorski wrote: W dniu 21.09.2012 15:33, Martin Stransky pisze: as the subject says there are test packages available for your beloved Fedora's. Especially Thunderbird 17 (Earlybird now) needs some love from you (the 17ESR line is going to be a background for the

Re: Firefox / Thunderbird 17 ESR for Fedora 16/17

On 23.09.2012 13:10, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 23.09.2012 13:06, schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: Has anybody considered to package the ESR releases for Fedora or is the general consensus that doesn't make much sense, just leads to confusion and is not worth the trouble. I now and then could need

Re: 3.5 overheating - temperature increase of 83%?

Michał Piotrowski wrote on 06.08.2012 08:59: I noticed some strange sensors values on Linux 3.5 [...] Do anyone else noticed something like that? I'd say this post is off-topic here and this (and all further replies) should have gone/should go to this list instead:

Re: Booting Fedora from LVM with grub2

Adam Williamson wrote on 27.03.2012 20:14: [...] It's worth bearing in mind there's a giant anaconda UI rewrite still pending, which entirely redesigns the storage configuration GUI. One of the other major changes is that it makes all installations kickstart-driven. The GUI will just produce

Re: Summary minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2012-03-19)

Josh Boyer wrote on 20.03.2012 02:26: On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com wrote: * #830 F18 Feature: ARM as Primary Arch -- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/FedoraARM (limburgher, 18:44:13) * LINK:

Re: Draft schedule for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (19 March 2012)

Hi! /me gave the mail a subject Jon Ciesla wrote on 18.03.2012 23:33: = New business = [...] #topic #822 F18 Feature: AE1000 USB wifi driver - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AE1000usb .fesco 822 I must be missing something here. Is that a early April fools joke or is that

Clarify our position on forks (was: Re: Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2012-02-27 at 18UTC))

Kevin Fenzi wrote on 27.02.2012 04:21: #topic #810 Clarify our position on forks .fesco 810 It's just a statement that is asked for in the ticket, but nevertheless: Shouldn't issues like this be discussed on this list first, so FESCo members can get a impression from the flamewar ^w discussion

Re: F15 ext4 discard option - why not default?

On 16.03.2011 18:55, Ric Wheeler wrote: On 03/16/2011 01:53 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: I installed F15 on SSD and I noticed that file systems are not mounted with discard option. Shouldn't discard option be enabled by default for SSD devices? No - discard is off on purpose. Some SSD's

Re: i686/x86_64 dual install media

On 25.10.2010 20:49, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2010-10-24 at 10:45 -0400, Mark Bidewell wrote: Sorry if this has been discussed, but has there every been discussion of a dual 32/64-bit install media? I realize that the default package selection would be reduced but with a high speed

Re: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs

Kevin Kofler wrote on 14.10.2010 00:36: Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: * Why haven't those that want iceweasel and icedove in Fedora not simply invested some time and got them integrated into the repository?(¹) Because having both Iceweasel and Firefox in the repository, in addition to being

Re: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs

Kevin Kofler wrote on 02.10.2010 00:56: Sven Lankes wrote: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=577653 Looking at how rigorous new packages with bundled libs are fought we should really stop shipping firefox and start shipping Iceweasel. +1 I really don't see why the Firefox stack

Re: Broadcom wifi drivers in F-14?

Hans de Goede wrote on 15.09.2010 08:31: On 09/14/2010 01:31 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 00:40 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: IIRC they require a firmware blob that has a license that we cannot distribute unlike say the Intel firmwares. I could be wrong though. That's

Re: Meeting summary/minutes from today's FESCo meeting (2010-09-14)

Toshio Kuratomi wrote on 15.09.2010 04:54: On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 07:02:33PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 20:48:13 -0400 Máirín Duffy du...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Only 5 of the 9 FESCo members voted on this issue. If all 9 had voted, even with the current 3 for / 2

Re: web-m and Fedora 14

On 20.05.2010 18:42, Jesse Keating wrote: On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 14:25 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not sure a feature page really makes sense. This happens with a lot of our features anyway, [...] And that imho is quite bad for

Re: Features in new releases / updates

On 22.05.2010 11:59, Matt McCutchen wrote: On Sat, 2010-05-22 at 10:14 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: On 20.05.2010 18:42, Jesse Keating wrote: On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 14:25 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not sure a feature page

Re: Conflicts in latest update

Jon Masters wrote on 16.03.2010 13:04: On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 11:16 +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote: Dne 16.3.2010 09:50, Ankur Sinha napsal(a): I did notice that. I wasn't sure why a package from rpmfusion would conflict with one from fedora repos. (It's in rpmfusion for a reason) Is it being

Re: Conflicts in latest update

Ankur Sinha wrote on 16.03.2010 14:33: On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 13:45 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: Jon Masters wrote on 16.03.2010 13:04: On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 11:16 +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote: Dne 16.3.2010 09:50, Ankur Sinha napsal(a): I did notice that. I wasn't sure why a package from

Re: Conflicts in latest update

On 16.03.2010 17:42, Till Maas wrote: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 01:45:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: There are so many developers around on this list that know: reporting bugs is the right way to get problems fixed and fixing things is way better than posting workarounds to public places

Re: Conflicts in latest update

On 16.03.2010 20:46, James Antill wrote: On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 20:09 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: On 16.03.2010 17:42, Till Maas wrote: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 01:45:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: There are so many developers around on this list that know: reporting bugs is the right

Re: hdparm -B for netbooks

Matthew Garrett wrote on 23.02.2010 23:09: On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 09:34:54PM +0100, Richard Zidlicky wrote: it was my understanding that hdparm -B has nothing to do with the BIOS but changes the power management feature specific to the drive? Either the drive set the initial value, or

Re: Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

Kevin Kofler wrote on 03.02.2010 19:08: Josh Boyer wrote: It is. It's one step removed. There were people actively wanting to make Zope/Plone work via a compat-python stack. It went all the way to FESCo and got voted down. The zope/plone users were the target audience there. There were