On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 10:37 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:46 AM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 12:44 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > > On 08/31/2016 02:10 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> > > > Hello all,
> > > >
> > >
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:46 AM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 12:44 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
>> On 08/31/2016 02:10 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
>> > Hello all,
>> >
>> > While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some
>>
On 2017-01-10, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Please be careful with such 'fixes'. Some specs are also built for EPEL
> 6; in EPEL 6, some of these (e.g. python-argparse) are still separate
> packages.
>
Following this rule, do not break EPEL, would effectivelly freeze
On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 12:44 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 08/31/2016 02:10 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some
> > packages that, while separate at some point, they got included in python's
> > stdlib and
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:51 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
>> The plan for renaming python is only for rawhide, while removing the
>> Obsoletes/Provides might as well go in F25 as well, depending on the time
>> frame that maintainers will be able to
Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> The plan for renaming python is only for rawhide, while removing the
> Obsoletes/Provides might as well go in F25 as well, depending on the time
> frame that maintainers will be able to fix their packages.
Why can't those simple Provides just stay in forever? I
Dne 31.8.2016 v 14:10 Charalampos Stratakis napsal(a):
> glacier-cli
Fixed. This was meant only for el6, but the %if was incorrectly constructed.
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
0 PM
Subject: Re: BuildRequires on obsoleted packages provided by Python
On 09/02/2016 06:44 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 08/31/2016 02:10 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some
>>
On 09/02/2016 06:44 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 08/31/2016 02:10 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some
>> packages that, while separate at some point, they got included in python's
>> stdlib and then obsoleted
On 08/31/2016 02:10 PM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some packages
> that, while separate at some point, they got included in python's stdlib and
> then obsoleted as standalone packages (thus to cope with the
>
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 2:10:25 PM
Subject: BuildRequires on obsoleted packages provided by Python
Hello all,
While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some packages
that, while separate at some point, they got included in python's stdlib and
then obsoleted as s
>
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 2:10:25 PM
Subject: BuildRequires on obsoleted packages provided by Python
Hello all,
While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some packages
that, while separate at some point, they got included in python's stdlib and
then obsoleted as s
Hello all,
While checking out the SPEC file of python, it seems there were some packages
that, while separate at some point, they got included in python's stdlib and
then obsoleted as standalone packages (thus to cope with the change, python was
obsoleting these packages and providing them as
13 matches
Mail list logo