Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Sat, 2014-01-25 at 17:24 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > From the BlueZ 5.0 release notes: > > > > "Remove internal support for telephony (HFP and HSP) profiles. They > > should be implemented using the new Profile interface preferably by the > > telephony subsystem of ch

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:40:22PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 01:33:07AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > David Sommerseth wrote: > > > So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for > > > bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 01/24/2014 03:41 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 21:35 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: David Sommerseth wrote: So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for bluez and depending packages, as described i

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 01:33:07AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> David Sommerseth wrote: >> > So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for >> > bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency Plan": >> >

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

Am 25.01.2014 17:40, schrieb Tomasz Torcz: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 01:33:07AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> David Sommerseth wrote: >>> So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for >>> bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency Plan": >>>

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 01:33:07AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > David Sommerseth wrote: > > So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for > > bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency Plan": > > > > Offici

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

Paolo Bonzini wrote: > From the BlueZ 5.0 release notes: > > "Remove internal support for telephony (HFP and HSP) profiles. They > should be implemented using the new Profile interface preferably by the > telephony subsystem of choice (e.g. oFono which already supports this)" > > For Fedora this

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > drago01 wrote: >>On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Adam Williamson >>wrote: >>> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:56 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: >>> > As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key >>feature of > the blu

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

drago01 wrote: >On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Adam Williamson >wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:56 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: >> >>> > As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key >feature of >>> > the bluetooth stack could go unnoticed through QA, and how to >avoid thi

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

Il 24/01/2014 14:05, David Sommerseth ha scritto: > FWIW, the HFP/HSP support is missing in PulseAudio, not in BlueZ for F20. Can you please shed some more light on this. From what I could grasp out of the freedesktop bug, it was a bluez bug. And PulseAudio says bluez4 is needed to get the han

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 24/01/14 18:30, Dan Williams wrote: > On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 12:21 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: >> On 23/01/14 21:19, Dan Williams wrote: >>> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 14:17 -0600, Dan Williams wrote: On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > On 23/01/14 19:58, Frank Mur

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 12:21 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > On 23/01/14 21:19, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 14:17 -0600, Dan Williams wrote: > >> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > >>> On 23/01/14 19:58, Frank Murphy wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:5

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Jan 24, 2014, at 4:47 AM, David Sommerseth wrote: > > > On 23/01/14 23:16, Chris Murphy wrote:> By all means, software does and > needs to evolve, and it can break. I > > have full understanding for this. But not alerting that basic > >

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Jan 24, 2014, at 4:47 AM, David Sommerseth wrote: > On 23/01/14 23:16, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> As far as I know there isn't an explicit test case or release >> criteria that covers this functionality, or it would have been discovered. >> Why >> it's not a test case is a valid question, bu

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 24/01/14 08:31, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > FWIW, the HFP/HSP support is missing in PulseAudio, not in BlueZ for F20. Can you please shed some more light on this. From what I could grasp out of the freedesktop bug, it was a bluez bug. And PulseAudio says bluez4 is needed to get the handsfree p

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > Right. But is it possible to ship a bluez4 package and rebuild the > dependencies against that after the release? No, because the maintainers said the 2 versions are not parallel- installable. (The original plan was to make the packages Conflict, which is why we ended up wi

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:56 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > >> > As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key feature of >> > the bluetooth stack could go unnoticed through QA, and how to avoid this >> > from happening aga

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 23/01/14 23:16, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Jan 23, 2014, at 2:56 PM, "Brian J. Murrell" wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:53 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: >> >>> As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key feature of >>> the bluetooth stack could go unnoticed through QA, and h

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

- Original Message - > I actually think Cinnamon used blueman in F19 for Bluetooth management, > iirc. Nope. Which is why it broke when I bumped the soname of the gnome-bluetooth libraries. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/li

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 23/01/14 23:59, Dan Williams wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:58 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: >>> >>> Nope, several packages depends on the bluez-5.13-1 package. >> >> Indeed. However I could probably live without gnome-bluetooth

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 23/01/14 21:19, Dan Williams wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 14:17 -0600, Dan Williams wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: >>> On 23/01/14 19:58, Frank Murphy wrote: On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:53:19 +0100 [...snip...] >>> Might even be a worse conflict for other

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

- Original Message - > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:56 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > > > > As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key feature of > > > the bluetooth stack could go unnoticed through QA, and how to avoid this > > > from happening again. > > > > Indeed. I

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 21:35 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: >> >> Right. But is it possible to ship a bluez4 package and rebuild the >> dependencies against that after the release? > > How does that differ, in practice? Potentially, - No epoch

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 21:35 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > David Sommerseth wrote: > >> So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for > >> bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency Plan": > >>

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > David Sommerseth wrote: >> So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for >> bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency Plan": >> > > Officially downgrad

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:59 -0600, Dan Williams wrote: > Out of curiosity, what do people use Blueman for? It includes an applet that could be used instead of the one that ships with GNOME that is now tied to Bluez5. I was merely putting it forth as what one could use for an applet if one were t

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

David Sommerseth wrote: > So, I wonder if it can be considered to enable a "downgrade path" for > bluez and depending packages, as described in the "Contingency Plan": > Officially downgrading BlueZ from 5 to 4 in a shipped release is totally imprac

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 23/01/14 22:59, Dan Williams wrote: Out of curiosity, what do people use Blueman for? Not me personally, but browsing for files on a remote bluetooth device [1]. With BlueZ 5, one can only push files from a device to a fedora box (or from a fedora box to a device) [2]. [1] https://bugzi

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:56 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > > As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key feature of > > the bluetooth stack could go unnoticed through QA, and how to avoid this > > from happening again. > > Indeed. I wondered the same myself. I'm somewhat chee

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:58 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > > > > Nope, several packages depends on the bluez-5.13-1 package. > > Indeed. However I could probably live without gnome-bluetooth if > blueman were still available. > > pu

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Jan 23, 2014, at 2:56 PM, "Brian J. Murrell" wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:53 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > >> As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key feature of >> the bluetooth stack could go unnoticed through QA, and how to avoid this >> from happening again.

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > > Nope, several packages depends on the bluez-5.13-1 package. Indeed. However I could probably live without gnome-bluetooth if blueman were still available. pulseaudio-module-bluetooth though. Would it work with Bluez4? Would it nee

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:53 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > Hi all, Hi, > This might be a viewed as a fire torch, but there is, IMO, a major > regression in BlueZ 5 which is shipped in Fedora 20. I agree. But everyone probably already knows that. > It doesn't support > HSP/HFP headset profil

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 14:17 -0600, Dan Williams wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > > On 23/01/14 19:58, Frank Murphy wrote: > > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:53:19 +0100 > > > David Sommerseth wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Hi all, > > >> > > >> This might be a viewed as

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:04 +0100, David Sommerseth wrote: > On 23/01/14 19:58, Frank Murphy wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:53:19 +0100 > > David Sommerseth wrote: > > > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> This might be a viewed as a fire torch, but there is, IMO, a major > >> regression in BlueZ 5 whic

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On 23/01/14 19:58, Frank Murphy wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:53:19 +0100 > David Sommerseth wrote: > >> >> Hi all, >> >> This might be a viewed as a fire torch, but there is, IMO, a major >> regression in BlueZ 5 which is shipped in Fedora 20. It doesn't >> support HSP/HFP headset profiles, w

Re: RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:53:19 +0100 David Sommerseth wrote: > > Hi all, > > This might be a viewed as a fire torch, but there is, IMO, a major > regression in BlueZ 5 which is shipped in Fedora 20. It doesn't > support HSP/HFP headset profiles, which enables the microphone on > many bluetooth h

RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20

Hi all, This might be a viewed as a fire torch, but there is, IMO, a major regression in BlueZ 5 which is shipped in Fedora 20. It doesn't support HSP/HFP headset profiles, which enables the microphone on many bluetooth headsets. It's already tracked in this BZ: