My investigations shown, probably nothing will be affected by removal of jdk on
i686 and the fix in subversion and automake/autotools is fluid and, again, will
damage nothing. However I'm not sure. I can not possibly see into all details of
all affected packages.
Where casual pkg which is
On 7/15/22 11:07, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 at 11:04, Jiri Vanek wrote:
Hi All!
On 7/6/22 01:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 07. 22 1:17, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 07. 22 0:14, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke.
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 at 11:04, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>
> Hi All!
>
> On 7/6/22 01:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 06. 07. 22 1:17, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >> On 06. 07. 22 0:14, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> >>> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see
Hi All!
On 7/6/22 01:24, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 07. 22 1:17, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 07. 22 0:14, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
If mesa's i686 support should be removed, then this proposal
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 23:15, Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
> > problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is going
> > to cause a lot of packages to be removed. Either
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 07:59:08 -0400
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> Thank you for your pointers. I have reflected on my original email and
> agree I made several mistakes in that email:
> I did not know the size of the bug problem.
> I did not investigate why the bugs were filed.
> I approached this as a
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 18:16, Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
> > problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is
> going
> > to cause a lot of
On 06. 07. 22 1:17, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 06. 07. 22 0:14, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is going
to cause a lot of packages to be
On 06. 07. 22 0:14, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is going
to cause a lot of packages to be removed. Either subversion needs to lose
Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
> problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is going
> to cause a lot of packages to be removed. Either subversion needs to lose
> that requirement or a lot of packages are going
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 11:34 PM Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 17:26, Leigh Scott wrote:
>>
>> Is this some sick joke?
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104255
>
> Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
> problem where
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 17:26, Leigh Scott wrote:
> Is this some sick joke?
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104255
Hyperbole aside, it isn't a joke. Looking at the chain we see a common
problem where subversion relies on java-11-openjdk and without it is going
to cause a lot of
12 matches
Mail list logo
