On 12/07/2012 07:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Are there other obsoleted packages in the F18 repo?
Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
4ti2-1.3.2-12.fc18.x86_64
anyremote2html-1.4-4.fc18.noarch
chktex-1.6.4-11.fc18.x86_64
classads-1.0.8-5.fc18.i686
classads-1.0.8-5.fc18.x86_64
On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:55:15 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 12/07/2012 07:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Are there other obsoleted packages in the F18 repo?
Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
qxmpp-dev-0.6.3.1-1.fc18.i686
qxmpp-dev-0.6.3.1-1.fc18.x86_64
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:55 AM, Panu Matilainen
pmati...@laiskiainen.org wrote:
Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
[snip]
latexmk-4.35-1.fc18.noarch
This one should not be obsoleted. See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868996. I'd appreciate
Jindrich doing something
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 08:19:58AM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
pmati...@laiskiainen.org wrote:
Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
[snip]
latexmk-4.35-1.fc18.noarch
This one should not be obsoleted. See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868996. I'd appreciate
Jindrich
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Matthew Miller
mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 08:19:58AM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
pmati...@laiskiainen.org wrote:
Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
[snip]
latexmk-4.35-1.fc18.noarch
This one should not be obsoleted. See
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 08:55:22AM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
latexmk-4.35-1.fc18.noarch
This one should not be obsoleted. See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868996. I'd appreciate
Jindrich doing something about that before
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Matthew Miller
mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 08:55:22AM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
Sorry, it must be too early in the morning for my brain to work
properly. What would I be asking FESCO to do?
Decide between the two redundant and
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
Well, IMHO reading the bug it just sounds like to me a mistake was made
and the obsoletes/conflicts was not removed as intended:
+* Sun Nov 4 2012 Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com 2012-5-20121024
+- don't conflict with latexmk
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:55:15AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
I made a Rel-Eng ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5427
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ mat...@fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
Hi Rich,
On 07.12.2012 18:54, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Well this is a more general question about virtualization. I agree
that it's sometimes more convenient to use an external kernel and
initrd to boot a guest, and libvirt supports this mode (see the
kernel and initrd in libvirt XML). But:
On 12/07/2012 09:41 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 16:48 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:02:20PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500,
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:56:44AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I haven't experienced this with F16, F17 or so far F18. What I'm seeing is:
yum install/update grub gets me grub legacy.
yum install/update grub-efi gets me grub legacy efi.
yum install/update grub2 gets me grub2.
yum
On 12/07/2012 05:26 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:56:44AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
I haven't experienced this with F16, F17 or so far F18. What I'm seeing is:
yum install/update grub gets me grub legacy.
yum install/update grub-efi gets me grub legacy efi.
yum
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:25:21PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:02 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
older package,
On 12/07/2012 08:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Yes, I think we're both trying to say the same thing: there's no point having
'grub' in the repositories as its not installable or usable in practise. The
same goes for bunch of other obsoleted packages as well.
yum is not the only tool
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 09:29:28AM -0800, John Reiser wrote:
Yes, I think we're both trying to say the same thing: there's no point
having 'grub' in the repositories as its not installable or usable in
practise. The same goes for bunch of other obsoleted packages as well.
yum is not the
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 06:49:25PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
My comment was simply on the if you have both part: it's not
really possible to have both without playing dirty tricks, so even
the if is pretty moot.
My point is that it's not really possible to have *grub* without playing
On 12/07/2012 07:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 06:49:25PM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
My comment was simply on the if you have both part: it's not
really possible to have both without playing dirty tricks, so even
the if is pretty moot.
My point is that it's not
On Dec 7, 2012, at 10:24 AM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:25:21PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
Why is a boot manager needed for a virtualized guest? It seems like all you
need is to point to a virtual disk (or current or past snapshot) and go
On 12/07/2012 11:42 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
ext[234] has two boot sectors for a total of 1024 bytes. XFS has none. Btrfs
has 64KB.
It just seems like GRUB is a really familiar 4000 meter cargo train, compared
to an unfamiliar hand truck, for the task of moving half-dozen boxes. Maybe
The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
older package, but it's still in the tree. Is there a reason?
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ mat...@fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:02 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
older package, but it's still in the tree. Is there a reason?
Yes,
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:02:20PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
older package, but it's still in the tree. Is there a reason?
Yes, virtualization.
On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:02:20PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
The grub2 package obsoletes grub, so there's no way to actually _use_ the
older
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 16:48 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 6, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:02:20PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:34:23PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
The grub2 package obsoletes
25 matches
Mail list logo
