Dne 8.7.2013 12:00, nob...@fedoraproject.org napsal(a):
ruby-mysql [devel] was orphaned by orion
A Ruby interface to MySQL
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ruby-mysql
Was this intentional? There is no replacement to this package in Fedora
yet, nor it was correctly
Hi,
I'm facing a strange issue while using libcurl with pthreads to access
'https://' addresses.
The program abruptly crashes with a SIGPIPE. I'm unable to produce it for any
single URL.
This very issue was fixed upstream recently:
- http://www.fpaste.org/23849/
-
Hi,
Till the time the new fixed version - 7.31.0 - is packaged and available,
solution is for
applications to ignore SIGPIPE signal.
+ signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN);
The problem is, even after ignoring SIGPIPE, I'm seeing same crashes.
I think if you ignore SIGPIPE it produces EPIPE, try setting
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 14:42 +0800, P J P wrote:
Does libcurl in Fedora use OpenSSL or a different
library for secure connections?
The command you quote below seems to answer that question:
$ curl-config --configure
... '--with-libssh2' '--without-ssl' '--with-nss' ...
It would seem
Hi Ankur,
I'll take it!
Best,
Mario
On 8 July 2013 15:37, Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I would like to re-add labyrinth to Fedora. It was deprecated due to
multiple FTBFS bugs, but seems to build just right with the new upstream
release.
I'd be happy to swap reviews
On 07/09/2013 08:42 AM, P J P wrote:
Till the time the new fixed version - 7.31.0 - is packaged and available,
solution is for
applications to ignore SIGPIPE signal.
+signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN);
The proper fix is to use sendmsg and MSG_NOSIGNAL in the TLS
implementation (in this case,
- Original Message -
From: Anish Patil apa...@redhat.com
Subject: Re: About libcurl, pthreads, ssl and SIGPIPE
I think if you ignore SIGPIPE it produces EPIPE, try setting error no EPIPE.
Nope, I see - Program received signal SIGPIPE, Broken pipe.
Thank you.
---
Regards
- Original Message -
From: Mathieu Bridon boche...@fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: About libcurl, pthreads, ssl and SIGPIPE
It would seem curl is built using NSS rather than OpenSSL?
Yep, I wasn't sure if NSS is replacement for openSSL, got tricked by libssh2.
Thank you!
---
Hi,
- Original Message -
From: Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com
Subject: Re: About libcurl, pthreads, ssl and SIGPIPE
The proper fix is to use sendmsg and MSG_NOSIGNAL in the TLS
implementation (in this case, NSS).
Yeah, mostly fix has to go into SSL or NSS library, but that
Hi, folks.
I've been active enough that an intro probably isn't needed, but I've
not successfully worked my way through the Fedora access to manage
particular packages nor have I gotten koji access. I'd particularly
like to get the old mkrdns tool into Fedora and EPEL, since it's a
personal
Compose started at Tue Jul 9 08:15:03 UTC 2013
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[derelict]
derelict-tcod-3-20.20130626gite70c293.fc20.i686 requires tcod
derelict-tcod-3-20.20130626gite70c293.fc20.x86_64 requires tcod
A manual page is now available that describes the new
Shared-System-Certificates feature.
It's contained in this new build for F19:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ca-certificates-2012.87-10.4.fc19
(and in rahide, too).
man update-ca-trust
Please let us know if you have feedback.
Thanks
On 09.07.2013 15:30, Kai Engert wrote:
A manual page is now available that describes the new
Shared-System-Certificates feature.
It's contained in this new build for F19:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ca-certificates-2012.87-10.4.fc19
(and in rahide, too).
man update-ca-trust
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
Change owner(s): Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us, Peter Robinson
pbrobin...@gmail.com
Make ARM a primary architecture. Add armv7hl to the i686 and x86_64 as arches
that we build
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 09:12 +0200, Mario Ceresa wrote:
Hi Ankur,
I'll take it!
Thanks Mario!
Labyrinth has been re-added to the repositories. I'll push builds soon.
--
Thanks,
Warm regards,
Ankur (FranciscoD)
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Join Fedora! Come talk to us!
Excellent proposal. I of course think this would be just awesome!
--
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 9, 2013, at 15:37, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
Change owner(s):
Hi,
A package I maintain (mc) has two rarely-used
python scripts.
Since they have #!/usr/bin/python header, build machinery
automatically adds python dependency.
But I don't want this to happen - the program is very much
usable without python too. Requiring python pulls in a top
of other stuff
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 05:26:19PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Hi,
A package I maintain (mc) has two rarely-used
python scripts.
Since they have #!/usr/bin/python header, build machinery
automatically adds python dependency.
But I don't want this to happen - the program is very much
Summary of changes:
638d8c6... Update to 0.021 (*)
3532187... Update to 0.022 (*)
d060950... Update to 0.023 (*)
3d58630... Update to 0.024 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
On 07/09/2013 12:16 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 8.7.2013 12:00, nob...@fedoraproject.org napsal(a):
ruby-mysql [devel] was orphaned by orion
A Ruby interface to MySQL
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ruby-mysql
Was this intentional? There is no replacement to this
On 07/09/2013 05:30 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
On 07/09/2013 05:26 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Since they have #!/usr/bin/python header, build machinery
automatically adds python dependency.
But I don't want this to happen - the program is very much
usable without python too. Requiring python
Hi Nico,
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:06:38AM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
I've been active enough that an intro probably isn't needed, but I've
not successfully worked my way through the Fedora access to manage
particular packages nor have I gotten koji access. I'd particularly
like to get
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:00:04AM +, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours
===
To whoever is creating these messages:
Please add a message about who is responsible for these reports, where
to report bugs and
On 2013-07-06 8:20 PM, Marcelo Barbosa - Fedora Ambassador wrote:
Stewart,
I can keep these packages, how to apply ? How should I proceed ?
Regards
Marcelo Barbosa
Hi Marcelo,
Great! Please sign-in to the Package DB and claim ownership of the package's
branches you wish to maintain.
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 04:37:40PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 05:26:19PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Hi,
A package I maintain (mc) has two rarely-used
python scripts.
Since they have #!/usr/bin/python header, build machinery
automatically adds python
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:00:04AM +, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours
How about changing the report time to to last 48-216 hours, then ongoing
ownership transfers would be recognised as long as they happen within 48
hours.
Regards
Till
--
devel
On 07/09/2013 05:26 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Since they have #!/usr/bin/python header, build machinery
automatically adds python dependency.
But I don't want this to happen - the program is very much
usable without python too. Requiring python pulls in a top
of other stuff which isn't needed.
Note: As of this writing, the agenda for this week is very light. The one
known agenda item is waiting on information which hasn't been submitted yet.
If you have something to discuss, please reply to this e-mail ASAP so we
can discuss it in the meeting. If we don't get more information on the
Hi,
I need lazarus in F19 to be rebuilt because the current version was
built against an old Free Pascal Compiler version and doesn't work with
the newer.
There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
(and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji).
nnnOn Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
How many F19 packages currently fail to build (or are excluded but
shouldn't be) on ARM? How do we
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 18:06 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:00:04AM +, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours
===
To whoever is creating these messages:
That would be me (and infra)
Please
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
nnnOn Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
How many F19 packages currently
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
nnnOn Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
How many F19 packages currently
On Ter, 2013-07-09 at 18:48 +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
Hi,
I need lazarus in F19 to be rebuilt because the current version was
built against an old Free Pascal Compiler version and doesn't work with
the newer.
+1
I need it too
There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 18:23 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:00:04AM +, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours
How about changing the report time to to last 48-216 hours, then ongoing
ownership transfers would be recognised as long
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 18:06 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:00:04AM +, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours
===
To whoever is creating these messages:
Please add a message about who is
On 9 July 2013 10:57, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
nnnOn Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com
wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 01:00:27PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
How many F19 packages currently fail to build (or are excluded but
shouldn't be) on ARM? How do we stand against
On 9 July 2013 10:57, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
nnnOn Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com
wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Kyle McMartin k...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 01:00:27PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
How many F19 packages currently fail to build
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 18:31 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
How do we treat Desktop items where the package compiles fine but does not
run well without external drivers (the GNOME on ARM conversation earlier )
Or am I misreading that conversation.
The same way as we do now. In some cases
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:33:53PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
There's a number of people working on this but ultimately like all
problems we can handle as much as possible but we also need assistance
by the package maintainers themselves.
No, that's not how it works. While you're a
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:33:53PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
There's a number of people working on this but ultimately like all
problems we can handle as much as possible but we also need assistance
by the package
llvmpipe has been known to be broken for months, and nobody on the ARM
team appears capable of fixing it. As a result, ARM shipped in F19
without any out of the box support for running our default desktop.
This doesn't make it seem like the ARM port currently has sufficient
developer expertise
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:49:10PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
That's correct and you'll find that that's what I've been doing for
2.5+ years now, but we're talking about Primary here... and in primary
it's everyone's responsibility...
That's the point. You don't get to be a primary
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
llvmpipe has been known to be broken for months, and nobody on the ARM
team appears capable of fixing it. As a result, ARM shipped in F19
without any out of the box support for running our default desktop.
This
On 07/09/2013 10:53 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Does the secureboot situation on arm mean that this primary architecture
will eventually be un-bootable for people running a non-redhat signed kernel?
No. We do not support secure boot on ARM in any way. Only devices
which ship without secure
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:53:39AM -0700, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Does the secureboot situation on arm mean that this primary architecture
will eventually be un-bootable for people running a non-redhat signed kernel?
That's unsupported hardware, in the same way that ipads are.
--
Matthew
Summary of changes:
638d8c6... Update to 0.021 (*)
3532187... Update to 0.022 (*)
d060950... Update to 0.023 (*)
3d58630... Update to 0.024 (*)
(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
I need lazarus in F19 to be rebuilt because the current version was
built against an old Free Pascal Compiler version and doesn't work
with the newer.
I have take this task.
Best Regards:
Jochen Schmitt
--
devel mailing list
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
(and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji).
Is there any provenpackager that can take care of this?
I have create an update request and a
Matthew,
We'll be looking into LLVM in due course. There are a few of us capable of
fixing the issue (that you were noted as being extremely concerned about on IRC
at the time - we will be happy to send you updates on this) but we balance this
with other priorities (as well as a desire not to
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 07:01:12PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 18:23 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:00:04AM +, nob...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Change in ownership over the last 168 hours
How about changing the report time to to last
On Ter, 2013-07-09 at 20:35 +0200, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:48:17PM +0200, Mattia Verga wrote:
There's nothing to be changed in spec file, just a rebuild is needed
(and to push the update to stable or creating an override in koji).
Is there any provenpackager that
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:56:03PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 18:06 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
and where the sources of the script can be found.
That would be there:
https://github.com/pypingou/fedora-owner-change
Thank you. Have you considered moving this to the
On Tuesday, July 9, 2013, Jonathan Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
Matthew,
We'll be looking into LLVM in due course. There are a few of us capable
of fixing the issue (that you were noted as being extremely concerned about
on IRC at the time - we will be happy to send you updates on this) but
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:50:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
llvmpipe has been known to be broken for months, and nobody on the ARM
team appears capable of fixing it. As a result, ARM shipped in F19
without any out of the box support for running our default desktop.
This doesn't make
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 03:00:05PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
Change owner(s): Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us, Peter Robinson
pbrobin...@gmail.com
Make ARM a primary
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 03:00:05PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
Change owner(s): Dennis Gilmore
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 14:54 -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote:
We'll be looking into LLVM in due course. There are a few of us
capable of fixing the issue (that you were noted as being extremely
concerned about on IRC at the time - we will be happy to send you
updates on this) but we balance this
On 2013-07-09 10:53, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org
wrote:
llvmpipe has been known to be broken for months, and nobody on the ARM
team appears capable of fixing it. As a result, ARM shipped in F19
without any out of the box support
On 2013-07-09 6:00, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ARM_as_Primary
The kernel is now a multi platform unified ARMv7 kernel supporting a
number of
SoCs with support expanding with each new upstream
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the
'deliverables SOP' I started several releases ago:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_releng_SOP_deliverables
(I don't really like the current layout, I was planning on
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
When reading media articles about SB, bear in mind they're usually wildly
inaccurate. For the straight dope, apply to mjg59, pjones, or if neither of
them is available, me (but remember I'm just the monkey).
You can ask
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 04:37:40PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 05:26:19PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Hi,
A package I maintain (mc) has two rarely-used
python scripts.
Since they
Hi folks,
Just in case, let's say we have the package foo-1.0 if I make a scratch
build of package foo-1.1, that doesn't count at all, isn't it?
I mean can I send an update foo-.1.1 completely different of the foo-1.1
sent as a scratch build, can't I?
Thanks in advance
--
--
Sergio Belkin
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 02:54:53PM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
This doesn't make it seem like the ARM port currently has sufficient
developer expertise involved, and I'd really like to hear what the plans
are for (a) fixing the existing problems, and (b) ensuring
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 23:42 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
Just in case, let's say we have the package foo-1.0 if I make a
scratch build of package foo-1.1, that doesn't count at all, isn't
it?
I mean can I send an update foo-.1.1 completely different of the
foo-1.1 sent as a scratch build,
On 2013-07-09 17:36, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
I've had an entry on my todo list _forever_ to complete the
'deliverables SOP' I started several releases ago:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_releng_SOP_deliverables
(I don't really
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 11:42:48PM -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
Just in case, let's say we have the package foo-1.0 if I make a scratch
build of package foo-1.1, that doesn't count at all, isn't it?
I mean can I send an update foo-.1.1 completely different of the foo-1.1
sent as a scratch
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
Just want to say I updated 2 machines using fedup, and everything seems to
have
gone perfectly.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
I second the
On 2013-07-09 22:35, Gilboa Davara wrote:
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just want to say I updated 2 machines using fedup, and everything
seems to have
gone perfectly.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 02:57:16PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 07/08/2013 02:25 PM, Petr Šabata wrote:
Dear list,
Following the recent thread on the Packaging list [1], and
since those questions arise fairly often during reviews, I
think it'd be a good idea to discuss some possible
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 03:28:52PM +0200, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 02:25:24PM +0200, Petr Šabata wrote:
First, the dependencies, both build- and run-time.
Personally I like to list every module which is actually used
since this means the package only fails to build
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982293
--- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr ---
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #0)
It looks to me that the best option is for perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML not
to build-require perl-Web-Scraper when bootstrapping, as
commit 88f95f08f8478bae65b58b01c2186fb074162f27
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Tue Jul 9 11:48:52 2013 +0100
Don't BR: perl(Web::Scraper) when bootstrapping
perl-Web-Scraper requires HTML::TreeBuilder::LibXML so don't pull
in this optional test requirement when
The lightweight tag 'perl-HTML-TreeBuilder-LibXML-0.23-2.fc20' was created
pointing to:
88f95f0... Don't BR: perl(Web::Scraper) when bootstrapping
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982293
Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Try-Tiny:
d712acd504203b2ecfb205e985e60de5 Try-Tiny-0.15.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
commit 1236c26ed0d747b70e3356201e902924a957657a
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date: Tue Jul 9 12:07:54 2013 +0100
Update to 0.15
- New upstream release 0.15
- Optionally use Sub::Name to name the try/catch/finally blocks, if
available
- BR:/R: perl(Sub::Name)
The lightweight tag 'perl-Try-Tiny-0.15-1.fc20' was created pointing to:
1236c26... Update to 0.15
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
perl-PDL has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-PDL-2.4.10-6.fc19.x86_64 requires libgd.so.2()(64bit)
On i386:
perl-PDL-2.4.10-6.fc19.i686 requires libgd.so.2
Please resolve this as soon as possible.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
perl-Bio-ASN1-EntrezGene has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Bio-ASN1-EntrezGene-1.091-17.fc19.noarch requires
perl(Bio::Index::AbstractSeq)
On i386:
perl-Bio-ASN1-EntrezGene-1.091-17.fc19.noarch requires
perl(Bio::Index::AbstractSeq)
Please resolve
perl-Bio-SamTools has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Bio-SamTools-1.35-2.fc19.x86_64 requires
perl(Bio::SeqFeature::Lite)
perl-Bio-SamTools-1.35-2.fc19.x86_64 requires perl(Bio::PrimarySeq)
On i386:
perl-Bio-SamTools-1.35-2.fc19.i686 requires
The lightweight tag 'perl-Module-Build-Tiny-0.024-1.fc18' was created pointing
to:
3d58630... Update to 0.024
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The lightweight tag 'perl-Module-Build-Tiny-0.024-1.fc19' was created pointing
to:
3d58630... Update to 0.024
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
86 matches
Mail list logo
