Hey, folks! We could really do with karma on these updates:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-15042 (kdepimlibs)
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qt-4.8.0-0.23.rc1.fc16
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-15038 (parted) use
my boot.iso from earlier to test
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691913
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691913
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System
2011-10-28 16:40:46 EDT ---
ocaml-camlp5-6.02.3-1.fc16,coq-8.3pl2-3.fc16 has been sub
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Jerry James wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719152
> gappalib-coq - Coq support library for gappa (requires flocq)
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719757
> apron - Numerical abstract domain library
Thomas swapped 1 review with
Hello Richard,
- Original Message -
> From: Richard Shaw
> I've just made some comments for PFDCrack, I'll take it once you've
> made the updates.
Ah cool, thanks.
> As for ndjbdns, I'm not quite comfortable with that one. Although I
> hate to mention it because it looks like so
We have a parted update to fix a new blocker:
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=747497
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/parted-3.0-4.fc16
I've built a boot.iso with the updated parted for testing, it's
available here:
http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/20111027_preRC1.x64.boot.iso
[meant to go out last night but failed thanks to internet connection
silliness]
Yes, it's episode three of the blockbuster 'Remaining F16 blockers'
trilogy - thanks for lining up all week, folks, have a complimentary
small popcorn.
As mentioned last time, we span a TC3 image for testing while we
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 08:39:56AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > ndjbdns -> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724
> >
> > Could someone approve these packages please?
>
> As for ndjbdns, I'm not quite comfortable with that one. Although I
> hate to mention it because it looks like so
Am 28.10.2011 16:26 schrieb "Zing" :
>
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:47:04 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>
> > Read the rpm snippet on the feature page, please.
>
> I just briefly browsed the feature page and the requirement on initramfs
> piqued me. Maybe I'm wrong, but usrmove would then make fedora sys
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:47:04 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Read the rpm snippet on the feature page, please.
I just briefly browsed the feature page and the requirement on initramfs
piqued me. Maybe I'm wrong, but usrmove would then make fedora systems
from now on specifically require the use o
One thing I'm not clear on is when the switch between the initramfs and the
actual / filesystem is performed. For instance, what does the user get if
they boot single user? What do they get if they boot single user and /usr
is on an nfs filesystem?
-Toshio
pgpC7SFu4zoLJ.pgp
Description: PGP si
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:47:04AM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> On 10/27/2011 08:35 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
>
> The strategy is:
>
> - Replace binaries in /bin /sbin /usr/sbin /lib /lib64 with symlinks to
> their counterpart in /usr. Symlinking is done in rpm %post. Symlinks are
> part of the fi
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 7:36 AM, P J P wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please see these review requests,
>
>
> PDFCrack -> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746754
>
> ndjbdns -> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724
>
> Could someone approve these packages please?
I've just made some c
Hi,
Please see these review requests,
PDFCrack -> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=746754
ndjbdns -> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724
Could someone approve these packages please?
Thank you.
---
Regards
-Prasad
http://feedmug.com
--
devel mailing list
devel
Compose started at Fri Oct 28 08:15:48 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
PackageKit-zif-0.6.19-2.fc16.x86_64 requires zif >= 0:0.2.5
bibletime-2.8.1-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libclucene.so.0()(64bit)
cluster-snmp-0.18.7-
This feature is going to cause a lot of churn.
Aside from the huge changes within fedora I
think a bigger issue will be downstream of fedora
where third party packages and configs will
require large changes. I would worry we might
alienate our users a bit with this?
Now I'm all for clean up, but
On 10/27/2011 08:35 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Chris Adams said:
>> One big question though: can RPM handle such a change? IIRC, when the
>> switch from /etc/rc.d/init.d to /etc/init.d was made, initially
>> everything was going to be moved and the old paths symlinked for a few
>>
17 matches
Mail list logo
