On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 01:33:46AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> We could. Right now, for ARM (as an example), there is really about as
> much representation as x86 from what I can see in terms of core arch
> support. I'm sure upstream bits will be pulled in, and David and ajax
> will do a great job
On 05/13/2012 01:21 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> Maybe we should draw more of a distinction between LLVM and clang, and
> use ExclusiveArch: on the latter to whitelist only architectures we
> feel comfortable supporting?
We could. Right now, for ARM (as an example), there is really about
> Maybe we should draw more of a distinction between LLVM and clang,
> and use ExclusiveArch: on the latter to whitelist only architectures
> we feel comfortable supporting?
That would only make it worse, for surely x86-32 and x86-64 would be
whitelisted, so most developers would "just use clang
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/11/2012 02:16 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 05/10/2012 04:56 AM, David Airlie wrote:
>> Don't confuse llvm and clang, llvm has no equivalent in gcc
>> world, clang is a C compiler like gcc that uses llvm tech.
>
> Right so I wasn't confusing these
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:00:48AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> So the set of people we'd be inconveniencing is exactly the set of
> people with no bandwidth and the inability to boot from anything larger
> than a CD.
Not only that - the people who have no bandwidth, the inability to boot
from a
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 00:00:24 +0200,
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 12.05.2012 23:38, schrieb drago01:
I've just rerun the test with 3.4.0-0.rc6.git1.1.fc18.x86_64,
This one has debug options enabled; 3.4.0-0.rc6.git0.1 is the one
without debug options.
how can someone find out if it is a d
On 11/05/12 00:30, Adam Jackson wrote:
> So the set of people we'd be inconveniencing is exactly the set of
> people with no bandwidth and the inability to boot from anything larger
> than a CD.
The way forward for those cheap machines on cheap networks is to let
them boot from CD but to then pull
Am 12.05.2012 23:38, schrieb drago01:
>> I've just rerun the test with 3.4.0-0.rc6.git1.1.fc18.x86_64,
>
> This one has debug options enabled; 3.4.0-0.rc6.git0.1 is the one
> without debug options.
how can someone find out if it is a debug-kernel?
even the satble ones seems to have a ton of deb
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Josh Boyer wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>> Today I noticed that some tests from coreutils' test suite
>>> were taking far longer than they used to on rawhide.
>>> For example, run this command in an empty
Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Today I noticed that some tests from coreutils' test suite
>> were taking far longer than they used to on rawhide.
>> For example, run this command in an empty directory:
>>
>> seq 20|env time xargs touch
>>
>> it tak
The "Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water... " release.
This is the end of the development cycle. We're now headed into the
stabilisation and bug fixing phase.
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/12.1.0/Release_plan
Fixed bugs:
#11796 XO-1 os8 (12.1.0) - 'rpm' fails to run
#11766 sy
I have submitted a bug report[1] related to nouveau driver. The
installer is unable to detect Nvidia Geforce GTX 460 v2 [2] which is
different from the original Nvidia Geforce GTX 460, forcing the use of
vesa driver. As a result, the screen is black so I cannot provide a
xorg.log report let alo
Compose started at Sat May 12 08:15:20 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[389-admin]
389-admin-1.1.28-1.fc18.i686 requires libicuuc.so.48
389-admin-1.1.28-1.fc18.i686 requires libicui18n.so.48
389-admin-1.1.28-1.fc18.
Hi,
I'm trying to build brickOS (alternative OS for the LEGO Mindstorms RCX
unit) on fedora (rawhide), which requires the c and c++ h8300 cross
compilers. In fedora however, cross-gcc is build only with
enable-languages=c. Is there a particular reason for this?
Thanks!
--
devel mailing list
Compose started at Sat May 12 08:15:18 UTC 2012
Broken deps for x86_64
--
[LuxRender]
LuxRender-blender-0.8.0-13.fc17.x86_64 requires blender(ABI) = 0:2.61
[aeolus-conductor]
aeolus-conductor-0.4.0-2.fc17.noarch requires rubyg
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 2:36 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
>> Right- followup question: Is Firefox what we want in the X images?
>
> What's the default browser for x86 ?
Firefox.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
16 matches
Mail list logo
