Upstream Tracker is a convenient place for checking API/ABI changes:
For Boost: http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/boost.html
-robin
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> I just noticed that the boost141 package had been previously available in
> Fedora, but it has since be
I just noticed that the boost141 package had been previously available in
Fedora, but it has since been removed (
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5291 ). I'm not familiar with the
recent changes in Boost, but is the API stable enough to support a package
to build on EL 5/6 and Fedora?
Thank
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 01:34:48PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> Eric H. Christensen wrote:
> >> link-layer encryption like WPA2 won't protect anything anymore
> >
> >What do you think WPA2 protects against? It has never protected
> >against anythin
Susi Lehtola wrote:
> Again, you should file a bug to the FPC about this.
Is this really the FPC's responsibility? I'd expect this to be the
maintainer's, and for escalation FESCO's.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailma
Susi Lehtola wrote:
> If you link to -lblas, you're shooting yourself in the leg in the first
> place, since that's the reference implementation on current Fedoras.
In fact, I noticed that, and that's a serious packaging bug.
If a package links -lblas -llapack, if ATLAS is installed, it'll get
r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all.
Are the dbh package (http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/dbh.git/) and
the DBH from http://sourceforge.net/projects/dbh/files/dbh/5.0.7/ same
software ?
If yes, why the first is released as 1.0.24 and not as 5.0.7 ?
Thanks.
- --
-
Anto
On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 13:01:33 +0200
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > Upstream, upstream, upstream It's not like Fedora decided to change
> > these things.
>
> We should indeed bring this to ATLAS upstream, opening a similar bug report
> there as for OpenBLAS. However, I thin
On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 12:59:13 +0200
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > The existing ATLAS setup (before the change) just worked!
>
> Actually, I just noticed the ATLAS packages we ship in F18 are also broken:
> libblas.so.3 is missing, so if something links only -lblas, or links -lblas
> before
Compose started at Sat Sep 28 09:15:02 UTC 2013
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[blueman]
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.armv7hl requires obex-data-server >= 0:0.4.3
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.armv7hl requires gvfs-obexftp
[bwm-ng]
bwm-ng-0.6
Eric H. Christensen wrote:
>What are you trying to protect yourself from, exactly?
Me? Other than address translation (a necessary evil) I use packet
filters mostly to restrain crazy programs that open listening sockets
for unknown reasons even though I don't use them for any kind of
communication
On 27.09.2013 20:59, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:55:43AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
I still can't choose a Desired Capacity that's larger than free space
in the VG. Ergo, I can't create a virtual size LV. Is this expected?
At this stage, yes. It might change in future,
Will Woods wrote:
> So if you actually wanted to write another yum replacement in C you
> could probably start with zif, port it to use libsolv and libcomps, fix
> up the CLI, and have yourself a functional prototype.
There's actually some stuff in PackageKit:
https://gitorious.org/packagekit/pack
Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Upstream, upstream, upstream It's not like Fedora decided to change
> these things.
We should indeed bring this to ATLAS upstream, opening a similar bug report
there as for OpenBLAS. However, I think we should not wait for upstream to
fix this horribly broken setup.
I wrote:
> The existing ATLAS setup (before the change) just worked!
Actually, I just noticed the ATLAS packages we ship in F18 are also broken:
libblas.so.3 is missing, so if something links only -lblas, or links -lblas
before -llapack etc., it will get the unoptimized reference BLAS functions!
14 matches
Mail list logo
