[perl-PPIx-Regexp/f19] 0.036 bump

commit add1917b6b60396f2ebc5018307851c4771f3254 Author: Petr Písař Date: Tue Jan 7 08:41:32 2014 +0100 0.036 bump .gitignore|1 + perl-PPIx-Regexp.spec |8 ++-- sources |2 +- 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/.giti

[perl-PPIx-Regexp/f20] 0.036 bump

Summary of changes: 2623dea... 0.036 bump (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/

Re: Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped.

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Henrik Hodne wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hey, > > On 01/07/2014 08:22 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: >> I have other pending open bugs, like one review for Christopher >> Meng taking time because I'm not familiar with perl packaging. I

Re: Problem changing symlink to directory with %pretrans scriptlet

On 01/06/2014 11:47 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Richard Fearn (richardfe...@gmail.com) said: On 28 December 2013 16:43, Bruno Wolff III wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#The_.25pretrans_scriptlet Notes that you need to use lua in pretrans scriptlets, not shell commands.

Re: Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/07/2014 06:39 AM, Christopher Meng wrote: > Can upstream come up with a better name? ;) > > It has a long name and contains a binary with naming collisions. > > IMO someone should advise upstream to change name like > "silversearcher" or "tss"

Re: Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hey, On 01/07/2014 08:22 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > I have other pending open bugs, like one review for Christopher > Meng taking time because I'm not familiar with perl packaging. I'm > waiting for a sign from Henrik to resume the review, and I h

Agenda for today's Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2014-01-07)

WG meeting will be at 13:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting on Freenode. == Topic == https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mmaslano/Draft:Env_and_Stack_PRD#Tasks We will have to continue in discussion and vote on mailing list, because not everyone can join us tomorrow. See you, Marcela -- devel mailing

Re: Grub installation. First potential Fedora killer

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 00:43 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Jan 6, 2014, at 12:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 22:52 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > >> On Thu, 2014-01-02 at 23:32 +0100, Jean François Martinez wrote: > >>> I have a nice booter setup and a nice _main_ Lin

Re: Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped.

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Kenjiro NAKAYAMA wrote: > Hi, all > (Sorry, Henrik and Dridi, I added you two in cc.) Hi, It's okay, probably the best way to make sure I notice it quickly. > Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped, and Fedora-review flags is > still "?". > > https://b

Re: Unannounced soname bump: tracker

One hiding in a private directory: /usr/lib64/gnome-bluetooth/ that gnome-shell explicitely adds to its path. It has no headers and is only usable through introspection. - Original Message - > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 05:52 -0500, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > - Original Message - > >

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 13:47 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:04:39AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > > > What about including them in the RPMs themselves, in a new section > > > similar to the existing %check -- or just in a standard file location > > > (so no changes to RPM itse

Re: Unannounced soname bump: tracker

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 05:52 -0500, Bastien Nocera wrote: > - Original Message - > > > Plus it wasn't just happening on its own; the state of Rawhide when > > everyone else bogged off for Christmas was that it was suffering from > > this, the borkage in libevdev, the gnome-bluetooth soname

Re: Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped.

Can upstream come up with a better name? ;) It has a long name and contains a binary with naming collisions. IMO someone should advise upstream to change name like "silversearcher" or "tss". -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/deve

Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped.

Hi, all (Sorry, Henrik and Dridi, I added you two in cc.) Package review of the_silver_searcher is stopped, and Fedora-review flags is still "?". https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1008063 Altough It is late for FC 20, it should target to FC 21. Can you please coninue the review? I hop

Re: Source file audit - 2014-01-05

On Mon, 06 Jan, 2014 at 19:53:04 GMT, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > mathstuf:BADSOURCE:bloomfilter-1.2.6.10.tar.gz:ghc-bloomfilter Reuploaded tarball to hackage. Only difference is that the newtarball is missing a test-suite stanza in the cabal file. > mathstuf:BADSOURCE:pdf2svg-0.2.1.tar.gz:pdf2svg Upst

On the qemu-system-XXX packages

It seems a lot of them were not created for EPEL 6 and 7 (see https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/qemu-system-arm as an example). I take that means the current maintainer is up to his nose in projects. How can I be equal parts lazy ass and selfish SOB and volunteer to be a co-maintainer t

Re: Grub installation. First potential Fedora killer

On Jan 6, 2014, at 2:35 PM, Jean François Martinez wrote: > Centos 6 wasn't detected at install time. This is rather vague. Do you mean the installer doesn't see any of the CentOS partitions/LVs? Or CentOS isn't included as a grub menu item after installing Fedora 20? Chris Murphy -- deve

Re: dnf versus yum

On Jan 6, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > On 5 January 2014 18:12, Chris Adams wrote: > > the ordianry user - i doubt > > The "ordinary user" won't do "yum erase kernel" either, so that's moot. > The rescue kernel is another option, right there on the boot menu; if >

python compat package change needed

The new setuptools shipped in F20+ has one change that breaks things for a subset of python packages. I'm proposing a very small guideline change for the Pyhton Eggs guidelines to address that. Maintainers of backwards and forward compat packages will likely want to address this as it will break

Re: Problem changing symlink to directory with %pretrans scriptlet

Richard Fearn (richardfe...@gmail.com) said: > On 28 December 2013 16:43, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#The_.25pretrans_scriptlet > > Notes that you need to use lua in pretrans scriptlets, not shell commands. > > Thanks. I've already seen that. It

Re: Grub installation. First potential Fedora killer

Centos 6 wasn't detected at install time. On Sun, 05 Jan 2014 22:52:35 -0800 Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-02 at 23:32 +0100, Jean François Martinez wrote: > > I have a nice booter setup and a nice _main_ Linux installation. Last > > thing I would want is a distribution I am _testing

Re: Grub installation. First potential Fedora killer

I just want the option of grub installed in the boot partition instead of in the MBR. That is all. For now I want to keep it "subordinate". And I Don't doubt users of other distributions willing to give it a try will want it like that. Do you know how Microsoft did in order to get users movi

Re: Orphaning packages

On Seg, 2014-01-06 at 15:56 -0500, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 12:51:18PM -0800, Manuel F Martinez wrote: > > Hello list, > > > > Due to lack of time I'm orphaning audacity on Fedora branch, > > EL5/6 branch is already taken. > > > > Thank you and sorry about the inconvenie

Re: Source file audit - 2014-01-05

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > jjames:BADSOURCE:latexmk-439.zip:latexmk > This one is the result of me sending a bug report upstream after the 4.39 release to point out two documentation bugs. I got a reply indicating that they would be fixed in the next release. Apparen

Re: Orphaning packages

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 12:51:18PM -0800, Manuel F Martinez wrote: > Hello list, > > Due to lack of time I'm orphaning audacity on Fedora branch, > EL5/6 branch is already taken. > > Thank you and sorry about the inconvenience. Since I use this weekly for my podcast, I'll gladly take it. -- Da

Orphaning packages

Hello list, Due to lack of time I'm orphaning audacity on Fedora branch, EL5/6 branch is already taken. Thank you and sorry about the inconvenience. -- Manuel F Martinez Linux Systems Engineer -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 4:00 AM, wrote: > Change in ownership over the last 168 hours > === > > 3 packages were orphaned > > rdesktop [devel] was orphaned by ssp > X client for remote desktop into Windows Terminal Server >

Fedora.next in 2014 <- hey look fourteen

It's been pointed out to me that that the New Year means that the year number actually increments. Who knew? In any case, this is meant to be looking _forward_, not a retrospective. -- Matthew Miller-- Fedora Project-- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://ad

Re: Source file audit - 2014-01-05

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 12:53:04PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > - I didn't explicitly mention it last time, but you can find the output > of the script for your package at: > > http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/sourcecheck-20140105/$packagename-dl.txt > Correction: http://www.scrye.com/~kevin

Re: dnf versus yum

On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 12:38:46 -0700 Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > If an expert says "no ordinary user" would ever do a command, they > have not worked front line Tech Support recently enough. > User- can you replace my modem, it doesn't work CSR: - can you do x,y,z . User: - No none work. CSR:

Re: dnf versus yum

On 5 January 2014 18:12, Chris Adams wrote: > > the ordianry user - i doubt > > The "ordinary user" won't do "yum erase kernel" either, so that's moot. > The rescue kernel is another option, right there on the boot menu; if > you actually removed all running kernels, it would be the _only_ Fedora

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:04:39AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > > What about including them in the RPMs themselves, in a new section > > similar to the existing %check -- or just in a standard file location > > (so no changes to RPM itself are needed immediately)? > I'm not sure that I see how includi

Re: Taskotron

On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 12:36:08 -0500 Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 18:06 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 6.1.2014 17:53, Matthew Miller napsal(a): > > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 09:36:09AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > > >> One of the primary reasons for replacing AutoQA with taskotro

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:04:39AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > I haven't given a whole lot of thought to how exactly we'll do package > specific checks. Keeping the checks in the package's git repo is the > first thing that comes to mind but I'm sure there other possible > solutions. Either way, it f

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 11:53:14 -0500 Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 09:36:09AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > > One of the primary reasons for replacing AutoQA with taskotron is to > > make it easier for folks to contribute checks. AutoQA's > > implementation just isn't capable of doing

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 09:36:09AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > Kamil already covered this a bit but I wanted to add a few more details. > > One of the primary reasons for replacing AutoQA with taskotron is to > make it easier for folks to contribute checks. AutoQA's implementation > just isn't capab

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 08:00:23AM -0500, Kamil Paral wrote: > Thanks, Richard, for your feedback. That's exactly one of the > problems in AutoQA that we want to improve in Taskotron. The package > maintainers or test maintainers should have a direct and simple > control over their tests. Excellen

Re: Taskotron

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 18:06 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 6.1.2014 17:53, Matthew Miller napsal(a): > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 09:36:09AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > >> One of the primary reasons for replacing AutoQA with taskotron is to > >> make it easier for folks to contribute checks. AutoQA's

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/06/2014 05:42 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: It's a nice theory. Sure. It's not a tenable basis on which to operate in the real world of software. So if you want to argue that something doesn't exist, check whether it exists. If you only check the documentation, you're not checking the software

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 09:36:09AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: > One of the primary reasons for replacing AutoQA with taskotron is to > make it easier for folks to contribute checks. AutoQA's implementation > just isn't capable of doing that in a reasonable fashion. We haven't > gotten into the specifi

EL6 branch of qt-creator?

I would like to create an EL6 branch of qt-creator and I am willing to become the maintainer. I have a working .spec and .src.rpm, so if an existing maintainer would prefer to take this over, then they are free to do so, but I'm fine with doing it. Thanks, Dave -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fe

Re: Taskotron

Dne 6.1.2014 17:53, Matthew Miller napsal(a): On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 09:36:09AM -0700, Tim Flink wrote: One of the primary reasons for replacing AutoQA with taskotron is to make it easier for folks to contribute checks. AutoQA's implementation just isn't capable of doing that in a reasonable fa

Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers

On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 19:52:04 -0800 Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2013-12-26 at 21:43 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Adam Williamson > > wrote: > > Time for another PSA... > > > > It appears libevdev 0.6 breaks the library's ABI without

Re: dnf versus yum

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 17:22 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: > On 01/06/2014 05:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > ... > >> The reason for me asking was that you accused me of "excoriating the dnf > >> devs" (a rather harsh accusation) just because I did not try > >> erase/remove. I looked at the docu

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 16:42:16 + "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:52:04PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > No. There's a bad one, which is AutoQA. The problem with it is it's > > more or less considered obsolete now as far as new development > > goes; the devs are worki

[Owner-change] Fedora packages ownership change

Change in ownership over the last 168 hours === 3 packages were orphaned rdesktop [devel] was orphaned by ssp X client for remote desktop into Windows Terminal Server https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/rdesktop

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/06/2014 05:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: ... The reason for me asking was that you accused me of "excoriating the dnf devs" (a rather harsh accusation) just because I did not try erase/remove. I looked at the documentation and used auto completion. Why would I try a number of different sub-

Re: dnf versus yum

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 09:26 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: > On 01/06/2014 08:13 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 08:01 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: > >> On 01/06/2014 12:46 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > ... > >>> If it exists for backward compatibility, it doesn't necessar

Re: dnf versus yum

On 06.01.2014 16:50, H. Guémar wrote: > Congratulations for lowering the level of this discussion even lower than > it already was ! Au contraire. Users Are Always Right! Love It, Learn It! poma -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinf

Re: dnf versus yum

Congratulations for lowering the level of this discussion even lower than it already was ! H. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Fedora.next in 2013 -- Big Picture and Themes

On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 07:01:33PM -0700, Pete Travis wrote: > I strenuously agree about the need for a solution providing tutorial > content. There's plenty on the wiki, if you can find it, but wiki > content just doesn't feel qualified and doesn't invoke the same trust as > something that's clear

Re: RFC: Taskotron task description format

On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 08:04:06 -0500 (EST) Josef Skladanka wrote: > Hi Tim, > > sorry for the late reply, this somewhat slipped my mind :( > > Overall, I like the concept, and although I understand that this is > Proof-of-Concept, I'm a bit worried about the get_argparser() method >

File Test-Output-1.03.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by pghmcfc

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Test-Output: 903485edb382f5a18a5029978d1febf6 Test-Output-1.03.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailm

[Bug 1048802] perl-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.86 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1048802 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version|

Re: dnf versus yum

On 06.01.2014 16:32, Frank Murphy wrote: > I don't think that helps Au contraire. You should not run this command in the same way as "dnf remove kernel". Maybe we should write a plug-in to provide a safety mechanism!? :) poma -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.

Re: Self Introduction

On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Jan Tulak wrote: > So I would not used it directly for something important (closed things are > closed things, and with NSA paying to RSA for backdoors...), but for casual > usage or as one of more entropy sources (or as a seed for a CSPRNG) it can > work pretty wel

Re: dnf versus yum

On 04.01.2014 21:09, Adam Williamson wrote: > Because yum's code is a mess. curl -s http://www.textfiles.com/art/monkey.vt From Yum with Love. poma -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedora

Re: dnf versus yum

On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 16:30:20 +0100 poma wrote: > On 04.01.2014 21:09, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Because yum's code is a mess. > > curl -s http://www.textfiles.com/art/monkey.vt > From Yum with Love. > > > poma > > I don't think that helps ___ Regards, Frank www.frankly3d.com -- dev

Re: dnf versus yum

Am 06.01.2014 16:12, schrieb Tomas Mlcoch: >> Am 06.01.2014 14:06, schrieb Vít Ondruch: >>> Also, I'd like to point out that "yum/dnf remove" by default shows what it >>> is going to do and you have to >>> explicitly confirm the action, isn't it enough? How much protection do you >>> need? >> >> t

[perl-MailTools] Update to 2.13

commit 028177f69ccecc9866a1620d5c701ab378ae7534 Author: Paul Howarth Date: Mon Jan 6 15:06:59 2014 + Update to 2.13 - New upstream release 2.13: - Optional 'from' and 'on' component in in-reply-to are comments (CPAN RT#89371) - mailcap -> \\ (CPAN RT#89

Re: dnf versus yum

- Original Message - > > > Am 06.01.2014 14:06, schrieb Vít Ondruch: > > Also, I'd like to point out that "yum/dnf remove" by default shows what it > > is going to do and you have to > > explicitly confirm the action, isn't it enough? How much protection do you > > need? > > to say it

Re: dnf versus yum

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: > On 01/06/2014 02:06 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> Dne 6.1.2014 13:31, Lars E. Pettersson napsal(a): > > ... > >>> What would be the point in removing the running kernel? Is there >>> actually such a use case? >>> >>> Lars >> >> >> Why are

Re: dnf versus yum

Am 06.01.2014 15:39, schrieb Petr Viktorin: > On 01/06/2014 03:32 PM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: >> On 01/06/2014 02:06 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>> Dne 6.1.2014 13:31, Lars E. Pettersson napsal(a): >> ... What would be the point in removing the running kernel? Is there actually such a use

[perl-ExtUtils-MakeMaker] 6.86 bump

commit 4100dc2262eb6b940655e3506ec1be6b3b848111 Author: Petr Písař Date: Mon Jan 6 15:54:52 2014 +0100 6.86 bump .gitignore |1 + ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.84-USE_MM_LD_RUN_PATH.patch | 136 -- perl-ExtUtils-MakeMaker.spec

Re: dnf versus yum

This discussion has now reached the "phoronix" point http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTU2MTE Has anyone filed any tickets so we could move forward or will we continue wasting time here ? Best regards, H. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedora

Re: dnf versus yum

Am 06.01.2014 14:06, schrieb Vít Ondruch: > Also, I'd like to point out that "yum/dnf remove" by default shows what it is > going to do and you have to > explicitly confirm the action, isn't it enough? How much protection do you > need? to say it clear - *all* protection to avoid breaking the

Re: dnf versus yum

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 08:01 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: >> On 01/06/2014 12:46 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> > If it exists for backward compatibility, it doesn't necessarily need to >> > be documented. >> >> Ehh? Why? Could you elabora

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/06/2014 03:32 PM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: On 01/06/2014 02:06 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 6.1.2014 13:31, Lars E. Pettersson napsal(a): ... What would be the point in removing the running kernel? Is there actually such a use case? Lars Why are you asking? May be you should let your i

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/06/2014 02:06 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 6.1.2014 13:31, Lars E. Pettersson napsal(a): ... What would be the point in removing the running kernel? Is there actually such a use case? Lars Why are you asking? May be you should let your imagination run riot. Why? Isn't that obvious? If

Re: php-libvirt package became orphan

Le 06/01/2014 15:04, Michal Novotny a écrit : > Hi all, > as I didn't do any builds of php-libvirt for a long time and the project > is done in my spare time and if so, it's done upstream, I released the > ownership of the php-libvirt. My first guess who could be interested in > taking the ownershi

php-libvirt package became orphan

Hi all, as I didn't do any builds of php-libvirt for a long time and the project is done in my spare time and if so, it's done upstream, I released the ownership of the php-libvirt. My first guess who could be interested in taking the ownership is either Ville or Remi (both CC'ed). If somebody else

Re: dnf versus yum

Dne 6.1.2014 13:31, Lars E. Pettersson napsal(a): On 01/06/2014 12:43 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Otherwise, I totally agree with Chris and with DNF upstream. "dnf remove kernel" should remove every kernel and should not behave magically. What would be the point in removing the running kernel? Is t

Re: Taskotron (was: Re: Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers)

> On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:52:04PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > No. There's a bad one, which is AutoQA. The problem with it is it's more > > or less considered obsolete now as far as new development goes; the devs > > are working on Taskotron to replace it, but I don't believe it's ready > >

Re: [pkgdb] python-boto ownership changed

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote: > On 2014-01-02 16:38, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> >> [Third try to send this email. The Gmail Android app has a lovely UI >> to select the sender address, but it doesn't do anything :(.] >> >> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:31 AM, Garrett Holmst

Re: Self Introduction

On Monday 06 of January 2014 13:27:21 Jan Tulak wrote: > On Monday 06 of January 2014 12:16:44 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > > Hello and welcome. Some questions based on your description of rdrand. > > How would you expect someone to use this library? I mean if /dev/urandom > > is more portable

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/06/2014 12:43 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Otherwise, I totally agree with Chris and with DNF upstream. "dnf remove kernel" should remove every kernel and should not behave magically. What would be the point in removing the running kernel? Is there actually such a use case? Lars -- Lars E. P

Re: Self Introduction

On Monday 06 of January 2014 12:16:44 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > Hello and welcome. Some questions based on your description of rdrand. > How would you expect someone to use this library? I mean if /dev/urandom > is more portable why use the rdrand tool or library? Also how does your > projec

Re: dnf versus yum

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Also, even removing every kernel RPM will not render your system "non-recoverable". You can always use a boot CD, and in modern Fedora systems, the "rescue" kernel/initramfs are never removed (not owned by any RPM), so you

Re: dnf versus yum

Dne 5.1.2014 22:25, Till Maas napsal(a): On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 01:06:16PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Reindl Harald said: http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html#dnf-erase-kernel-deletes-all-packages-called-kernel Frankly, that's a dumb "feature" to have the package ma

Re: Self Introduction

On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 21:38 +0100, Jan Tulak wrote: > I'm also developing it (https://github.com/BroukPytlik/RdRand). > ReadMe still needs to be filled with reasonable texts, I have to copy it from > man pages (why write the same things twice). :-) > > About the security concerns... I have don

Re: crash stats for Fedora 20

On 01/03/2014 03:35 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Richard Marko wrote: >> In last two weeks these components were crashing the most on Fedora 20: >> 3. kernel seen 4540 times (8% of all reports) >> http://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/problems/898437/ >> http://re

Re: Unannounced soname bump: tracker

- Original Message - > Plus it wasn't just happening on its own; the state of Rawhide when > everyone else bogged off for Christmas was that it was suffering from > this, the borkage in libevdev, the gnome-bluetooth soname bump / library > drop (which affects other desktops), library drop

Re: [Test-Announce] 2014-01-06 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

On 01/06/2014 07:18 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: # Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2014-01-06 # Time: 16:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! It's meeting time again soon! Still not an awful lo

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/05/2014 07:24 PM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: Three documentation "bugs" out of a side track of a thread is not a terrible thread, in my opinion... Yum auto completion missing erase: dnf man page missing to mention remove:

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/06/2014 08:13 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 08:01 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: On 01/06/2014 12:46 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: ... If it exists for backward compatibility, it doesn't necessarily need to be documented. Ehh? Why? Could you elaborate? I don't see w

Re: Grub installation. First potential Fedora killer

On Jan 6, 2014, at 12:48 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > I dunno, it's in there for the regular grub2 install so I kept it for > the 'non-install-install' I'm suggesting. Looks optional. Not created by grub anyway. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2013-01/msg00088.html > bootloade