On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Dave Johansen
wrote:
> I can bulid a package on my machine (F21 32-bit), but when I try and build
> it with mock, I get an error when trying to run python. Here's the output:
> RPM build errors:
> + cd durin42-hgsubversion-dde1ade36a49
> + '%{__python2}' setup.py b
sheldon.co...@gmail.com sent you an invitation to join MEGA.\n\n";
--- Message from user: ---
Hello, join me on MEGA and get access to encrypted storage and
communication. Get 50 GB free!
---
Please create your free MEGA account by clicking on the following
link:\n\n";
https://mega.nz/#newsignupZ
Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines. Note that
there is also a set of Python guideline changes pending which I will
send in a separate announcement.
-
Guidelines for making use of weak dependencies (Recommends:, Suggests:,
etc.) have been added.
*https://fedoraproject.
I can bulid a package on my machine (F21 32-bit), but when I try and build
it with mock, I get an error when trying to run python. Here's the output:
RPM build errors:
+ cd durin42-hgsubversion-dde1ade36a49
+ '%{__python2}' setup.py build
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.N6A81W: line 31: fg: no job control
Any id
On Qua, 2015-07-08 at 21:55 +, opensou...@till.name wrote:
> nightfall mmahut, astronomy-sig 60 weeks
> ago
version available on Fedora : nightfall-1.62-15.fc20
version available upstream : nightfall-1.86.tar.gz
No wonder does not compile, but the package aren
On 08.07.2015 22:28, Orion Poplawski wrote:
It appears to be sufficient to define this macro anywhere, not just in
elf.attr. So I think it could be added in to a rpm macros file in
openmpi/mpich-devel.
Ah cool, actually it seems to also work if I add it directly to
mpi.attrs, meaning that al
Hello Jonny,
On 8 July 2015 at 20:56, Jonny Heggheim wrote:
> Do anyone have time to sponsor me? I have three Java packages waiting
> for formal review:
> * hid4java: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230949
> * rescu: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1231457
> * Java-Web
On 07/07/2015 03:12 AM, Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hello
>
> I've got an initial implementation of this using the rpm dependency generator
> hooks, as suggested in the other thread [1].
>
> The resulting scripts are here: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/rpm-mpi-hooks/
>
> There is just one problem: an
Do anyone have time to sponsor me? I have three Java packages waiting
for formal review:
* hid4java: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230949
* rescu: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1231457
* Java-WebSocket: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1231570
Sincerely J
On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 21:30:40 +0200
Reindl Harald wrote:
...snip...
> Protected multilib versions: polkit-0.113-1.fc21.x86_64 !=
> polkit-0.112-7.fc21.1.i686
This is due to polkit splitting out a polkit-libs package between those
two versions. This makes it only include the polkit-libs p
On 08/07/15 20:02, Dave Johansen wrote:
I'm trying to run fedora-review. Do I have something setup incorrectly?
Or am I doing something wrong? It keeps running into issue with not
finding qmake, but isn't everything supossed to be done in mock?
The build is done in mock, but that spec is using
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Dave Johansen
wrote:
> I'm trying to run fedora-review. Do I have something setup incorrectly? Or
> am I doing something wrong? It keeps running into issue with not finding
> qmake, but isn't everything supossed to be done in mock?
>
Sorry for the noise. It looks
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Antonio Trande
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 07/08/2015 07:08 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> > I have two reviews that have been waiting for a reviewer for a
> > while. I would be willing to do a review swap but I would probably
> >
On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 11:29 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> It may not end up going away. I want to mark it BROKEN, which means
> that basically everyone's config will disable it. The problem is that
> it's buggy and probably full of security holes.
Certainly using it the way xserver needs t
--> Running transaction check
---> Package polkit-libs.x86_64 0:0.113-1.fc21 will be installed
---> Package udisks2.x86_64 0:2.1.3-4.fc21 will be updated
---> Package udisks2.x86_64 0:2.1.3-4.fc21 will be updated
---> Package udisks2.x86_64 0:2.1.6-1.fc21 will be an update
--> Processing Dependenc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/08/2015 09:23 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Antonio Trande
> mailto:anto.tra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>
> On 07/08/2015 07:08 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
>> I have tw
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 08/07/15 20:02, Dave Johansen wrote:
>
> I'm trying to run fedora-review. Do I have something setup incorrectly?
>> Or am I doing something wrong? It keeps running into issue with not
>> finding qmake, but isn't everything supossed to be do
On 8 July 2015 at 19:46, James Antill wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
> meeting Thursday at 2015-07-08 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
> Local time information (via. rktime):
>
> 2015-07-08 10:00 Wed US/Pacific PDT
>
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 2:47 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth <
tchollingswo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> > So this was discussed at today's FESCo meeting[1]. Basically, we're not
> > sure that it makes sense to have both interpreters in the distr
I'm trying to run fedora-review. Do I have something setup incorrectly? Or
am I doing something wrong? It keeps running into issue with not finding
qmake, but isn't everything supossed to be done in mock?
Here's the output from the process:
[dlj@JohansenDev ~]$ fedora-review -b 1231427
INFO: Proce
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2015-07-08)
===
Meeting started by paragan at 18:00:02 UTC. The full logs are available
athttp://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2015-07-08/fesco.2015-07-08-18.00.log.html
.
Meeting summary
---
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2015-07-08 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2015-07-08 10:00 Wed US/Pacific PDT
2015-07-08 13:00 Wed US/Eastern EDT
2015-07-08 1
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 16:20 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> I'm asking here because Fedora seems to one of few distros that
>> enables CONFIG_VM86 on 32-bit kernels.
>>
>> Would anyone object if the upstream kernel (and hence Fedora) remov
WG meeting will be at 17:00 UTC (13:00 EST, 19:00 Brno, 13:00 Boston,
2:00+1d Tokyo, 3:00+1d Brisbane) in #fedora-meeting-2 on Freenode.
= Topics =
* Progress and goals for f23 and f24
(https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/env-and-stacks/2015-May/000786.html)
* Open Floor
--
devel maili
On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 09:19:46 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:15:09AM +0200, Germano Massullo wrote:
> > Il 30/06/2015 10:13, Richard W.M. Jones ha scritto:
> > > Didn't even know it was happening. Where was it announced? Rich.
> >
> > On
> > devel-annou...@lists.fed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/08/2015 07:08 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
> I have two reviews that have been waiting for a reviewer for a
> while. I would be willing to do a review swap but I would probably
> have a slow turn around on my end (I'm currently on vacation and
> on
I have two reviews that have been waiting for a reviewer for a while. I
would be willing to do a review swap but I would probably have a slow turn
around on my end (I'm currently on vacation and only occasionally get time
to do this sort of thing). So if you're willing to swap or do the review,
the
Compose started at Wed Jul 8 05:15:04 UTC 2015
Broken deps for i386
--
[apache-scout]
apache-scout-1.2.6-11.fc21.noarch requires mvn(org.apache.juddi:uddi-ws)
apache-scout-1.2.6-11.fc21.noarch requires
mvn(org.apache.juddi:ju
On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 16:20 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> I'm asking here because Fedora seems to one of few distros that
> enables CONFIG_VM86 on 32-bit kernels.
>
> Would anyone object if the upstream kernel (and hence Fedora) removed
> vm86 support? This would break 16-bit real mode progr
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> Hi-
>
> I'm asking here because Fedora seems to one of few distros that
> enables CONFIG_VM86 on 32-bit kernels.
I'm somewhat confused as to how that is to be honest. We don't
explicitly set it in our config hunks, and we disable CONFIG_
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 4:51 PM, José Matos wrote:
> Please note octave FAQ
> http://wiki.octave.org/FAQ#Why_did_you_create_yet_another_GUI_instead_of_making_one_that_already_exists_better.3F
>
> In this case the important thing is the last (and a half) paragraph:
>
> "Also, many bits from QtOctave
On Tuesday 07 July 2015 23:44:03 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I am one of the comaintainers of the qtoctave package. I know the package is
> dead upstream. But last I checked, it worked. (There had been some issues,
> but I
> fixed those that I found.) If it still works fine, I object to retiring it.
>
32 matches
Mail list logo
