Have you imported your FAS SSL certificate in Firefox?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_the_Koji_build_system#The_web_interface
Anyway, for canceling tasks I found more straightforward the use of
commandline:
"koji cancel-task 12024149"
Mattia
Il 02/12/2015 05:52, gil ha scritto:
hi
I t
Hello Neal,
> On Wednesday, 2 December 2015 1:03 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
> For example, when I'm at work, I can access hostA.work.com
> where resolving hostA only works by talking to dnsserverA.work.com,
> which was setup by the usual dhcp and then when I'm at home
>
> google.com is resolved as nor
Il 02/12/2015 05:52, gil ha scritto:
hi
I tried to log in to stop
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12024149 but it
failed with the following error using Firefox on Fedora 23
koji.fedoraproject.org. Il peer SSL ha rifiutato il certificato
considerandolo revocato. (Codice d
hi
I tried to log in to stop
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12024149 but it
failed with the following error using Firefox on Fedora 23
koji.fedoraproject.org. Il peer SSL ha rifiutato il certificato
considerandolo revocato. (Codice di errore: ssl_error_revoked_cert_alert)
Since the old proposal to have the bootloader automatically enumerate
boot options never went anywhere, can we do the next best thing?
Specifically, these days grub2-mkconfig appears to produce output
that's functionally identical to what grubby generates. Can we switch
new-kernel-pkg to just reg
On Ter, 2015-12-01 at 16:44 +, Dave Love wrote:
> What's the correct way to write a spec file that obeys the %license*
> stipulation but also works for epel6?
>
> Some time ago I was told to follow
> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411 and write
>
> %{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc
Hi,
I'm new here and followed the instructions for adding a new package.
I have submitted a ticket for my first package and looking for a review and
a sponsor.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286539
Let me know if I'm missing something.
Thanks,
Roi
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists
Am 01.12.2015 um 22:15 schrieb Richard W.M. Jones:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:57:53PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 28/11/15 20:05 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:24:21AM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
= System Wide Change: Fedora 24 Boost 1.60 uplift =
Does this me
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 09:15:38PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:57:53PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On 28/11/15 20:05 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:24:21AM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> > >>= System Wide Change: Fedora 24 Boost 1
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:57:53PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 28/11/15 20:05 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:24:21AM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
> >>= System Wide Change: Fedora 24 Boost 1.60 uplift =
> >
> >Does this mean "upgrade" or "update"?
>
> I just copied
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 12:43 PM, gil wrote:
> Hi
> again thanks
> no all jsonld-java-tools dependencies are all available in rawhide
> org.openrdf.sesame: and in F23 only jsonld-java
> with fedora-review -b 1267890 --plugins Java -m fedora-rawhide-i386
> should work ...
I had to add --enablerepo=
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 08:19:04AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 10:09:58PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> FWIW, I'm not sure that's really true. The fedora-review tool makes it
> very easy to do a low-effort review and still produce a pretty
> checklist. (This
Il 01/12/2015 19:57, Jerry James ha scritto:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:42 AM, gil wrote:
Hi Jerry,
Take!
can you take this for me https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267890
?
Will do. It seems this package depends on other packages that have
not yet been built in Rawhide. I can bu
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Dave Love wrote:
>
> Sorry, I don't understand. What do I need to get _licensedir defined
> appropriately so that the conditional makes sense (per the chopped part
> of my message)?
%{!?_licensedir:%global license %doc}
%license COPYING
The redirect to doc wor
I think in order to make dnssec/local resolver the default, it should be
required to work for a naive user who works in a changing environment such
as:
moving between work, which has it's own private dns and
home, which has usual, public dns
without that user needing to understand anything abou
Richard Shaw writes:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Dave Love wrote:
>
>> What's the correct way to write a spec file that obeys the %license*
>> stipulation but also works for epel6?
>>
>> Some time ago I was told to follow
>> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411 and write
>>
>> %{!?_l
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:42 AM, gil wrote:
> Hi Jerry,
> Take!
> can you take this for me https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267890
> ?
Will do. It seems this package depends on other packages that have
not yet been built in Rawhide. I can build them myself, except I
could use some h
Hi Jerry,
Take!
can you take this for me
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267890 ?
Thanks
Regards
- gil
Il 01/12/2015 18:29, Jerry James ha scritto:
I need a review for this package:
mathicgb: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287183
Let me know what I can review for y
I need a review for this package:
mathicgb: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287183
Let me know what I can review for you in exchange. Thanks,
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel
= Proposed F24 System Wide Change: Node.js 4.2 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NodeJS4x
Change owner(s):
* Stephen Gallagher
* Jared Smith
Fedora 24 will be updated to Node.js 4.2, the latest LTS release of
the platform built on Chrome's JavaScript runtime for easily building
fast, sca
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Dave Love wrote:
> What's the correct way to write a spec file that obeys the %license*
> stipulation but also works for epel6?
>
> Some time ago I was told to follow
> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411 and write
>
> %{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc}
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Randy Barlow wrote:
This sounds overall pretty neat to me! One detail came to my mind: how
would this interact with VPN DNS servers? In my experience with VPNs,
it's common for them to provide a DNS server that allows internal host
resolution to work. Would this local resolve
What's the correct way to write a spec file that obeys the %license*
stipulation but also works for epel6?
Some time ago I was told to follow
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411 and write
%{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc}
and that now also appears in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPE
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Björn Persson wrote:
Tomas Hozza wrote:
- dnssec-trigger does not do the Captive Portal detection and handling and
we rather rely on NM for the detection and on Gnome Shell for the Portal login
Can I assume that users of non-Gnome desktops will also be able to log
in to
On Di, Dez 01, 2015 at 11:29:25 -0500, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
> I received mail that EPEL-7 branch was requested for PowerTOP in [1].
> Is there any way how to cancel (or at least comment) such requests?
You can block it at:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/requests/1976
It should
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Jaroslav Skarvada
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I received mail that EPEL-7 branch was requested for PowerTOP in [1].
> Is there any way how to cancel (or at least comment) such requests?
IIRC you can change the request to "Obsolete" but you can't delete it.
Thanks,
Richard
Hi,
I received mail that EPEL-7 branch was requested for PowerTOP in [1].
Is there any way how to cancel (or at least comment) such requests?
Because this request is apparently invalid, PowerTOP is already
included in RHEL-7
thanks & regards
Jaroslav
[1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/p
This sounds overall pretty neat to me! One detail came to my mind: how
would this interact with VPN DNS servers? In my experience with VPNs,
it's common for them to provide a DNS server that allows internal host
resolution to work. Would this local resolver be notified by NM of a new
VPN connection
On 01.12.2015 16:06, Björn Persson wrote:
> Tomas Hozza wrote:
> > - dnssec-trigger does not do the Captive Portal detection and handling and
> > we rather rely on NM for the detection and on Gnome Shell for the Portal
> > login
>
> Can I assume that users of non-Gnome desktops will also be abl
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 3:02 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 1.12.2015 08:20, Dan Book wrote:
> > I have run into this before and it was very confusing, it really should
> be
> > a separate command from remove for when you actually want to remove what
> > dnf thinks is now "unused".
>
> Maybe it would
Thank you for the information, but it is still confusing. What I mean by
that is that there is no discoverability to why dnf is choosing to remove
all the extra packages. So the user is left to assume that none of those
packages can function without the one you want to remove. I spent half an
hour
Missing expected images:
Cloud disk raw i386
Cloud disk raw x86_64
Cloud_atomic disk raw x86_64
No images in this compose but not Rawhide 20151130
No images in Rawhide 20151130 but not this.
Failed openQA tests: 52 of 52
ID: 9330Test: x86_64 workstation_live default_install@uefi
ID: 93
Tomas Hozza wrote:
> - dnssec-trigger does not do the Captive Portal detection and handling and
> we rather rely on NM for the detection and on Gnome Shell for the Portal
> login
Can I assume that users of non-Gnome desktops will also be able to log
in to a portal if they want to?
Björn Perss
On 12/01/2015 12:45 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> Hello,
>
> a week ago I proposed a new release criterion for upgrading across two
> releases (e.g. from F21 to F23 directly, skipping F22). As this was never
> officially supported (even though users were probably unaware of this fact,
> because we h
On 28/11/15 20:05 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:24:21AM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
= System Wide Change: Fedora 24 Boost 1.60 uplift =
Does this mean "upgrade" or "update"?
I just copied that from the previous change proposals, but I'm not
sure what the difference
On 01/12/15 09:02 +0100, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 1.12.2015 08:20, Dan Book wrote:
I have run into this before and it was very confusing, it really should be
a separate command from remove for when you actually want to remove what
dnf thinks is now "unused".
Maybe it would help if these auto-remo
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 00:35:37 +0100
> Björn Persson wrote:
>
> > Is there a way to deal with the following situation in Koji?
> >
> > · Build tool B has a build-time dependency on itself.
> > · B is linked to library L version 1.
> > · L gets upgraded to version 2, which chan
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 02:38:10PM -0500, Jaroslav Skarvada wrote:
> they now use 'daily-MMDD' as the version, it is even shown in the
> about dialog. They provide daily builds. It doesn't seem they are
> going to change this release model in the near future (but I will
> recheck with them). Pe
On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 10:09:58PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Package review is public and happens in the review bug. We also
> require (in the sense of having a strong custom, maybe even if it's
> not written anywhere explicitly), a checklist style review. This allows
If we want
On 01.12.2015 13:28, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Út, 2015-12-01 at 11:15 +0100, Tomas Hozza wrote:
> > You are not mistaken.
> >
> > This is the third time, because previously we rather moved the change to the
> > next Fedora to bring better user experience. Every time there was something
> > enhanced,
On 1.12.2015 13:25, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 12/01/2015 10:02 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>> On 1.12.2015 08:20, Dan Book wrote:
>>> I have run into this before and it was very confusing, it really should be
>>> a separate command from remove for when you actually want to remove what
>>> dnf thinks i
On 1.12.2015 13:15, Jan Kurik wrote:
> = Proposed Self Contained Change: Koji Generates Repositories of Signed RPMs =
>
> Change owner(s):
> * Jay Greguske < jgregusk with the usual red hat domain >
>
> Extend Koji with a new feature that allows users to generate yum
> repositories of signed RPMs
On Út, 2015-12-01 at 11:15 +0100, Tomas Hozza wrote:
> You are not mistaken.
>
> This is the third time, because previously we rather moved the change to the
> next Fedora to bring better user experience. Every time there was something
> enhanced, since we learned a lot about user use-cases, so th
On 12/01/2015 10:02 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 1.12.2015 08:20, Dan Book wrote:
I have run into this before and it was very confusing, it really should be
a separate command from remove for when you actually want to remove what
dnf thinks is now "unused".
Maybe it would help if these auto-remov
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Koji Generates Repositories of Signed RPMs =
Change owner(s):
* Jay Greguske < jgregusk with the usual red hat domain >
Extend Koji with a new feature that allows users to generate yum
repositories of signed RPMs.
== Detailed Description ==
This is a significant
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1213155
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285176
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1213155
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285176
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204600
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285313
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
game update
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1213158
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121403
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hello,
a week ago I proposed a new release criterion for upgrading across two releases
(e.g. from F21 to F23 directly, skipping F22). As this was never officially
supported (even though users were probably unaware of this fact, because we
haven't discouraged it either), I'm gathering feedback f
Compose started at Tue Dec 1 05:15:02 UTC 2015
Broken deps for i386
--
[IQmol]
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_serialization.so.1.58.0
IQmol-2.3.0-9.fc24.i686 requires libboost_iostreams.so.1.58.0
IQmol-2.3.0
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 24 Rawhide 20151201. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
You are not mistaken.
This is the third time, because previously we rather moved the change to the
next Fedora to bring better user experience. Every time there was something
enhanced, since we learned a lot about user use-cases, so this is definitely
not the same change as before, only the root i
Hello Vit,
> On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 1:45 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > If I am not mistaken, this is at least 3rd time this change is proposed.
> Can somebody post some short summary what was changed, that you believe
> it will be successful this time?
True, it was postponed couple of times b
We are using RedHat Bugzilla to track all bugs which happens in DNF,
dnf-plugins-core, dnf-plugins-extras. So please choose right component
in https://bugzilla.redhat.com and file a bug. We will be happy to
help with it.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redh
http://dnf.readthedocs.org/en/latest/command_ref.html#autoremove-command-label
dnf autoremove will just remove dependencies which is not used by
another packages.
BTW you can ignore removing non-used packages for one transaction
using option --setopt=clean_requirements_on_remove=false
On Tue, De
If I am not mistaken, this is at least 3rd time this change is proposed.
Can somebody post some short summary what was changed, that you believe
it will be successful this time?
Thx
Vít
Dne 30.11.2015 v 17:14 Jan Kurik napsal(a):
> = Default Local DNS Resolver =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wik
On 1.12.2015 08:20, Dan Book wrote:
> I have run into this before and it was very confusing, it really should be
> a separate command from remove for when you actually want to remove what
> dnf thinks is now "unused".
Maybe it would help if these auto-removed packages are clearly marked as such
in
58 matches
Mail list logo
