https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2018/06/03/report-389-ds-base-1.4.0.9-20180602gitb0e0580.fc28.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2018-06-04
# Time: 15:00 UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net
Greetings testers!
We haven't met for a couple of weeks, and there are some active
discussions about release criteria,
On 6/2/2018 1:34 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The linux-igd package no longer builds against the latest libupnp
> package and upstream is dead so I'm going to retire it.
>
> To replace it I am packaging miniupnpd, which is strangely not in
> Fedora while the client tool, miniupnpc,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1581851
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Reply-0.42-4.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1581851
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Reply-0.42-5.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Do you have a use case for using ancient fedoras repos? What is better for
> you: to have ancient fedora repos or to have
> more architectures in Copr?
More arches for sure.
Even if multi-arch was not a consideration, it seems like a lot
Hi all,
The linux-igd package no longer builds against the latest libupnp package and
upstream is dead so I'm going to retire it.
To replace it I am packaging miniupnpd, which is strangely not in Fedora while the
client tool, miniupnpc, is packaged.
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Note that this is exactly why this is a F30 thing, to give us
> a chance to figure out how exactly to detect a failed boot.
>
> Also I would like to note that Windows has been doing more or
> less the same since Vista and it does not seem
On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 9:00 AM, John Florian wrote:
> Also, I'm entirely unclear on the scope. Is the affecting Fedora
> Workstation (GNOME) only or all spins? The proposal says Workstation
> but it doesn't explicitly exempt the others, unless I missed something.
> If it's confined to the
Chris Adams kirjoitti 31.05.2018 klo 20:09:
Once upon a time, Hans de Goede said:
On 31-05-18 15:08, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Hans de Goede said:
And for F30, single OS install we get:
1) grub menu not shown, 0 second timeout, no way to get to the menu
2) grub menu shown with 5
On 06/01/2018 12:10 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Michael Watters wrote:
>
>> What about users that don't use a graphical login manager? Personally I
>> *like* seeing boot messages so that I know what is going on.
>>
>> Having the menu available is also quite useful for booting into rescue
>> mode or
On 06/01/2018 03:07 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Hans de Goede writes:
>> 1) . . ., no way to get to the menu
> I think this steps over a line we should not cross.
>
> There's a huge difference between HIDING grub's functionality, and
> essentially DISABLING it. While I'm opposted to hiding the grub
Can the service that creates these notifications be improved to include
an excerpt of the problems that cause a build to fail?
[...]
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 23:37:57 + (UTC)
From: notifications fedoraproject org
Subject: claws-mail's builds started to fail in Fedora
I just saw that SSL pulse has data on TLS versions supported under the
"Protocol Support" section. It shows that 8.1% of all websites don't have TLS
1.2 support. Surely, this data is not weighted by real-world usage nor by how
it will affect people, but it does sort of speak against this
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 01:40:58PM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote:
> What is the availibility of TLS 1.2 vs 1.1/1.0 on the internet ?
> ie how likely is this to break the ability of users to access websites
> they care about ?
There is quite a lot, sadly. I'd say about 0.1…1% of all internet sites of
15 matches
Mail list logo
