On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 15:01:32 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> Well, isn't the rule is actually simpler than that: any package owning
> a directory owned by another package is broken.
It used to be like that, but nowadays the guidelines aren't that strict
anymore. See "multiple ownership" here:
On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 11:59:08 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> According to Kevin,
> this is a bug and should be fixed by having filesystem to own
> /usr/lib/debug (like /usr/src/debug), and also having packages only to
> own "their own" directories. Are saying that the current ownership is OK?
>
>
On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 11:57:54 +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> WRT subject: before I go to file a bug report I want to make sure I'm
> not exploiting something unsupported in rpmbuild.
>
> In a couple of rpms (for which we're also upstream and I'm managing
> them, so it's fairly easy fo
On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 10:44:27 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 02/15/2013 11:58 PM, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 10:50:28AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> >> - make a script to identify all the packages that are broken and
> >>shipping debug stuff.
> > AT least for the directory
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 13:03:50 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 02/14/2013 11:19 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:36:03 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> >
> >> Running some automated tests I stumble over the debug directories. E. g.,
> >>
&g
> Yeah, a test environment would be good.
Found a first one! EL6 with Openbox from EPEL. That one auto-spawns
g-s-d when running Audacious unpatched.
$ find /usr/share/dbus-1|grep Sett
/usr/share/dbus-1/services/org.gnome.SettingsDaemon.service
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 08:13:32 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > Could you tell me a test environment where auto-starting the daemon is
> > reproducible? Then I might take a look at trying to avoid it.
>
> It should be auto-started when your app pokes at the not-yet-spawned
> well-known D-Bus name.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:16:56 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> What I want is that "yum distro-sync" removes the package eventually.
Then it will need an "Obsoletes" tag somewhere else to get rid of any
installed CK packages.
"yum distro-sync" doesn't remove orphans. It only upgrades/downgrades
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 20:33:46 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> PS. Yes, I repeat this message. Looks like it wasn't sent somehow :(
As I had replied to the earlier message ;) here just a mention that
I've reported the mispackaged nacl-devel: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/911405
--
Fedora release 19 (Ra
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:35:23 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 03:49:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >>
> >>> DJ Delorie wrote:
> Disadvantage, if you ask me. First thing audacious did was spew
> random errors to the screen and change my Firefox and emacs cursors.
> >
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:36:03 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> Running some automated tests I stumble over the debug directories. E. g.,
>
> $ repoquery -qf /usr/lib/debug
>
> shows 45 owners on current F18. Other directories under /usr/lib/debug
> have a similar situation with many owners..
>
> I
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:28:57 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 10:53 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 03:49:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > > DJ Delorie wrote:
> > > > Disadvantage, if you ask me. First thing a
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 03:49:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> DJ Delorie wrote:
> > Disadvantage, if you ask me. First thing audacious did was spew
> > random errors to the screen and change my Firefox and emacs cursors.
>
> So I suspect that Audacious started gnome-settings-daemon.
It doesn't do t
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:21:41 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> While audacious can be made to look similar to xmms, it is not xmms,
True, and it doesn't try to duplicate XMMS anyway. It had only started as
a fork of BMP. From its description:
| Historically, it started as a fork of Beep Media Player
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:59:46 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> DJ Delorie wrote:
> > And now I have to restart my entire session to reset my gtk themes,
> > because of one rogue app. Thanks.
>
> You have other serious system issues not affiliated with Audacious if
> this is the case.
Hmmm, Au
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:15:07 -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> First thing audacious did was spew
> random errors to the screen and change my Firefox and emacs cursors.
Interesting, but here it has never done that before.
> Then it ask which of the most recent minecraft jar files I wanted to
> listen t
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:21:35 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 02/13/2013 04:26 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> >
> >> Hmm, we still have xmms in the repo?
> >
> > /me is very glad we still have xmms in the repo
>
> Have you tried using Audacious ? You can set it to
> classic mode, at which point
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:24:07 +0100, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> as an provenpackage I have introduced an upstream patch to Emacs
> and have create an update in bodhi. After ten days I have to recognize,
> that I'm unable to push this update to the stable repository because there
> is no 'm
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:47:50 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 00:26:28 +0100,
>Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >
> >Hmm, we still have xmms in the repo? Both Debian and Gentoo killed it
> >years ago... And I though those were the conservative distributions...
>
> I wanted t
n as you need more time and until the full show is ready to be built.
HTH
--
Michael Schwendt
Fedora release 19 (Rawhide) - Linux 3.8.0-0.rc6.git0.1.fc19.x86_64
loadavg: 0.68 0.52 0.35
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
4.2 emaldonado 02/05/2013
02/08/2013
nss-softokn-3.14.2-3.fc17 Required for updating to nss-3.14.2
emaldonado 02/05/2013 02/08/2013
nss-util-3.14.2-2.fc17 Required for updating to nss-3.14.2 emaldonado
02/05/2013 02/08/2013
Cc to emaldona
On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 09:13:33 -0700, Jerry James wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > Hmm, that makes it seem even more likely that upstream fat-fingered
> > something.
> >
> > Although: http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/glpk.html
> > does indicate that ABI has been
On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 19:54:23 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Looks like going from glpk 4.47 to 4.48 bumped the soname from
> libglpk.so.0 to libglpk.so.33. Something tells me this was not expected
> and is not correct. Can this be verified?
>
Could be an accident in the upstream tarball ind
,
--
Michael Schwendt
Fedora release 19 (Rawhide) - Linux 3.8.0-0.rc4.git5.1.fc19.x86_64
loadavg: 0.29 0.23 0.24
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:03:42 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> It looks as if the qemu source contains the one canonical copy of
> libcacard. The separate 'libcacard' package has the following sources
> file:
>
> $ cat sources
> 189bc5b87281a72f8c72a0f7ebaa6d00 qemu-1.2.1.tar.bz2
>
> So prob
Just forwarding, because I've had a look:
The final one for today. ;)
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:37:43 +0200, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> unhide -- Tool to find hidden processes and TCP/UDP ports from rootkits
Sounds interesting, didn't knew that one.
Project site tells rkhunter uses it:
$ repoquery
e maintainers are also
actively taking care of the corresponding Fedora packages.
Regards,
--
Michael Schwendt
Fedora release 19 (Rawhide) - Linux 3.8.0-0.rc4.git5.1.fc19.x86_64
loadavg: 0.00 0.06 0.11
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Just forwarding, because I've had a look:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:37:43 +0200, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> enet -- Thin, simple and robust network layer on top of UDP
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/enet
There have been a few upstream releases.
There are three co-maintainers for this already.
$ repoque
Just forwarding, because I've had a look:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:37:43 +0200, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> uriparser -- URI parsing library - RFC 3986
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/uriparser
There's an open ticket requesting an upgrade, claiming that the current
release in Fedora is more than three y
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 23:56:50 -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > cpptest -- A portable and powerful and simple unit testing framework for C++
>
>
> I'll take this one.
Only "uriparser" uses it currently.
And there's an 1.1.2 upstream release, too.
--
Fedora release 19 (Rawhide) - Linux 3.8.0-0.rc4.g
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:20:03 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 07:47:26PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 07:44:19PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > Affected packages:
> > >
> > > - libcacard
> > > - qemu
> >
> > I have kicked off rebu
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 18:15:55 +0100, Mario Blättermann wrote:
> due to lack of time I will orphaning all my packages. Most of them I
> haven't used for a while anyway. Here's a full list:
> gtk-solidity-engine -- Solidity Gtk+ theming engine
As one of the recently approved new packages, it has en
On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:44:43 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> As mentioned in the FUDCon kernel talk, we are trying to figure out
> exactly what causes the massive slowdown for some people with debug
> kernels. At this point, debug is completely off in the rawhide kernel.
> Every update this week
On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:13:09 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 23.1.2013 21:04, Bruno Wolff III napsal(a):
> > One possiblity here would be to create a special package that
> > obsoletes all of the dropped packages from the last release (or two
> > depending on how far back you want to yum update
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 11:41:09 +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There is some stall with the review of pg_journal:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856560
> which is journal-logging add-on for PostgreSQL.
> I've addresed all the issues and upstream is really helpful, but
> th
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:11:39 +0100, Haïkel Guémar wrote:
> I think there's no problem for doing informal reviews, as long as your
> review is ok, the sponsor could just approve it.
Yes, there is no "sponsor must be the first reviewer" rule.
Anyone can post feedback to review requests. Only the s
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:30:04 +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> I would like to help this poor soul get his package into Fedora:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
>
> (adobe-source-code-pro-fonts)
>
> I'm a packager but no sponsor, he's no packager (so needs a sponsor).
> It'
How to reach the package maintainers?
[...]
Begin forwarded message:
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797838
gtk3-3.6.4-1.fc18.i686 conflicts with file from package
gtk2-immodules-2.24.13-1.fc18.i686
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.f
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:10:06 -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> I see that Gnome's lock screen now shows a pretty clock, after the display
> wakes up, that must be "swiped" away in order to unlock the desktop.
I just hit "Enter" or "Return" to achieve the same.
--
Fedora release 18 (Spherical Co
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:52:26 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 18:14 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > Well, I am very opposed to silent makerules.
> >
> > I like them. :-) By the way, CMake has had them for way longer than the
> > autotools and they have
On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 11:44:29 +0100, Adrian Reber wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 08:22:18PM +0100, Adrian Reber wrote:
> > Some weeks ago libcdio 0.90 has been released. In addition to the
> > libcdio-0.90 release there have been parts split off into a separate
> > package called libcdio-paranoia.
On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 15:42:47 +0800, Robin Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You can send a mail to the maintainer directly. You can find his/her Email
> address[1] in RPM changelog.
Hmmm... mailing the previous/last maintainer may be fruitful, but reason
for retiring a package could have been that the maintai
On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 19:42:02 +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FrequentlyMadeMistakes
Could somebody with "Edit" access for this page please add it to
category PackageMaintainers? Then it would appear on the main page
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package
On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 20:20:25 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 2012-12-29 19:45, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 18:23:35 +, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
> >
> >> I've seen on a few occasions reviewers mention that they can't tell what
> >>
On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 18:23:35 +, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
> I've seen on a few occasions reviewers mention that they can't tell what
> has changed in the spec since the previous version, as the new packager
> has overwritten the previous spec.
If the packager does that, it makes the rpmdev-diff c
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 09:48:45 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> > Continue talking to the other people,
>
> [snip]
>
>
> Yes, this is the correct action. But it's hard to talk to people if
> they don't reply at all or not in a meaningful way. I'm not talking
> about reviews making progress, poss
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 06:55:01 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> As I understand it, we have a policy handling unresponsive submitters or
> reviewers. However, there is a third case when the complete process is
> stalled.
>
> The situation then becomes problematic if the stalled process handles a
> pa
On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:55:15 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 12/07/2012 07:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >
> > Are there other obsoleted packages in the F18 repo?
>
> Here's what I see on F18, it's quite a pile:
>
> qxmpp-dev-0.6.3.1-1.fc18.i686
> qxmpp-dev-0.6.3.1-1.fc18.x86_64
> qxmpp-dev-
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:47:09 +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
> What is truly amazing is that the submitter was FE-NEEDSPONSOR the whole
> time. Kudos
Not really. It has been the submitter's only package review request.
Possibly without a request to become a co-maintainer of other packages
in the Fed
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 10:15:39 +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> FYI:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188542
>
> This package review has been submitted more then six years ago. With
> more then 150 comments in BZ. And now finally get accepted into Fedora.
> I would like to thanks Lee fo
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:21:43 +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> I can only say that at
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
> 23 steps are shown under "Becoming a Fedora Package Collection Maintainer".
>
> Some of them are technical and more or less unavoidable (
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 12:55:37 -0600, inode0 wrote:
> My recommendation at this point is to guarantee the announcement will
> go to the main announce list. You can be sure you will get it if you
> subscribe to that. We will also announce it all over the place as we
> always do, on various mailing li
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:33:33 -0600, inode0 wrote:
> >> Looks like it was sent to the devel list as well.
> >>
> >> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-December/174779.html
> >
> > 417 messages in December so far! Too easy to miss the announcement,
> > if one doesn't pay attention t
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:59:03 -0600, inode0 wrote:
> Looks like it was sent to the devel list as well.
>
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-December/174779.html
417 messages in December so far! Too easy to miss the announcement,
if one doesn't pay attention to that list for so
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:28:22 +, Ian Malone wrote:
> >> > > I think this is not good - every contributor should be subscribed
> >> > > to
> >> > > announce list (with cla_done).
> >> >
> >> > So you're blaming people who didn't recieve the email they expected
> >> > on
> >> > devel-announce@ fo
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:20:55 -0500 (EST), Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > >
> > > I think this is not good - every contributor should be subscribed
> > > to
> > > announce list (with cla_done).
> >
> > So you're blaming people who didn't recieve the email they expected
> > on
> > devel-announce@ for
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 06:50:59 -0800, Brian C. Lane wrote:
> I just saw the Fedora election results, and was surprised to learn there
> had been an election. After some digging I figured out what happened.
>
> Robyn sends her announce emails to: announce@, devel-announce@,
> test-announce@
>
> I s
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 17:07:37 +0100, Kai Engert wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-12-09 at 16:49 +0100, Kai Engert wrote:
> > In September, Ryan expressed interest to resurrect the pdfedit package,
> > but I couldn't find follow-up messages nor koji builds.
> >
> > I made a patch to fix the build, see
> > h
On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:55:18 +0200, Brendan Jones wrote:
> On 06/01/2012 03:24 PM, Jameson wrote:
> > Unfortunately, I'm no longer in a position to maintain the projectM
> > packages (libprojectM, libprojectM-qt, projectM-jack,
> > projectM-libvisual, and projectM-pulseaudio), so I will need to or
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:43:48 +0100, I wrote:
> 2011-06-23 : FTBFS not responded to
> 2010-06-30 : -static packaging bug not responded to
>
> Plus, release 0.89 from 20-May-2011 is available whereas Fedora contains
> 0.84 from 2010 ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/courier/files/cone/ ).
>
> This
On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 11:46:49 -0500, Ralph Bean wrote:
> > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/SOURCE-RPM-NAME
> > e.g.
> > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/gnome-packagekit
> I introduced the switch-over as per this ticket
> https://fedorahosted.org/fedoracommunity/ticket/381
Waiting for fedorahosted.
There used to be
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/SOURCE-RPM-NAME
e.g.
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/gnome-packagekit
Whoever has installed the new non-working software on that server,
could it be replaced with the previous version again, please?
The pages don't want to load successfully anymor
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012 23:50:15 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> Wouldn't it already help if the build system would just refuse to
> build newer versions in branches than which are in rawhide at that
> moment?
That would be dangerous with regard to security fixes, for example.
Rawhide buildroot contents
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:21:04 +0200, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 12:39:46 +
> Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
>
> > [freeglut]
> > freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.i686 requires libGLU-devel
> > freeglut-devel-2.8.0-7.fc19.x86_64 requires libGLU-devel
>
> Hello,
> freeglut is m
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 23:04:14 +0200 (CEST), Martin Gansser wrote:
> -- checking for module 'sqlite3'
> -- package 'sqlite3' not found
> CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:46 (MESSAGE):
> sqlite3 not found!
> -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred!
>
> sqlite and sqlite-devel are installed, a local r
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:06:36 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> ->
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-13308/jack-audio-connection-kit-1.9.8-11.fc18
> -> in updates-testing only
I've requested a buildroot override for this one as a temporary fix:
$ koji wa
DEBUG util.py:257: Error: Package:
jack-audio-connection-kit-1.9.8-10.fc18.x86_64 (build)
DEBUG util.py:257: Requires: libfreebob.so.0()(64bit)
:-( This is unacceptable! Please avoid breaking the koji buildroot like
this. You could have rebuilt jack-audio-connection-kit prior to rem
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 15:51:04 +0200 (CEST), Martin Gansser wrote:
> hmm, the question is, in which file do i add the '-lgdk_pixbuf-2.0' linker
> option ?
> thanks
> Martin
The one that creates/links the main executable. ;)
For a clean fix, intimate familiarity with CMake may be necessary, but
this
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:15:40 +0200 (CEST), Martin Gansser wrote:
>
> trying to build guayadeque on Fedora 18 Alpha, but this fails with the
> following error message:
>
> Linking CXX executable guayadeque
> [...] -o guayadeque -rdynamic -pthread -Wl,-z,relro -lwx_baseu-2.8
> -lwx_gtk2u_core-2.8
> Package txt2man (fails to build)
Fixed.
Everything needed to fix it was in the f15 branch, whereas master was
older and incomplete and had failed to build for f16 already.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> Package qtparted (fails to build)
H...
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/qtparted
750566 Fedora new qtparted won't install because it is from F15 and
requires libparted.so.0, and F16 has so.1
802782 Fedora new qtparted fails to install due to missing dependency
715847 Fedora new
> Package audtty (fails to build)
Fixed (as this has been spotted on Dennis' list a few days ago already).
--
Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.4.6-2.fc17.x86_64
loadavg: 0.14 0.13 0.24
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listin
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 09:54:03 +0200, 80 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> libgtksourceviewmm can be safely (?) dropped since it is no more
> actively maintained and all packages i'm aware of that relied on it
> moved to newer gtksourceviewmm{,3} packages (repoquery didn't find any
> other packages relying on it)
>
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 19:01:48 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> can someone tell me what is wrong with wyrd?
>
> build.log says
> (http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8809/4318809/build.log):
> | ocaml version is 4.00.0+beta2
> | ocaml library path is /usr/lib/ocaml
> | configure: erro
The following three have been orphaned in pkgdb today, which makes it
possible to grab ownership:
archmage -- Extensible reader/decompiler of files in CHM format
gtick -- A graphical metronome software
python-chm -- Python package for CHM files handling
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:09:27 +0400, Fl@sh wrote:
> > The bug report is almost completely incomprehensible. I'm not
> > surprised the maintainer is ignoring it.
> >
> > Rich.
> >
> Not too difficult for maintainer to see these lines and see
> the difference in exactly four brackets ;)
> This ma
Anyone with interest in package "echoping"? It's been unmaintained since 2008
and I really don't understand how it could survive so far.
| Echoping is a small program to test (approximatively) performances of a
| remote host by sending TCP "echo" (or other protocol, such as HTTP)
| packets.
http:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:51:24 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Before we branch for Fedora 18, as is custom, we will block currently
> orphaned packages and packages that have failed to build since Fedora 16.
>
> The following packages are currently orphaned, or fail to build. If
> you have a need
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 08:34:46 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
> > The Original post was simply letting everyone know that upstream
> > changed their license. If you have an issue with that, they would be
> > the ones to address it, not anyone here in Fedora land.
>
> Technically, if upstream bung
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:31:43 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Look at it this way: it's the *project* which is in the exposed,
> dangerous position, not the contributors. You're arguing it almost the
> opposite way.
That must be a misunderstanding. Perhaps as a result of reading too quickly.
I've
Forwarding this message as it had devel list in "To:" but has not shown up
in the list archives yet (likely because sender is not subscribed):
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:42:17 -0700, Rangeen Basu Roy Chowdhury wrote:
> Hi Michael
>
> You can say that I have given up contributing to Fedora for a whil
After running into a run-time crash (due to a missing dep) in package
"archmage" almost two months ago, with the packager not responding,
I've discovered that the same packager's
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/sherry151
other tickets still wait for responses, too. There ar
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:57:21 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Do you think a few more verdicts like that will influence small FLOSS
> > projects? In that they will not apply proposed fixes "faster, faster,
> > faster",
>
> You complained no one here was a lawyer and any residual changes would be
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:33:26 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Please consider that in the Oracle vs Google case, Oracle ended up with
> 9-line copying (plus a few test files), and the judge decided that *as*
> *a* *matter* *of* *law* copyright infringement had occurred for those 9
> lines.
>
> htt
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 20:30:16 +0200, Haïkel Guémar wrote:
> Le 10/07/2012 19:38, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> > python-flask
> > python-werkzeug
> >
> >
>
> I actively maintain these two (i pushed Flask 0.8.1 last week, 0.9 will
> land rawhide soon) as a co-maintainer.
> As a matter of fact, I wou
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 14:20:32 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> Can you stop the useless hyperbole ?
Sure, can the useless generalization and pedantry stop, too?
> The reason why nobody is telling you a hard rule is that there are no
> hard rules, but often it will be decided on case by case basis.
He
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:19:09 -0400, Seth Johnson wrote:
> Copyright is automatic under Berne.
Which only means that you don't need to apply for copyright at any
government office.
But copyright on _what_? What comprises a "copyright work"? Single words?
Single lines of code? Trivial/obvious code
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:52:19 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:45:15PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:57:31 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > > Saying things like:
> > >
> > > "and arbitrary
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:57:31 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Saying things like:
>
> "and arbitrary other people, who get their patch contributions merged,
> don't gain any copyright protection on the file or the proper parts of
> it,"
>
> is inaccurate and dangerous. It's entirely appropriate
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:57:52 -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> On 07/10/2012 05:22 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > This may be another chance for smartasses to jump in with general legal
> > pedantry, but I don't consider that helpful.
>
> All accurate legal interpretations
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:03:02 + (UTC), Petr Pisar wrote:
> > Have you had your name and a copyright statement in any source file?
>
> Obviously not. I just remember some patches into plugins and they have
> been removed probably.
The plugins are a different source package and a different Fedo
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:00:50 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:30:50 -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
>
> > What if the main creators of the software prefer acknowledging substantial
> > contributions with proper attribution and copyright notice in the file
> > preambles?
>
>
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:15:19 +0200, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 13:10:48 + (UTC), Petr Pisar wrote:
>
> > How could they have changed the license without asking contributors?
> > I have periodically translated the messages, I believe I have some
> > patches there and n
On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 18:13:29 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=837901
> >
> > has requested boost static libraries be shipped as multilib so that they
> > can be used with "gcc -m32".
> >
> > We historically haven't done this for
On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:30:50 -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 03:21 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> and arbitrary other people, who get their patch contributions merged,
> >> > don't gain any copyright protection on the file or the proper parts of
> >> > it,
> > I don't think this is tr
On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:51:09 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > Transaction Check Error:
> >file /usr/include/db.h conflicts between attempted installs of
> > db4-devel-4.8.30-10.fc18.x86_64 and libdb-devel-5.3.15-3.fc18.x86_64
> >file /usr/include/db_185.h conflicts between attempted insta
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 20:52:23 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 09:47:40PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > Without proper attribution, e.g. in a commit message [of the merge done by
> > a _different_ person] or in the preamble or inline, wit
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 15:36:25 -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> It's certainly possible for contributions to be so minor that they gain
> no copyright.
I _do_ _not_ _know_ about what level of contributions we talk to. Whether
they have been one-line fixes of bugs or typos, dozens of lines, or even
e
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 20:21:02 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 09:17:02PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > and arbitrary other people, who get their patch contributions merged,
> > don't gain any copyright protection on the file or the proper pa
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 14:17:09 -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> For a point of accuracy—
Or not. ;-)
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > Have you had your name and a copyright statement in any source file?
> > To highlight that you've been the [
801 - 900 of 1479 matches
Mail list logo
