Re: Another great update

Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 01:49 +0100 schrieb Michał Piotrowski: Let's consider a situation - I'm developing a project in php 5.2. This project might work fine on php 5.3 - I don't know I didn't tested it yet. I'm depending on 5.2 version. Testing this code for a new php will take some time.

Re: Another great update

Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 12:18 +0200 schrieb Debarshi Ray: Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend the time to make a system update to F12. All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository. eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is used

Re: Update question: some user data

My basic point here is that the poll, while imperfect, is the best indication we have available so far. So? From a scientific process perspective, bad data is bad data. And if all you have is bad data, then you really have no data at all. From a social science point of view (and the

Re: Update question: some user data

Am Montag, den 08.03.2010, 12:34 -0500 schrieb Will Woods: Our current users' expectations are already set by their past experience with Fedora. If they're still Fedora users, they're willing to accept - and *have* accepted - whatever we're currently doing. +1 Amen. Therefore we should be

Re: Orphaned taglib

Am Mittwoch, den 10.03.2010, 00:09 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: I've orphaned taglib in response to the hostilities found in the FESCo meeting log. Most likely Rex Dieter will pick it up, but I want to let the list know as there are other dependencies on it. Hm, I could find anything

Re: Orphaned taglib

Am Mittwoch, den 10.03.2010, 00:46 + schrieb Peter Boy: Am Mittwoch, den 10.03.2010, 00:09 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: I've orphaned taglib in response to the hostilities found in the FESCo meeting log. Most likely Rex Dieter will pick it up, but I want to let the list know

Re: Orphaned taglib

Am Dienstag, den 09.03.2010, 18:46 -0600 schrieb Mike McGrath: On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Michael Schwendt wrote: I've orphaned taglib in response to the hostilities found in the FESCo meeting log. Most likely Rex Dieter will pick it up, but I want to let the list know as there are other

Re: Meeting summary/minutes for 2010-03-09 FESCo meeting

There are nearly no facts, so everyone is just guessing and many people are just ignoring objections. That is true, indeed. But do we really need detailed statistics to make a good decision? All of us have an experience with Fedora over the last years. And I *guess* ( :-) ) most or even

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

Am Freitag, den 12.03.2010, 15:31 -0600 schrieb Matthew Woehlke: Thomas Janssen wrote: I have read all this mega-threads and i haven't found just a single argument why it's good for Fedora to change away from what we are. +10 to that! Indeed!! -- devel mailing list

Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

Am Sonntag, den 14.03.2010, 19:33 +0100 schrieb Mathieu Bridon: Some others arrive and say hi, their first update (the 300MB one you get when installing 2 months after release) breaks something, they leave (some will not even finish downloading such a huge amount and leave). Finally, even

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

Hi Martin, Am Donnerstag, den 31.01.2013, 13:28 +0100 schrieb Martin Sourada: Also, since Apache took over OpenOffice.org and put it out of incubation, it seems the development has been progressing rather well and in a different direction than LibreOffice. While both started from the same

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

Am Montag, den 04.02.2013, 13:34 +0100 schrieb Michael Stahl: how exactly does LibreOffice depend on OpenOffice, and what do you mean by OpenOffice in this context? As I understood the discussion at Linux Day last year the LibreOffice rebase is not only about changing Licence headers but

Re: tomcat-native orphaned

lorenzo.dal...@gmail.com wrote: Taken. :) Is there really a need for it? Given that tomcat has good support for java keystore, even keystores with poorly passphrased keys, is there really a need for this package? — Dr. Peter Boy Universität Bremen Mary-Somerville-Str. 5 28359 Bremen Germany p

Re: Orphaning/retiring 3 Java packages

email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedorap

Re: Announcement: EPEL Steering Committee Changes

Whether modularity is good news or a nightmare, it is a fact in EL 8. Troy obviously being familiar with it might be the best to make it work as smooth as possible. Besides I remember him as very supportive from Scientific Linux (sadly gone with EL8)so I'd appreciate it. — Dr. Peter Boy Univers

Re: The Future of the Java Stack (also regarding ELN and RHEL)

> Am 09.09.2020 um 11:28 schrieb Guido Aulisi : > IMHO we could package only the JDK and let the user use Java software > directly from upstream. > Usually upstream means Apache, which is a trusted source, and Java users are > smart enough to manage the Java packages. > I usuali do so when

Re: Why lxd is not included in Fedora?

> Am 03.08.2020 um 01:13 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen : > > On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 18:45, Sergio Belkin wrote: >> >> Hi! >> Just out of curiosity, why is lxd not included in Fedora? >> Thanks in advance! >> > > A quick review of the development mailing lists sees the last person > mentioning

Fedora 33 network configuration (ifcfg*) migration guide available?

With Fedora 33 network configuration is by default persisted in /etc/NetworkManager/system-connections/*.nmconnection files. The old /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg* files are „legacy“. They are still being processed for the time being, but obviously it is time to migrate. (cf

Re: [Help wanted] Setting vi/view/vim via alternatives

> Am 30.01.2021 um 15:58 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > : > > On 29.01.2021 09:49, Zdenek Dohnal wrote: >> I'm currently trying to rewrite the current shell aliases for making >> Vi/View/Vim use the correct compiled binary based on which Vim package >> is installed. > > Alternatives are

Re: [Help wanted] Setting vi/view/vim via alternatives

> Am 30.01.2021 um 19:41 schrieb Fabio Valentini : > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 7:24 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> >>> Am 30.01.2021 um 17:45 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel >>> : >>> >>> On 30.01.2021 16:58, Peter Boy wrote:

Re: [Help wanted] Setting vi/view/vim via alternatives

> Am 30.01.2021 um 17:45 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > : > > On 30.01.2021 16:58, Peter Boy wrote: >> But it’s perfectly usable for Fedora Workstation or Server and almost >> indispensable for some development projects, e.g. Java (and vi/vim for a >> ter

Re: x86_64-v2 in Fedora

> Am 16.06.2021 um 13:47 schrieb Björn Persson : > But I'm already planning to reinstall that one with Debian, > ... so it won't hurt me > if Fedora stops working there. Do we really want to recommend this to our users? The ability to continue using ‚mature', functional hardware was

Re: x86_64-v2 in Fedora

> Am 16.06.2021 um 14:16 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen : > > > > … > feel comfortable using. People in academia usually have tight capex budgets ++1 As an example, we have still to use as a server for production > [root@hydra ~]# cat /proc/cpuinfo > processor : 0 > vendor_id :

Re: F35 Change: Drop the the "Allow SSH root login with password" option from the installer GUI (Self-Contained Change proposal)

> Am 12.05.2021 um 22:35 schrieb Ben Cotton : > > == Summary == > Since 2019 the Anaconda installer GUI hosted an option called "Allow > SSH root login with password", that made it possible to enable > password based root logins over SSH on the installed system. ... And > after two years of

Re: Self Introduction Sergei Petrosian

gt; 17:00 UTC is 7 pm for me. Let me know if I can help in some other way, e.g. > via emails or something. > > Thank you for the invitation, > > Best regards > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:43 PM Peter Boy wrote: > Hi, > > welcome to Fedora. I would like to invit

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 26.05.2021 um 08:51 schrieb Chris Murphy : > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 5:52 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >>> Am 25.05.2021 um 23:20 schrieb Neal Gompa : >>> Cloud images never had such separation. It was always one big ext4 >>> partition.

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 28.05.2021 um 11:43 schrieb Neal Gompa : > > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 3:45 AM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> Nevertheless, coordination and cooperation is at least very desirable (in >> fact, indispensable). And is is not just about who is paying the bills. &g

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 28.05.2021 um 23:08 schrieb Chris Murphy : > >> …… > > All I mean by this is to push back on the idea that the proposal for > Cloud translates into delaying the decision for Server by 5 or 10 > years. Not that Server folks should escalate their discussion. What I originally meant was

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 02.06.2021 um 03:09 schrieb Michel Alexandre Salim via devel > : > > On Mon, 2021-05-31 at 15:19 +0200, Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >>> Am 28.05.2021 um 23:08 schrieb Chris Murphy < >>> li...@colorremedies.com>: >>> >>

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 27.05.2021 um 00:59 schrieb Chris Murphy : > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 5:30 AM Peter Boy wrote: > ... > Whereupon Server SIG/WG perform an evaluation of Btrfs for their use > cases, and decide Btrfs should be the default in a compelling manner, > FESCo will approve i

Re: Tomcat Package Changes in Rawhide

Please, could you re-include the logrotate config file. It is useful independently from the jsvc package and does not harm. Thanks Peter > Am 04.06.2021 um 13:46 schrieb Coty Sutherland : > 3) I've removed the tomcat-jsvc subpackage from the distribution as it isn't > very useful either.

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> > Am 25.05.2021 um 19:03 schrieb Ben Cotton >: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FedoraCloudBtrfsByDefault > > == Summary == > > For cloud installs of Fedora, we want to provide advanced file system > features to users in a transparent fashion. Thus, we

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 25.05.2021 um 21:56 schrieb Neal Gompa : > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 3:52 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> Am 25.05.2021 um 19:03 schrieb Ben Cotton : >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FedoraCloudBtrfsByDefault >> >> T

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 25.05.2021 um 23:20 schrieb Neal Gompa : > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 5:05 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> As to my knowledge it’s not about space (there is no difference in this >> respect), it's about strikt separation of system and user data, conta

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 25.05.2021 um 23:33 schrieb przemek klosowski via devel > : > > > > On 5/25/21 5:04 PM, Peter Boy wrote: >>> So the same model works totally fine for both desktop and server. >>> >> I myself lack the exact technical knowledge, but (all?)

Re: F35 Change: Make btrfs the default file system for Fedora Cloud (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 03.06.2021 um 15:35 schrieb Dusty Mabe : > > > > On 6/2/21 5:28 AM, Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> >> very nicely put. According to Matthew and others cloud wg did virtually not >> exist for more than a year, no meetings, silence on m

Re: Take the new Annual Fedora Contributor Survey

> Am 03.06.2021 um 20:00 schrieb Bruno Wolff III : > > Given that badges are being handed out, it is clear the survey is not > anonymous. > > People that do surveys love to claim they are anonymous when they aren't, to > increase the response. When you are collecting detailed information

Re: Intention to dropping the the "Allow SSH root login with password" option from the installer GUI

> Am 29.04.2021 um 22:09 schrieb Martin Kolman : > > Hi! > At the moment the Anaconda installer used by Fedora contains an option > called "Allow SSH root login with password" on the root password > configuration screen. > ... > Note that the checkbox is not ticked by default, the user needs to

Re: Self Introduction Sergei Petrosian

Hi, welcome to Fedora. I would like to invite you to join the Fedora Server Working Group. Ansible is supposed to be one of the focal points in the near future to simplify various maintenance and installation tasks. We meet every Wednesday, 17:00 UTC #fedora-meeting or server mailing list.

Re: Fedora 33 network configuration (ifcfg*) migration guide available?

> Am 27.01.2021 um 13:56 schrieb Robert Marcano via devel > : > > On 1/25/21 5:53 AM, Peter Boy wrote: >> With Fedora 33 network configuration is by default persisted in >> /etc/NetworkManager/system-connections/*.nmconnection files. The old >> /etc/sysconfi

Re: Fedora 33 network configuration (ifcfg*) migration guide available?

> Am 27.01.2021 um 13:18 schrieb Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski > : > > On Wednesday, 27 January 2021 at 13:11, Arthur G wrote: >> Too bad NetworkManager persists with the old MS-DOS "INI" file format for >> it's configuration files. At least network-scripts was bash script friendly. > > You

Re: [dns-sig] split-DNS, resolvconf on Fedora

> Am 24.02.2021 um 18:18 schrieb Paul Wouters : > > On Mon, 22 Feb 2021, Petr Menšík wrote: > >> Wouldn't it be much simpler, if I could just dnf remove systemd-resolved >> in case I don't want it? > > …. > There is no technical reason why this is not in its own package. There > has been

Re: systemd-resolved fallback DNS servers: usability vs. GDPR

> Am 24.02.2021 um 20:19 schrieb Lennart Poettering : > > On Mi, 24.02.21 12:49, Paul Wouters (p...@nohats.ca) wrote: > > > I think the caching and DoT stuff that resolved provides is useful on > any system, and that includes servers, and I think it would be good to > minimize the difference

Re: New maintainer experience

> Am 18.08.2021 um 13:32 schrieb Iago Rubio : > > Hi all, > > Following my messages on the "The Death of Java Packages" thread on > this list(1), Ankur Shina suggested to me to give a go at being a > package maintainer and let the mailing list know how it goes. > > If you find this thread

Re: F35 3x slower boot than F34

> Am 05.09.2021 um 14:40 schrieb Nico Kadel-Garcia : > > On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 4:10 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > wrote: >> >> On 05/09/2021 09:19, Peter Boy wrote: >>> Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years >>>

Re: per-package selinux policies [was Re: F35 3x slower boot than F34]

> Am 05.09.2021 um 17:59 schrieb Matthew Miller : > > On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 09:19:20AM +0200, Peter Boy wrote: >> I think it is urgent that Fedora Council starts an initiative here (and I >> would not hesitate to contribute, not just ask others to do something). > &g

Re: F35 3x slower boot than F34

> Am 05.09.2021 um 15:07 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen : > > On Sun, 5 Sept 2021 at 07:12, Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> >>> ... >> >> I watch Distrowatch in an occasional way. It is certainly not the most >> reliable indicator, unquestioni

Re: libvirt and systemd-resolved integration?

Hi all, I’m working on an update of the Fedora Server virtlib documentation (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-server/virtualization-install/), specifically the part about the DNS configration. I would like to include and integrate the solutions presented in this thread by Daniel

Re: Re-Launching the Java SIG

> Am 13.09.2021 um 15:41 schrieb Jhordy M. Caceres Guerra > : > > Hello! > > I'm new here, but I would like to be part of this group, I have a little > knowledge of Java and I think I can be helpful for the group's goals. > > Note: I know this thread is old, but I didn't know how to join

Re: libvirt and systemd-resolved integration?

> Am 15.09.2021 um 19:22 schrieb Petr Menšík : Many thanks for your information. They were very helpful. I got (almost) everything working with your (and Daniel's) information. > On 9/10/21 4:57 PM, Peter Boy wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> ... >> The main c

Re: libvirt and systemd-resolved integration?

> Am 10.09.2021 um 17:22 schrieb Daniel P. Berrangé : > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 04:57:56PM +0200, Peter Boy wrote: >> (a) === Installing libvirt-nss. (Daniel Berrange) === >> >> I did the following >> >> 1. dnf install libvirt-nss >> >&

Re: F35 3x slower boot than F34

> Am 05.09.2021 um 09:32 schrieb Samuel Sieb : > > On 2021-09-05 12:19 a.m., Peter Boy wrote: >> Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years and >> the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among >> distributions.

Re: F35 3x slower boot than F34

> Am 05.09.2021 um 10:09 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > : > > On 05/09/2021 09:19, Peter Boy wrote: >> Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years and >> the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among >> distribu

Re: F35 3x slower boot than F34

> Am 05.09.2021 um 00:28 schrieb Sam Varshavchik : > > Miroslav Suchý writes: > >> Dne 04. 09. 21 v 17:28 Sam Varshavchik napsal(a): >>> Are you a package maintainer? Ok: please write an selinux policy for your >>> package. Let me know when that's done. >> >>

Re: Fedora Maven? [was: Re: Fedora ? Java: The Death of Two SIGs]

> Am 08.10.2021 um 02:06 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel > : > > Michal Srb wrote: >> Unlike RPM repositories, Maven repositories can easily hold multiple >> versions of libraries. ... > > And that is actually a problem rather than a solution. Maven artifacts are > basically write once only.

Re: Fedora Maven? [was: Re: Fedora ? Java: The Death of Two SIGs]

> Am 08.10.2021 um 14:08 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel > : > > Peter Boy wrote: >> A valid point, but only in case the app that consumes the maven artefact >> in unmaintained. > > Many applications are maintained and never (or very rarely, only whe

Re: Fedora Maven? [was: Re: Fedora ? Java: The Death of Two SIGs]

> Am 06.10.2021 um 14:37 schrieb Mikolaj Izdebski : > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:50 PM Matthew Miller > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 03:09:08PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote: >>> I'm not sure what's the best solution, but I guess the number one >>> reason to have packages within the

Re: Fedora minimum hardware requirements

> Am 14.10.2021 um 17:24 schrieb Michal Schorm : > > Sigh, it is useless to search for Fedora documentation on google ... > anything but _current_ Docs will be found. Welcome to the club. This has been a nuisance for a long time. I have made several attempts, but so far without response.

Re: Package owner required for ImageMagick

> Am 15.10.2021 um 06:17 schrieb Neal Gompa : > > you'll probably want to look at is upgrading it to ImageMagick 7.x. > ImageMagick 6.x is not maintained upstream as far as I can tell. https://imagemagick.org/index.php: "We continue to maintain the legacy release of ImageMagick, version 6, at

Re: Fedora Maven? [was: Re: Fedora ? Java: The Death of Two SIGs]

> Am 08.10.2021 um 14:11 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel > : > > Mario Torre wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 2:11 AM Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: >>> And that is actually a problem rather than a solution. Maven artifacts >>> are basically write once only. Everything depends on a hardcoded

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 27.09.2021 um 12:30 schrieb Fabio Valentini : > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 12:19 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> >>> Am 27.09.2021 um 11:13 schrieb Pierre-Yves Chibon : >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:57:12AM +0200, Peter Bo

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 29.09.2021 um 22:13 schrieb Karlis K. : > > This: > https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item=Fedora-Java-Rough-Shape > > Brought my attention, what can be done to help? I take it as a question how to contribute to Fedora Java. In the end, I guess, we will need to find a group

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 29.09.2021 um 13:57 schrieb Fabio Valentini : > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:49 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: >> >> On 26. 09. 21 21:20, Fabio Valentini wrote: >>> Should the @java-maint-sig group be removed from any packages it is >>> still associated with? Should it be dissolved, and members be

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

We had a spirited and detailed discussion so far. But nevertheless, I think we are none the wiser at the moment. We have many informative contributions to the discussion and analyses of the situation. However, we lack concepts on how to proceed after removing java-maint-sig. What

Re: Fedora Maven? [was: Re: Fedora ? Java: The Death of Two SIGs]

> Am 06.10.2021 um 07:08 schrieb Michal Srb >: > > Hi folks, > > @Matthew Miller Are you still trying to save Fedora from packaging the ocean? > :) > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 9:10 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:49 PM Matthew Miller > wrote:

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 06.10.2021 um 17:04 schrieb Mikolaj Izdebski : > > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 1:27 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> >>> Am 04.10.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Mikolaj Izdebski : >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:08 PM Peter Boy wrote: >>&

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

hose issues cannot get worked out as a one-man show, I guess. What else really interests me: The "java-maint-sig" will be removed soon. Then you are really completely content with the Fedora Java world? No change? No preferrable improvement anywhere? Best Peter — Dr. Peter

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 04.10.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Mikolaj Izdebski : > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:08 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> However, we lack concepts on how to proceed after removing java-maint-sig. >> What consequences do we draw from the analyses? > > … If you want > to im

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 05.10.2021 um 14:56 schrieb Stephen Snow : > > Hello, > > (snip) > > So are the meetings being held with the java-sig? When are they? All of > us interested java community members should attend I think if we want > to offer an opinion or even just have something to say. If you search

Re: Fedora Maven? [was: Re: Fedora ? Java: The Death of Two SIGs]

> Am 04.10.2021 um 21:08 schrieb Fabio Valentini : > > > But then you're back to *exactly how Fedora packages for Java projects > already work* - only with the added complication that distributing > those build artifacts as plain JARs instead of RPMs now makes them > impossible to consume as

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 27.09.2021 um 10:47 schrieb Ankur Sinha : > > On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 21:20:07 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: >> Should the @java-maint-sig group be removed from any packages it is >> still associated with? Should it be dissolved, and members be removed? >> Should the remaining ruins that used

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 27.09.2021 um 11:13 schrieb Pierre-Yves Chibon : > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:57:12AM +0200, Peter Boy wrote: >> > >> What do you want to gain from it? What is the goal to be? > > I believe the original email from Fabio answers both of these questions.

Re: Fedora  Java: The Death of Two SIGs

> Am 29.09.2021 um 13:49 schrieb Miro Hrončok : > > Since many have moved this discussion away from this question, let me please > bring back the main reason this was posted. > > Since the @java-maint-sig group is esentially non-responsive, I suggest we do > the following: > > > 1) We

Re: update F34 - f35 postgresql module issue

> Am 24.10.2021 um 04:55 schrieb Samuel Sieb : > > On 10/23/21 14:40, Peter Boy wrote: >> I just tested the dnf upgrade procedure on one of our standby backup systems >> which happens to have the F34 postgresql module version 9.6 installed. >> The module was overwrit

Re: F36 Change proposal: No ifcfg by default (Self-Contained Change)

> Am 05.01.2022 um 15:05 schrieb Ben Cotton : > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoIfcfgFiles > > == Summary == > Do not not include NetworkManager support for legacy network > configuration files by in new installations. > > …… > == Scope == > * Proposal owners: Split the ifcfg

Re: F37 Change: RetireARMv7 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 16.11.2021 um 20:37 schrieb Miro Hrončok : > > On 15. 11. 21 20:15, Ben Cotton wrote: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RetireARMv7 >> == Owner == >> * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] >> * Email: > > May I suggest to include >

Re: F37 Change: RetireARMv7 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 16.11.2021 um 21:23 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen : > > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 15:10 Peter Boy wrote: > > ... > This could (hopefully) solve a number of problems raised by various > contributors to the discussion (and preserve the „trademark&

During the first update after installation: Failed to connect to bus: Invalid argument

While updating right after installation of Fedora Server 35 today I get: > [...]# sudo dnf update > ... > Cleanup : glibc-langpack-de-2.34-7.fc35.x86_64 > 303/306 > Cleanup : glibc-gconv-extra-2.34-7.fc35.x86_64 > 304/306 >

Re: Fedora 36 System-Wide Change: java-17-openjdk as system JDK in F36 pre-announcement

> > Am 01.11.2021 um 11:04 schrieb Jiri Vanek : > > Hello! > > For wide hearing/reading, before final announcement, > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java17 have anybody any opinion or > anything to say for/against? > I welcome the update as useful for development and testing, as

update F34 - f35 postgresql module issue

I just tested the dnf upgrade procedure on one of our standby backup systems which happens to have the F34 postgresql module version 9.6 installed. The module was overwritten with version 13 without warning. Given the data incompatibility, this is a very unattractive practice. As far as I

Re: is there an offshoot or branch of early Fedora for simple UI

> Am 10.01.2022 um 00:25 schrieb Nico Kadel-Garcia : > > ... it has gotten out of hand. Indeed. When Gnome 3 hit Fedora years ago, I tried hard, but then decided heavy heartedly to switch all my desktops and laptops to macOS. It has remained that way until today. But I’m happy with Fedora

Re: is there an offshoot or branch of early Fedora for simple UI

> Am 09.01.2022 um 23:43 schrieb None Business : > > I use(d) fedora to run my IDEs ( c++), now it is all floating-contracting > windows , with gazilion 'drag-your-window' nonsense . I guess I am not cool > enough to use this clusterfu..k, it is simply unusable for me , so I am > looking for

Re: New top-level dir: /state [WAS: Re: F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change] proposal)

> Am 17.01.2022 um 05:17 schrieb Chris Murphy : > > On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 4:34 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> @Neal, I remember a Suse employee made once (about a year ago) a proposal to >> slightly modify FHS to better separate distro specific from local

Re: New top-level dir: /state [WAS: Re: F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change] proposal)

> Am 17.01.2022 um 05:16 schrieb Chris Murphy : > > On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:59 PM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> >>> Am 14.01.2022 um 23:51 schrieb Fabio Valentini : >>> >>> >>> Wait, I thought this change was about making the

Re: New top-level dir: /state [WAS: Re: F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change] proposal)

> Am 10.01.2022 um 17:19 schrieb David Cantrell : > > On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 10:01:57AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RelocateRPMToUsr >> >> == Summary == >> Currently, the RPM databases is located in `/var`. Let's move it to >> `/usr`. The move is already

Re: New top-level dir: /state [WAS: Re: F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change] proposal)

> Am 10.01.2022 um 18:57 schrieb Alexander Sosedkin : > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 5:20 PM David Cantrell wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 10:01:57AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RelocateRPMToUsr >>> >>> == Summary == >>> Currently, the RPM databases

QEMU-kvm installation a dependency hell?

I just checked installation of qemu-kvm & libvirt & virt-install on a Fedora Server Edition, that is a headless server. It installed 338 packages / 158 mb including poppler, mesa, wayland, libX11, gtk3, cairo and a lot of additional graphic related software. I’m wondering, why I need Wayland

Re: QEMU-kvm installation a dependency hell?

> Am 13.03.2022 um 22:20 schrieb Chris Adams : > > Once upon a time, Peter Boy said: >> ... >> I’m wondering, why I need Wayland or X11 etc for kernel virtualization and >> running virtual machines? It turns my headless server into a graphical >> worksta

Re: QEMU-kvm installation a dependency hell?

> Am 13.03.2022 um 22:10 schrieb Samuel Sieb : > > ... > qemu-kvm is a metapackage which points to qemu-system-x86. That is also a > metapackage which brings in all the qemu packages including the graphical > parts. If you don't want that, then you have to install just the packages > that

Re: QEMU-kvm installation a dependency hell?

> There's not a companion libvirt-daemon-kvm-core though, so I think you > just have to pick and chose the libvirt-daemon-* packages you want > manually (libvirt-daemon-kvm is another virtual package that pulls in, > among other things, the qemu-kvm virtual package). > > So, a package set that

Re: Let's retire original glib and gtk+ (new report)

> Am 08.03.2022 um 01:41 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel > : > > I do not see why we would want to force removing working, maintained > packages from the distribution. That is a major disservice to users and > basically a "screw you" to the maintainer. Whom does that help? > > GLib 1 and

Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F35 to F36

> Am 11.03.2022 um 18:43 schrieb Miroslav Suchý : > > Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and > try to run: > > # Run this only if you use default Fedora modules > # next time you run any DNF command default modules will be enabled again > sudo dnf module

Re: Fedora 36 NoIfcfgFiles change

> Am 02.04.2022 um 11:10 schrieb Neal Gompa : > > On Sat, Apr 2, 2022 at 4:28 AM Peter Boy wrote: >> >> >> Part of the aforementioned change is a migration tool and a documentation >> for said tool. Now that the beta is officially released, I trie

Fedora 36 NoIfcfgFiles change

Part of the aforementioned change is a migration tool and a documentation for said tool. Now that the beta is officially released, I tried to find both. Unfortunately unsuccessfully. Please, could someone help me with a pointer where I can find those?

Re: F37 Change: Deprecate Legacy BIOS (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 05.04.2022 um 16:52 schrieb Ben Cotton : > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateLegacyBIOS > > == Summary == > Make UEFI a hardware requirement for new Fedora installations on > platforms that support it (x86_64). Legacy BIOS support is not > removed, but new non-UEFI

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 36 Rawhide 20220127.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

> Am 27.01.2022 um 13:14 schrieb rawh...@fedoraproject.org: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_36_Rawhide_20220127.n.0_Summary I’m missing Server aarch64 raw-xz. Is it not yet finished or not successful? ___ devel mailing list

Re: F36 Change: Ruby 3.1 (System-Wide Change proposal)

> Am 27.01.2022 um 21:13 schrieb Vít Ondruch : > > Just to let everybody know, Ruby 3.1 has landed in Rawhide [1]. The binary > packages have been rebuilt, but there might be other compatibility issue. If > you need help fixing your package, please come to discuss the issue to > ruby-sig ML.

Re: [Test-Announce] 2022-01-24 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

> Am 25.01.2022 um 14:53 schrieb Luna Jernberg : > > Hey! > > Is the minutes of this meeting gonna be posted online somewhere so i can read > up on them after the fact? > forgot about it totally yesterday Are you looking for these? Minutes:

Re: New top-level dir: /state [WAS: Re: F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change] proposal)

> Am 14.01.2022 um 23:51 schrieb Fabio Valentini : > > > Wait, I thought this change was about making the path consistent > within Fedora variants? The question still is whether this is actually useful and beneficial. All the arguments for this move that I have read so far explain benefits

Re: New top-level dir: /state [WAS: Re: F36 Change: Relocate RPM database to /usr (System-Wide Change] proposal)

> Am 17.01.2022 um 00:09 schrieb Neal Gompa : > > On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 5:51 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: >> >> …. > > openSUSE originally did the move because standard openSUSE has a > snapshot+rollback scheme and tracking the rpmdb is straightforward in > /usr with all the other system

  1   2   3   >