On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 15:58 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:55 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > > I guess we get to poke through everything built around the 17th
> > > and
> > > try
> > > to find a relevant change? :)
> >
>
On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 15:45 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 18:16 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > But this is different, and it's the cause of your problem (well,
> > it's
> > the immediate cause anyway). The kernel-install script is failing
> >
t requires on libibverbs I think.
Anyway, at this point, I don't know if the rdma-core-owner people can
help. I think this is first in the hands of the systemd folks.
> DEBUG util.py:602: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.6RiAo6: line 34: 2006782
> Segmentation fault (core dumped) /bin/systemctl is-active
The arm32 platform literally does not support the memory primitives needed to
safely to RDMA. If we enable the support, and someone uses it, there is
nothing we can do to prevent them running the risk of memory corruption. So we
probably need to exclude arm32 from all these packages, or
On Sun, 2018-02-04 at 14:30 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 02/04/2018 01:38 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> > On Sun, 04 Feb 2018 22:14:47 +0100, Doug Ledford wrote:
> > > cc1: fatal error: inaccessible plugin file plugin/annobin.so expanded
> > > from short plugin
with gcc-8.0.1 that I didn't know about? And if there is,
why isn't it part of the Build package group since the RPM macros the
build system defines are the ones telling gcc to use annobin?
--
Doug Ledford <dledf...@redhat.com>
GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD
Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BD
to speed.
Oh, and please leave me on the Cc: list. Fedora-devel is a list I only
monitor occasionally.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 11:17 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
libibverbs
libmlx4
libmthca
Taken.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
When a shutdown task isn't proceeding as planned on Fedora 19/rawhide,
am I the only one that feels like I'm staring down the monocle of a
Cylon and should be preparing to die? That or it's the hood from Kit
off of Knight Rider...
Either way, it's creepy ;-)
--
devel mailing list
On 06/10/2013 04:43 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Sun, 09.06.13 11:05, Doug Ledford (dledf...@redhat.com) wrote:
The audit system is just a more modern version of that same thing. And
the second you put any sort of exception into the audit rules, then you
have to verify
On 06/09/2013 09:53 AM, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
On 06/08/2013 04:13 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
Yes, but none of these results show the .12s time that your first
noatime test run showed in your original post. If you are now saying
that atime is faster than noatime by about .005 to .010s
On 06/09/2013 10:34 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 10:03 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
I don't think anyone wants these accesses to generate audit records. The
question is whether the right way to fix that is to avoid those accesses
in the first place or to provide a mechanism
On 06/09/2013 01:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 16:44 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
where did you read this?
Where Doug et al keep not responding to Lennart and Matthew's queries as
to whether the correct fix is to the app or to the audit system, but
keep repeating that
On 06/09/2013 11:42 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 11:05:44AM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
And really, we've spent more time on this thread than it would take
Lennart to fix PA. Just a quick stat and check of uid before trying to
remove the stale files and this would all
On 06/08/2013 09:53 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 09:34:22 AM Steve Grubb wrote:
Does opening with noatime really make a measurable difference (assuming it
worked)? I suspect not since what we have now is 2 syscalls. It would
probably be faster to load icons without
On 06/08/2013 10:10 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 09:57:03 AM Doug Ledford wrote:
Bad test. The first run took the hit for getting the file info into
page cache, after that, everything was run from cache and you got the
second result above and the results below. You have
On 06/08/2013 10:29 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 10:13:45 AM Doug Ledford wrote:
Yes, but none of these results show the .12s time that your first
noatime test run showed in your original post. If you are now saying
that atime is faster than noatime by about .005 to .010s
On 06/08/2013 02:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sat, 2013-06-08 at 09:25 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
Its not quite like this. What I need is the OS to be well behaved under
normal
conditions so that when problems come along they are easily spotted. Fedora
has been a fairly well behaved
On 05/21/2013 04:25 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On May 21, 2013, at 2:07 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 21.05.2013 22:02, schrieb Chris Murphy:
Maybe someone can explain to me the use case for ONBOOT= where its value
isn't tied
to the current network state. I wasted an
in
the ass. And have him read the openmpi spec file too, it really
exemplifies how ugly this stuff gets.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
On 2/23/2012 8:52 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
On 02/21/2012 06:31 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
it honors all the LSB dependency tags in the SysV init scripts, and
my experience is that this is specifically where a number of the
emulation startup bugs exists.
What do you mean? That the LSB headers
for whatever reason (debugging, want to see output,
the systemd unit file won't allow the necessary interactive username
and password prompt, etc.), then it won't get stopped properly on
shutdown. That is not a feature, that's just dumb.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG
://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=773492
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
CRITPATH package, and I'd sooner slit
my wrists.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
* to wait until the first time that
particular kernel is booted to build the module.
So, long story short, there are difficulties, not the least of which is the
poorly understood usage of the %trigger capabilities in rpm.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
- Original Message -
Oh I figured if it was going to be dropped it would no longer be
CRITPATH, but if it would remain that I would prefer not to have Mrs
Ledford hunting me down .
You're probably safer that way... ;-)
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID
boot
loader installation (or lack thereof).
If anyone complains about a grub/grub2 binary in libguestfs, tell them it's a
necessary tool the base OS didn't want to provide reliably so you did what was
necessary.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
a huge gaping
security cluster fuck).
not because it's necessary.
It's just as necessary as any of the other rescue tools we put on rescue CDs.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel
and going
nowhere at the moment?
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
on autoqa
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AutoQA
I've already volunteered for one project that's at least tangentially related
to AutoQA and I'm having a hard time finding the time to do it justice, more
would simply make everything I do worse.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG
ingrained FUD against the idea that isn't even based on realistic
future development of this dead end package.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
- Original Message -
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:19:29 -0400 (EDT)
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com wrote:
...snip...
Which rpmdiff are we talking about here?
The free/included in fedora one is not that great... it gives you
files
and deps that changed, but that doesn't help you
feel like an
outcast that doesn't belong.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
, that the proper answer (whether
using zif or yum) would be to ask the user which they would prefer. Any
automated system is going to be prone to being tricked one way or another.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
dependency.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
it in the base OS any more, and we don't care about our
virtualization stack, so go away. I don't think he missed the point at all,
except maybe missing that some people don't care about supporting a reasonably
functioning virtualization stack in Fedora.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
all of them. A user who bought the hardware in question could probably
suss out which package they need to satisfy the dependency if they were asked.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
side, just playing devil's
advocate.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
of a salt
coated slug.
That's my proposed process for our early branched release. Thoughts?
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
. A source
update that implements new features is another issue. The maintainer is in the
best position to know this and can note the distinction in the bodhi ticket.
Looks like it would get things done.
That's what I thought ;-)
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID
decision.
thus we have bodhi
and updates-testing as a gateway to get into the release.
It's a gateway, I just don't think it serves as useful a purpose as it was
intended to.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
- Original Message -
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 03:01:06PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
On 9/15/2011 12:01 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 04:56:43PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
The most obvious case where it can fail involves grub being
effectively
- Original Message -
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:51:26AM -0500, Matyas Selmeci wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote on Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 01:02:26PM +0200:
Michael Schroeder wrote:
Sounds like you want weak dependencies (i.e. Suggests et al).
In this case, I think disjunctive
- Original Message -
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:44:58PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
OK, technically it install the 1.5 or the 2.0 if you don't use a
1.5
(if you install both the 1.5 and 2.0, then it patches the name of
the
2.0 into the 1.5 that it installs and the 1.5 reads
- Original Message -
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
wrote:
Like I said, not true. The grub package is designed to be updateable
without requiring an mbr reinstall. What's more is I had a look at
the stage1.[hS] files in the grub
- Original Message -
Matthew Garrett wrote:
The output of rpm -qf grub may be instructive.
I suppose you mean rpm -ql grub…
That worked better. And I see your point. I was mistaken in thinking that the
grub files resided directly in /boot/grub.
--
devel mailing list
- Original Message -
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 02:53:11PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
This is incorrect. The whole reason the stage1.5 portion is an fs
compatible reader is so that you can update the stage2 file and it
will pick the changes up without needing to be reinstalled
with no
running services besides sshd and libvirtd, then it is arguably the
better place to have a tool like grub installed than in the guest which
might be running apache and considerably more open to attack than the host.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
device mounted, so
there would need to be some fiddling with device names and such.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
I've grown entirely too fed up with the CRITPATH approval process.
Here's my Fedora FESCo TRAC ticket requesting that the issue be solved
and providing a suggested solution. If you agree, you might want to put
your +1 in the ticket. If you disagree because you think you have a
better solution,
This could use some testing love. If it misses Fedora 16 final, it
won't be a huge setback. The only change between what's already in f16
and this updated package is the two bug fixes mentioned. I've tested
those fixes myself (my workstation didn't work properly until the fixes
went in, not
symbol versions quite nicely.
Hilariously gcc _does_ let you specify symbol version in a __attribute__
tag, but only on HP/UX on ia64. Thanks for that.
- ajax
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband
On 8/12/2011 3:28 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 19:40 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
I've never got around to working up a coherent proposed modification and
submitting it, though - if anyone else can, that'd be great.
I'll just go back to what I've said before. I don't care
On 08/11/2011 12:32 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 09:02 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
Can we please either disable these nag messages or give developers the
ability to push a package regardless of testing when it reaches nag age?
You have that ability for non-critpath
Can we please either disable these nag messages or give developers the
ability to push a package regardless of testing when it reaches nag age?
Original Message
Subject: [Fedora Update] [CRITPATH] [old_testing_critpath]
mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100804.3.fc14
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/20/2011 4:13 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
wrote:
Unfortunately, I was told I should remove the systemd support in
particular, so I did. Glad to hear it worked for you though
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/20/2011 6:05 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 20.07.2011 22:06, schrieb Doug Ledford:
On 07/15/2011 05:20 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=253031
* Fri Jul 15 2011 Doug Ledforddledf...@redhat.com
On 07/15/2011 05:20 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=253031
* Fri Jul 15 2011 Doug Ledforddledf...@redhat.com - 3.2.2-5
- Merge rawhide mdadm to f15. Rawhide changelog preserved even though
- the referenced versions do not exist in f15, rawhide
upstream. That ended my relationship
with their offerings.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
signature.asc
On 05/27/2011 10:43 AM, Albert Strasheim wrote:
Hello
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com wrote:
I just need some time to get updates in. However, that being said, I
totally ignore OFED. I pull packages from upstream and I do *not* get
anything from OFED
be broken, then get the hell out of the maintainer's way and
let us do our job.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
Persson bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se wrote:
Doug Ledford wrote:
Now I'm seeing new bugs trickle in about mdadm in the live image, and I
have no clue if there is something I need to fix because I haven't
gotten my update pushed to stable yet so these people are running
against a known broken mdadm
wrote:
On 10 April 2011 20:01, Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com wrote:
The bug I'm looking at right now is specifically against the live image, so
no I can't test that with something in updates testing. It needs to make it
to the base before it gets on the live media to see if it solves
On Apr 10, 2011, at 4:37 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 15:01 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
The bug I'm looking at right now is specifically against the live
image, so no I can't test that with something in updates testing. It
needs to make it to the base before
Comment inline below:
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 10, 2011, at 4:34 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 12:45 -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
And here we are, about to go down the same road again. I have an update
in updates-testing, it's getting no love
On 04/10/2011 01:23 PM, Sven Lankes wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:45:56PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
And here we are, about to go down the same road again. I have an update
in updates-testing, it's getting no love, and the package that's in the
release is *known broken*. It has
with the new
: systemd and with the tmpfs based /var/run and
: /var/lock. Please push to stable prior to F15 final.
Submitter: dledford
Submitted: 2011-03-28 15:44:22
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mdadm-3.1.5-1.fc15
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
.
Kevin Kofler
For non-boot devices, loopback works. You only need the hardware if you
are testing boot time capabilities (which, admittedly, is the far more
important aspect of testing for this package).
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http
or not, but I know it didn't because I was
working on other things at the time.
Bodhi critpath restrictions == -1000 in their current form as far as I'm
concerned. Fix it as you see fit, but it definitely needs fixing.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
On 12/01/2010 01:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 13:23 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
That being said, F14 went out with a broken mdadm *purely* because of
this policy.
Evidently my update was approved somewhere along the way, but because of
the volume of bodhi spam I get
On 12/01/2010 04:40 PM, Luke Macken wrote:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 10:41:20AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 13:23 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
That being said, F14 went out with a broken mdadm *purely* because of
this policy.
Evidently my update was approved somewhere
On 12/01/2010 04:35 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 16:22 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
If the ticket can be allowed to languish that long, then I don't feel in
the least bit guilty that I didn't drop my other Red Hat
responsibilities on the floor when the ticket was finally
On 11/23/2010 04:32 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 23.11.10 16:12, Doug Ledford (dledf...@redhat.com) wrote:
On 11/23/2010 03:48 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Heya!
I hereby want to let everybody know that in the next days I will turn on
/var/run and /var/lock on tmpfs on Rawhide
-tmpfs
Will the tmpfs mounts be available in the initramfs, or only on the
running system?
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
needs for at least another 13
releases or so... :-)
Oh, yeah, and Jesse - thank you, for now people can finally stop
mumbling blames my way. ;)
No!!! That doesn't stop. The crazy Romanian is to blame for everything!
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
will allow you to directly download the packages.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
signature.asc
Description
On 03/09/2010 07:46 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Doug Ledford wrote:
Things like the libata kernel change and KDE 3 to 4 migration are
intentional events
That's the whole problem. Under our current model, we have places and times
where to perform those intentional disruptive changes, they're
what should possibly
be the raised bar of the released products then the idea won't work so
lets lower the bar across the board and give up.
I'm sorry Kevin, but you and I will simply have to agree to disagree. I
will *not* capitulate to your stance on this issue.
--
Doug Ledford dledf
non-critpath packages do with just AutoQA is sufficient.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
signature.asc
options as gratuitous and reasonable, and I have no
doubt that this wording change would effect the results of the poll (and
probably drastically so). To be a valid poll, we have to be precise
enough that people know what they are voting on without the wording
leading their thoughts.
--
Doug Ledford
On 03/08/2010 03:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 12:14 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
On 03/08/2010 11:05 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
If you think the poll is wrong - provide some data to disprove it.
I'm sorry, but that's a scientifically specious argument. Invalid data
On 03/05/2010 04:49 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Doug Ledford wrote:
So, I'm going to reiterate my policy suggestion:
Make Fedora releases (all of them) stable in nature, not semi-rolling.
Make rawhide consumable as a semi-rolling release itself.
And let me reiterate my objections, because you
that Fedora was primarily stable once released, that
there would always be exceptions to that rule and things that should be
updated more aggressively. So I would not advocate for any policy that
was absolute and inflexible. There should be room for human judgment to
play a role.
--
Doug Ledford dledf
proposal are the two I would pair with my proposal in
order to satisfy both groups. I don't see any reason to rehash them here.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available
On 03/04/2010 06:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Doug Ledford wrote:
But let's be clear. That's a *policy* decision. One of the things that
got very confusing in the previous thread(s) was the intermixing of
policy decisions and technical issues. For instance, Kevin's response
to my proposal
discussions.
I would argue that it's necessary to continue constructive discussions
in order to reach the stage where a wiki page and proposals makes sense.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs
On 03/03/2010 04:40 PM, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 03/03/2010 04:30 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
So while I agree that some of the posts where people are simply
attacking other people need to stop, I can't agree that this thread has
reached a stage where it is advisable to stop constructive
On 03/02/2010 04:25 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Doug Ledford wrote:
Fixes my problem
Works for me (someone testing that didn't necessarily have any of the
problem supposedly fixed by this update just noting that their system
still works ok
, itty bitty group,
whichever that may be, cry in their beers while they eat their
consolation chocolates. (Sorry, as heartless as it might be, it is still
an accurate bean counter truth)
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com
for rawhide or
if wholesale updates are being pushed on down into the stable releases.
At that point you would know for sure what Fedora is, not what it's
supposed to be. I say this because, obviously, different people read
the part about First differently and do different things.
--
Doug Ledford
as in the bug itself with a resultant
VERIFIED/FAILS_QA toggle to the bug status.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
On 03/01/2010 05:01 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 16:51 -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
To be pedantic, Fedora is what it is. What the leadership has to say
doesn't really matter in terms of what Fedora *is*, only in terms of
what Fedora is *supposed to be*. In order to know what
On 01/15/2010 01:37 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 01/15/2010 09:52 AM, Doug Ledford wrote:
We are discussing the complete removal of pkgconfig support from openmpi
(and never including it in mvapich and mvapich2 which are ready for
Fedora package review submission). The proper way to invoke
time.
If there are objections, please raise them now.
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
signature.asc
Description
94 matches
Mail list logo
