Re: Announcing: Fedora ARM Technical Talks

2013-02-15 Thread Jon Masters
On 02/15/2013 02:32 PM, Jon Masters wrote: Please see the following link for further details: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Talks/ARMTechTalks Today's talk is on debugging vexpress (Versatile Express) kernels running under qemu models with gdb. It will simply cover

Re: [fedora-arm] FUDCon ARM related followup

2013-01-22 Thread Jon Masters
Always was done with yaboot. Do we know if OLPC will move to UEFI? -- Sent from my phone. Please excuse formatting and brevity. Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com To: Development discussions related to Fedora

Fedora ARM status meeting minutes for 2012-12-19

2012-12-21 Thread Jon Masters
Hi everyone, I would like to share the minutes from yesterday's Fedora ARM meeting. In particular, those on devel@ might be interested in our desire to discuss PA at FUDCon. At FUDCon, we will have a 24 node Calxeda EnergyCore (highbank) server that will demonstrate various capabilities of the

Fedora ARM status meeting 2012-12-19

2012-12-19 Thread Jon Masters
Hello, This week's Fedora ARM status will take place today (Wednesday, Dec 12th) in #fedora-meeting-1 on Freenode. I will run the meeting with Brendan as Paul is on PTO today. Please ping us on #fedora-arm with additional topics on IRC also. I will be at the dentist soon, so Brendan may start the

Fedora ARM status meeting 2012-12-12

2012-12-12 Thread Jon Masters
Hello, This week's Fedora ARM status will take place today (Wednesday, Dec 12th) in #fedora-meeting-1 on Freenode. I will run the meeting as Paul is out sick today. Please ping with additional topics on IRC also. Times in various time zones (please let us know if these do not work on an ongoing

Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?

2012-12-11 Thread Jon Masters
On 12/09/2012 03:32 PM, Michael Scherer wrote: snip Having one repo and refusing commercial software are 2 different issues. Really, they're not though. The problem is that stuff is shipped in-distro and builds deps on core packages, and those packages are revved in a symbiotic relationship

Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?

2012-12-09 Thread Jon Masters
On 12/06/2012 10:38 AM, Michael Scherer wrote: People are annoyed to go to different bugzilla to report bugs, people are annoyed to go to different shops to shop for stuff ( as seen by the success of amazon, or even itunes, etc ), so why would it make sense to have a different way depending

Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?

2012-12-07 Thread Jon Masters
On 12/06/2012 01:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote: On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said: Three things: 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size

Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?

2012-12-07 Thread Jon Masters
On 12/07/2012 12:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote: We could draw them between Core and Extras! :) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a Core of their own a while back. Maybe

Re: Fedora ARM status meeting 2012-12-05

2012-12-05 Thread Jon Masters
On 12/05/2012 02:39 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: I can't make the meeting. It conflicts with the Board meeting. Current items on the agenda: 1) Current Problem packages 2) F18 ARM VFAD - additional feedback, blockers? 3) Ownership of non-release blocking images (Beagleboard XM, etc) Who

Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?

2012-12-05 Thread Jon Masters
On 12/05/2012 04:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said: Three things: 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well) is a fine example of something

Re: MPI updates

2012-11-11 Thread Jon Masters
On 11/01/2012 11:08 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: - I built openmpi 1.6.3 in rawhide yesterday. This had an unexpected bump in the libmpi_f90.so soname. I know this affects hdf5 and netcdf-fortran, both my packages and I'll be rebuilding them later today (hopefully). On that, I've made a

Re: Maintainers with bugzilla issues. (Please read and help contact) (last call)

2012-07-08 Thread Jon Masters
On 07/06/2012 02:32 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: pnasrat 'Paul Nasrat' pnas...@gmail.com pinged -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Like C++? Not afraid of quirky build systems? Seeking LLVM co-maintainers

2012-05-13 Thread Jon Masters
On 05/13/2012 02:02 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: snip From a purely practical perspective, the popularity of OS X as a development platform means that we're likely to see a gradual increase in the amount of code written to assume LLVM-specific functionality. People are just going to have to

Re: Like C++? Not afraid of quirky build systems? Seeking LLVM co-maintainers

2012-05-12 Thread Jon Masters
On 05/13/2012 01:21 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: snip Maybe we should draw more of a distinction between LLVM and clang, and use ExclusiveArch: on the latter to whitelist only architectures we feel comfortable supporting? We could. Right now, for ARM (as an example), there is really

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora ARM VFAD - May 11th - 12pm (EDT)

2012-05-11 Thread Jon Masters
On 05/11/2012 07:39 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: o jonmasters to track down the OMAP (Panda/Beagle) issue. Right, but I'm also going to try to hunt down the futex issue and a few other things...so we might end up going with an older kernel in the OMAP images just for beta to get that out earlier

Re: Like C++? Not afraid of quirky build systems? Seeking LLVM co-maintainers

2012-05-10 Thread Jon Masters
On 05/10/2012 04:56 AM, David Airlie wrote: - Original Message - From: Jon Masters j...@redhat.com To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc: Michel Alexandre Salim sali...@fedoraproject.org Sent: Wednesday, 9 May, 2012 10:57:30 PM Subject

Re: Weekly ARM status meeting - Wed 2012/05/09

2012-05-09 Thread Jon Masters
Hi Folks, Thanks for joining us today in our weekly meeting. Here are the minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-09/fedora-meeting.2012-05-09-20.00.html Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

ARM MEETING - moving to #fedora-meeting-1 next week

2012-05-09 Thread Jon Masters
Folks, The EMEA Fedora Ambassadors have a periodic meeting at the same time that we do. So that we don't ever have confusion, we will henceforth move all of our meetings to #fedora-meeting-1 at the same time. Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Like C++? Not afraid of quirky build systems? Seeking LLVM co-maintainers

2012-05-09 Thread Jon Masters
On 05/06/2012 02:29 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: LLVM is becoming an increasingly integral part of our distribution (with mesa now using it to build the LLVMpipe renderer, for example) that I don't really feel comfortable maintaining it mostly by myself. Thanks for the private email

Re: Like C++? Not afraid of quirky build systems? Seeking LLVM co-maintainers

2012-05-09 Thread Jon Masters
On 05/09/2012 05:57 PM, Jon Masters wrote: More broadly though, I feel that GCC is well represented in terms of engineering knowledge but I'm *concerned* that we run the risk of growing a dependence on LLVM that is more critical than the LLVMpipe stuff. Before we can blink, we might need LLVM

Weekly ARM status meeting - Wed 2012/05/09

2012-05-08 Thread Jon Masters
Hi everyone, A reminder that this week's ARM status meeting will take place tomorrow (Wednesday), on #fedora-meeting. There will be no phone call. Please reply to this email with any additional agenda items you want to add. Times in various timezones (please let us know if these do not work):

Re: Weekly ARM status meeting - Wed 2012/05/02

2012-05-02 Thread Jon Masters
Hi Folks, Thanks for joining us today in our weekly meeting. Here are the minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-02/fedora-meeting.2012-05-02-19.59.html Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Weekly ARM status meeting - Wed 2012/05/02

2012-05-01 Thread Jon Masters
Hi everyone, A reminder that this week's ARM status meeting will take place tomorrow (Wednesday), on #fedora-meeting. There will be no phone call. Times in various timezones: PDT: 1pm MDT: 2pm CDT: 3pm EDT: 4pm UTC: 8pm BST: 9pm CST: 10pm Also join #fedora-arm on Freenode for general ARM

Minutes from weekly Fedora ARM status meeting (2012/04/25)

2012-04-25 Thread Jon Masters
On 04/24/2012 12:27 PM, Jon Masters wrote: Let's have one of our weekly status calls tomorrow pm. I aim to send these reminders out more regularly so that we can get in the habit. If the times no longer work for those involved in the Fedora ARM project, please do let us know asap. Sadly

Re: [fedora-arm] Weekly ARM status call - TOMORROW (Wed 2012/04/25)

2012-04-25 Thread Jon Masters
On 04/24/2012 01:33 PM, Jerry James wrote: On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote: Times in various timezones: PDT: 2pm CDT: 3pm EDT: 4pm UTC: 8pm BST: 9pm CST: 10pm Shouldn't that be PDT: 1pm MDT: 2pm Yes, as I said on IRC I was going to make a joke

Fwd: [fedora-arm] Weekly ARM status call - TOMORROW (Wed 2012/04/25)

2012-04-24 Thread Jon Masters
Original Message Subject: [fedora-arm] Weekly ARM status call - TOMORROW (Wed 2012/04/25) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:27:23 -0400 From: Jon Masters j...@redhat.com Organization: Red Hat, Inc. To: a...@lists.fedoraproject.org Hi everyone, Let's have one of our weekly status

Re: Feedback on secondary architecute promotion requirements draft

2012-04-20 Thread Jon Masters
On 04/19/2012 05:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: Ok, I'll modify that section. Thanks for the feedback! Matthew, Could you add comments addressing the need for documentation and website content around a promoted arch? And any of the other comments I made in my previous reply that you would like

Re: Feedback on secondary architecute promotion requirements draft

2012-04-20 Thread Jon Masters
On 04/20/2012 04:30 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 04:22:38PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: On 04/19/2012 05:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: Ok, I'll modify that section. Thanks for the feedback! Matthew, Could you add comments addressing the need for documentation and website

Re: Feedback on secondary architecute promotion requirements draft

2012-04-18 Thread Jon Masters
Hi Matthew, On 04/18/2012 09:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: Right now I don't think ARM's doing a great job of that [being part of the Fedora community]. Your meetings happen on the phone and aren't minuted. I am sorry that you feel that way. I think it is important to add some context to the

Re: Feedback on secondary architecute promotion requirements draft

2012-04-18 Thread Jon Masters
On 04/19/2012 01:22 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:42:58AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: Hi Matthew, On 04/18/2012 09:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: Right now I don't think ARM's doing a great job of that [being part of the Fedora community]. Your meetings happen

Re: Feedback on secondary architecute promotion requirements draft

2012-04-18 Thread Jon Masters
Hey guys, Cutting this sub-thread off at the pass :) I think it's obvious that we in the ARM project can do a better job at engagement, cohesion, and we can learn and improve in many ways. I would like to suggest that we steer this thread back toward the more abstract question at hand: that of

Re: ARM as a primary architecture

2012-03-28 Thread Jon Masters
On 03/26/2012 08:00 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Which leads me to a rant about ARM. G RANT!! I didn't think I'd ever love the BIOS, but compared to the alternatives (UEFI and a million different ARM bootloaders) it's simple and effective. There is some truth to that. Nobody is going

Re: RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

2012-03-22 Thread Jon Masters
On 03/20/2012 06:51 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: On 03/20/2012 03:33 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: doing all of these things doesn't happen magically just because the board/fesco grants that ARM is suddenly a primary arch. If we made arm a primary arch tomorrow, you'd still have to solve all the

Re: Updated Fedora ARM qemu images?

2012-03-22 Thread Jon Masters
On 03/22/2012 03:38 PM, Chris Tyler wrote: On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 12:10 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: I started looking at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/HowToQemu VM starts okay in F16 with setsebool -P virt_use_execmem=on But the image is a Fedora 12 system. Any updated

Re: ARM as a primary architecture

2012-03-22 Thread Jon Masters
Hi Kevin, Thanks for your message. On 03/22/2012 11:21 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Peter Robinson wrote: On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 2:28 PM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: The only ones where this is possible right now are actually x86 based tablets. Even Windows 8 wont help here as MS mandates

Re: ARM as a primary architecture

2012-03-20 Thread Jon Masters
On 03/20/2012 11:52 AM, Peter Jones wrote: In yesterday's FESCo meeting I told you I'd make a list of specific issues I have with the current proposal for ARM as a primary archictecture. There are some places where I think the current proposal fails to deal with some necessary aspects of

Re: RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

2012-03-20 Thread Jon Masters
Hello, On 03/20/2012 12:37 PM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Brendan Conoboy b...@redhat.com wrote: On 03/20/2012 09:21 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: That said, I considera cross-building environment for secondary arch to be inevitable, which would at least help for the class

Re: RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

2012-03-20 Thread Jon Masters
On 03/20/2012 12:56 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: On 03/20/2012 09:50 AM, drago01 wrote: I don't know about the details there but that does not sound like unfixable to be. I'd even say that fixing that is a prerequisite to allow secondary archs that run on slow hardware to become primary.

Re: RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

2012-03-20 Thread Jon Masters
On 03/20/2012 01:42 PM, Dave Jones wrote: On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:54:36PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: The hardware is way slower ... so we can just build on faster hardware (x86_64). Which is the only sane way to do it. Trying to build on ARM directly is kind of a gimmick but nothing

Re: Rebuild for GCC-4.7

2012-01-05 Thread Jon Masters
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 11:18 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: El Thu, 05 Jan 2012 10:37:41 -0500 Tom Callaway tcall...@redhat.com escribió: On 01/05/2012 09:40 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: I just didn't know if there was any filtering going on for the mass rebuild or if all packages, regardless of

Re: Rebuild for GCC-4.7

2012-01-05 Thread Jon Masters
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 21:47 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I guess you are referring an ordered rebuild, not a simple sequential rebuild. The latter would be mostly useless. For bootstrapping, ideally there would be ordered rebuilds, but even any mass rebuild assists more than having none at

Re: kmod for fedora?

2011-12-22 Thread Jon Masters
On Thu, 2011-12-22 at 13:31 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Thu, 22.12.11 07:17, Neal Becker (ndbeck...@gmail.com) wrote: I was reading about kmod on LWN. Sounds like it might be good for a future fedora, to optimize boot time http://www.politreco.com/2011/12/announce-kmod-1/

Any interest in an or1ksim package?

2011-12-04 Thread Jon Masters
Folks, Anyone interested in an or1ksim package for Fedora? If so, I could throw something together based on upstream trunk. None of the current releases (even the RC) are able to run the orpsoc model correctly with the latest upstream kernel, due to the assumption of support for tap network

Re: Request update of shared-mime-info

2011-11-22 Thread Jon Masters
Hi Bastien, Thanks for your help with this. I'm glad a fix is in upstream now. On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 11:12 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 14:36 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: Folks, Can someone please push the update that I made (with permission) to shared-mime-info? I'm

Re: Request update of shared-mime-info

2011-11-22 Thread Jon Masters
On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 15:37 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: I believe any MP3 file containing a uits tag will be affected. This is the Unique Identifier Technology Solution, which appears to be required by a number of media distributors. Therefore, I believe (but have not confirmed yet

Request update of shared-mime-info

2011-11-21 Thread Jon Masters
Folks, Can someone please push the update that I made (with permission) to shared-mime-info? I'm getting jcm does not have commit access when I try to make the F16 update. This fix is required to actually be able to play many MP3 files (including all purchased from Amazon.com) on F16. Tested

Re: [fedora-arm] ARM Architecture - Package Updates in git

2011-11-15 Thread Jon Masters
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 13:19 -0500, Chris Tyler wrote: The ARM Secondary Arch project[0] is working on an F15 release for the existing armv5tel architecture as well as the new armv7hl architecture (with hardfp ABI). This effort has been previously announced and is ongoing. A number of minor

Re: Why EDID is not trustworthy for DPI

2011-10-06 Thread Jon Masters
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 13:54 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 11:46 -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: Grovelling around in the F15 xorg-server sources and reviewing the Xorg log file on my F15 box, I see, with _modern hardware_ at least, that we do have the monitor geometry

Re: Why EDID is not trustworthy for DPI

2011-10-06 Thread Jon Masters
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 16:20 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 11:14:56AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: How about EDID as it exists today. Since you're able to so beautifully explain what the pitfalls are, I'd assume you've raised this with the VESA and asked

Re: Why EDID is not trustworthy for DPI

2011-10-06 Thread Jon Masters
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 12:12 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 11:14 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 13:54 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: EDID does not reliably give you the size of the display. How about EDID as it exists today. Since you're able to so

Re: GNOME 3 - font point sizes now scaled?

2011-10-04 Thread Jon Masters
On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 12:56 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: More to the point, your DPI numbers would be per-output anyway, so there's no picking a single point size preference, the same size in pixels would be different sizes in millimeters on each output. In fairness, for my dual head setup I

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-08-29 Thread Jon Masters
On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 19:13 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 09:51 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: To participate, visit the following link: http://scotland.proximity.on.ca/fedora-arm/f15hardfp/bootstrap

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-08-28 Thread Jon Masters
On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 09:51 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: To participate, visit the following link: http://scotland.proximity.on.ca/fedora-arm/f15hardfp/bootstrap/rootfs_stage4_20110825/ Just a quick update that we've had mock builders running around the clock and that, at last count we had

Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-08-26 Thread Jon Masters
Folks, We are hosting another one of our regular Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today Friday August 26th 2011, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the continued bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware floating point). Previously, we

Re: Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-08-26 Thread Jon Masters
On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 09:51 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: To participate, visit the following link: http://scotland.proximity.on.ca/fedora-arm/f15hardfp/bootstrap/rootfs_stage4_20110825/ Follow the instructions contained within the readme file to extract the uboot, boot, and root archives

Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery

2011-07-30 Thread Jon Masters
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 10:57 +0200, drago01 wrote: Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click install to install an extension. Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. So, just so I

No specific armv7hl VFAD today

2011-07-22 Thread Jon Masters
Hello, I'm traveling this week, so didn't make any specific plans to host the VFAD earlier today. Sorry for not announcing that. Of course, there's no reason to not build and contribute bits by joining us on #fedora-arm at any time, and by following the instructions:

Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-07-15 Thread Jon Masters
Folks, We are hosting another one of our regular Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today Friday July 15th, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware floating point). Last week, we succeeded in

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-07-15 Thread Jon Masters
On Fri, 2011-07-15 at 03:20 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/Fedora15_HardFP_Bootstrap Please note that this has been updated since last week. It now includes all of the information you need for stage3 (current). Further, there is an additional wiki

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-07-10 Thread Jon Masters
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 00:48 -0300, Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 12:45 AM, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 00:52 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: We are hosting another one of our regular Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today Friday July

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

2011-07-10 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 23:32 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: On 07/08/2011 10:57 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: Or in other words: configuration via command line arguments or environment variables sucks. I disagree. It doesn't suck. It's the way UNIX and Linux have done this for dozens of

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

2011-07-10 Thread Jon Masters
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 05:46:18AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: I disagree. It doesn't suck. It's the way UNIX and Linux have done this for dozens of years, and it's the way countless sysadmins know and love. Sucks might be true from

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

2011-07-10 Thread Jon Masters
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 21:59 +0200, drago01 wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Jon Masters jonat...@jonmasters.org wrote: On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 23:32 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: On 07/08/2011 10:57 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: Or in other words: configuration via command line

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-07-10 Thread Jon Masters
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 16:23 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 04:43:30PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 11:45:33PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: * Fedora should (IMO) institute mandatory mass rebuilds. Either every cycle, or every other cycle. I've

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-07-10 Thread Jon Masters
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 22:44 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: It's certainly true that we could do more to identify ftbfs situations earlier, but we've had mass rebuilds in most recent releases. Random failures years down the line really aren't a realistic concern. I can think of specific cases

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-07-09 Thread Jon Masters
On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 00:52 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: We are hosting another one of our regular Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today Friday July 8th, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

2011-07-08 Thread Jon Masters
[ removing extraneous copy of old Fedora devel list ] On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 09:57 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: On 07/08/2011 08:23 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: I am pretty sure systemd-devel is the better place to discuss this. But here are a few comments after reading throught the bug

Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-07-07 Thread Jon Masters
Folks, We are hosting another one of our regular Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today Friday July 8th, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware floating point). Going forward, the proposal is that

Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-06-29 Thread Jon Masters
Hi Folks, Join us on Friday to celebrate July with another in our series of VFADs! This is an awesome opportunity to participate in improving support for ARM processors, and to learn about architecture bootstrap. Last week, we successfully added a number of new packages to our bootstrap

Re: Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-06-29 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 09:14 +0200, Nikola Pajkovsky wrote: Refreshing news! What is pain in the ass is rhel6, because it doesn't have qemu-system-arm. I will play around with rhel6 and qemu-system-arm. Then I will try to build my packages for arm (if already aren't in). Is there a list of

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - FRIDAY

2011-06-29 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 08:02 -0400, Chris Tyler wrote: On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 02:17 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: Hi Folks, Join us on Friday to celebrate July with another in our series of VFADs! Just a heads up that you won't have many Canadians joining you -- July 1 is Canada Day, a *big

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-06-22 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 00:36 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: We are hosting another Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware floating point). Going forward

Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY

2011-06-21 Thread Jon Masters
Hi Folks, We are hosting another Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware floating point). Going forward, the proposal is that these be on Fridays. You can

SUMMARY - [Fwd: Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY]

2011-06-11 Thread Jon Masters
---BeginMessage--- On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 04:51 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: We are hosting a Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware floating point). You

[Fwd: [fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp Virtual FAD (Fedora Activity Day) - TODAY]

2011-06-10 Thread Jon Masters
---BeginMessage--- Hi Folks, We are hosting a Fedora 15 hardfp Virtual Fedora Activity Day today, at 14:00UTC (10:00 Eastern Daylight Time). The purpose of this session is to co-ordinate the bootstrap of F15 hardfp (hardware floating point). You can find a lot more detail here, along with all

Re: [fedora-arm] [Fwd: Activity Day June 10th - ARMv7 F15 hardfp bringup]

2011-06-05 Thread Jon Masters
On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 09:54 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Chris Tyler ch...@tylers.info wrote: On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 20:53 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: [0] We're making a one time incompatible ABI switch in F-15 bringup to the hard float ABI defined in section 6

Re: [fedora-arm] Does anyone care about LSB on arm?

2011-06-04 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 01:32 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 12:25 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: sooo... although the situation *right now* is that nobody in the commercial world is the slightest bit interested in LSB because they all do custom builds

[Fwd: [fedora-arm] Activity Day June 10th - ARMv7 F15 hardfp bringup]

2011-06-04 Thread Jon Masters
Folks, If you're interested in getting involved in the armv7hl[0] bringup, please do subscribe to the ARM list and follow along/join us Fri for the first of what will hopefully be several sessions dedicated to bootstrap of F15 hardfp bits, followed by building the universe around those. Jon.

Re: [Fwd: [fedora-arm] Activity Day June 10th - ARMv7 F15 hardfp bringup]

2011-06-04 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 21:10 -0400, Chris Tyler wrote: On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 20:53 -0400, Jon Masters wrote: [0] We're making a one time incompatible ABI switch in F-15 bringup to the hard float ABI defined in section 6 of the ARM AAPCS (commonly referred to as the ARM EABI

Re: manually fixing IPs

2011-03-29 Thread Jon Masters
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 14:47 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: end, I gave up and used a system without NM or any of the other stuff, That's the right answer: simply turn off NetworkManager and turn on the network service, to prevent these new breakages from occurring. I do that for all the

manually fixing IPs

2011-03-26 Thread Jon Masters
Hello, So, back in the good old days, one could just type this: ifconfig eth0 some_temp_ip up Then it became necessary to: /etc/init.d/NetworkManager stop Then it became necessary to: systemctl disable NetworkManager.service Just to try to get the interface left alone. But when the link

Re: manually fixing IPs

2011-03-26 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 12:10 +0100, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: On 03/26/2011 12:05 PM, Jon Masters wrote: Then it became necessary to: /etc/init.d/NetworkManager stop Then it became necessary to: systemctl disable NetworkManager.service The last two are equivalent to service

Re: manually fixing IPs

2011-03-26 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 12:23 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Nobody stops you to disable Network-Manager, DHCP, AVAHI and the other noob-crap and write your /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 manually as i do everytime directly after the first boot and i guess the next 20 years this will

Re: manually fixing IPs

2011-03-26 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 11:03 -0400, Neil Horman wrote: IIRC you can set: NM_CONTROLLED=no in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-ethX Supposedly that will take ethX off the reservation and allow you to use the ifup script and ifconfig utility as you traditionally would. I remain

Re: Plans for BTRFS in Fedora

2011-02-28 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 17:33 -0500, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: On 02/23/2011 04:37 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: And I'd like to counter-counter-propose that we just stop using ANY kind of subvolumes or volume management by default and just default to plain old partitions. IMHO, LVM causes more

Re: Plans for BTRFS in Fedora

2011-02-23 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 07:15 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Jon Masters jonat...@jonmasters.org wrote: On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 14:51 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: 2) Fedora 16 ships without LVM as the volume manager and instead use BTRFS's built in volume management

Re: Plans for BTRFS in Fedora

2011-02-22 Thread Jon Masters
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 14:51 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: 2) Fedora 16 ships without LVM as the volume manager and instead use BTRFS's built in volume management, again just for the default. In my personal opinion, this is a poor design decision. Yes, BTRFS can do a lot of volume-y things, and

Re: NetworkManager doesn't start on boot

2011-02-08 Thread Jon Masters
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 11:04 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 08.02.11 04:44, Braden McDaniel (bra...@endoframe.com) wrote: I'm not sure whether 1 means it is or it isn't; but system-config-services claims it's enabled. s-c-s only covers sysv services. We probably should deprecate

Re: NetworkManager doesn't start on boot

2011-02-08 Thread Jon Masters
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 11:27 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 08.02.11 05:18, Jon Masters (jonat...@jonmasters.org) wrote: On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 11:04 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 08.02.11 04:44, Braden McDaniel (bra...@endoframe.com) wrote: I'm not sure

Re: rawhide woes

2011-02-04 Thread Jon Masters
On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 03:09 -0500, Felix Miata wrote: On 2011/02/04 01:26 (GMT-0500) Jon Masters composed: On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 18:04 -0500, Felix Miata wrote: I tried to net (minimal) install 40 hours ago and got no initrd and thus no boot. Culprit was less not installed. I made

Re: rawhide woes

2011-02-03 Thread Jon Masters
On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 18:04 -0500, Felix Miata wrote: I tried to net (minimal) install 40 hours ago and got no initrd and thus no boot. Culprit was less not installed. I made a working initrd via chroot and yum install less. Still when done, ethX cannot be found, so I have no network

Re: Fedora Rawhide Test Day for Network Device Naming on January 27th 2011

2011-01-19 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 22:30 +0530, narendr...@dell.com wrote: The objective is to test the new naming scheme for onboard and PCI add-in network interfaces as suggested by 'biosdevname' utility. It would be great if you could participate and provide your feedback which would help us flush

Re: Fedora distribution build times

2011-01-15 Thread Jon Masters
On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 16:51 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: It took my build system 96 hours to build all of rawhide (10k packages) for both x86_64 and i386. Builders are 10 Dell PowerEdge 1955 servers, each with 2 sockets 3GHz Xeon 5160 CPUs (4 cores each), 8GB RAM. Builders running Fedora 14.

Re: Fedora distribution build times

2011-01-15 Thread Jon Masters
On Sat, 2011-01-15 at 19:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 04:49:37PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: A slowdown by a factor of 4 is a high price to pay for the impact of RemoveSUID. I'd rather pay at most 30%, and not a factor of 4. That's the extreme corner case,

Re: Rawhide: Gnome totally busted after today's (?) round of updates

2011-01-12 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 20:12 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 17:34 -0500, Andy Lawrence wrote: Is there a package we can down-grade to get back up and running? Or an update via Koji? With the gnome-shell, gjs and gobject-introspection builds that are in koji now,

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

2010-12-15 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 22:25 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: Files marked as documentation must not cause additional dependencies that aren't satisfied by the package itself or its dependency chain as it would be if none of its files marked as documentation were included in the package. Doesn't

Re: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines

2010-12-15 Thread Jon Masters
On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 23:57 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: On Wednesday 15 December 2010, Jon Masters wrote: On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 22:25 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: Files marked as documentation must not cause additional dependencies that aren't satisfied by the package itself or its

Re: Proposed package blocking due to FTBFS

2010-12-08 Thread Jon Masters
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 20:29 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: My goal isn't to make life difficult for everyone. My goal is to keep the distribution in a form where it can actually build from the open source we provide. Thanks Matt. What you're doing is vitally important for the distribution, since

Re: Proposed package blocking due to FTBFS

2010-12-06 Thread Jon Masters
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 23:01 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: I trust module-init-tools will get resolved with an impending upstream release. Not like that can go unfixed forever. :-) Should be fixed before Wednesday (tomorrow). I have some fixes for compressed modules too. Will let you know when

  1   2   3   >