Thank you for your reply. I'm looking forward to Netbook Respin.
Everybody writes how great KDE Netbook Plasma and doing reviews but
not in single one nobody mentioned how to turn it on :(
Is it possible to have this choice during login GDM/KDM screen? So
that some users can login into regular
On 05/16/2010 01:28 PM, Valent Turkovic wrote:
Thank you for your reply. I'm looking forward to Netbook Respin.
Everybody writes how great KDE Netbook Plasma and doing reviews but
not in single one nobody mentioned how to turn it on :(
Is it possible to have this choice during login GDM/KDM
On Sat 15 May 2010 1:16:26 pm Valent Turkovic wrote:
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Friday 05 March 2010 18:37:06 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
As I had expected, breaking up the monolithic
packages into individual
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
A segfaulty version of KDE filelight seems to have been pushed into
F13, F12 and (astonishingly) F11. Just filing a bug about that one ...
Filelight is an application maintained by Neal Becker, not by KDE SIG. This
has absolutely nothing to do with KDE SIG's update
On Friday 05 March 2010 18:37:06 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
As I had expected, breaking up the monolithic
packages into individual packages is a whole lot
of unnecessary work. Better to provide releases
as they occur, than to waste time unnecessarily
breaking
A segfaulty version of KDE filelight seems to have been pushed into
F13, F12 and (astonishingly) F11. Just filing a bug about that one ...
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora now
Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
It's actually almost no extra work to build the updates also for the
previous stable release. We have to build them for the current stable
anyway. It just means doing the usual routine (copying the specfile,
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:19 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
Obviously this would require some tools work, but isn't it worth
considering?
This is essentially serviced by KoPeRs
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/KojiPersonalRepos
Except this is still vaporware.
Kalev Lember wrote:
If upstream really issues security fixes for 4.x-1,
Their security advisories include patches, which usually either apply just
fine to the old releases or have a version for the old releases included.
then this is pretty much perfect. We get 4 or 5 bug fix releases, and
On Thursday 04 March 2010 22:13:05 Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 13:59 -0700, Ryan Rix wrote:
The problem is that there _aren't_ bug fixes for these old releases. When
4.x comes out, upstream pretty much drops development on 4.x-1 except
for security issues which are backported
Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
What bugfix releases would we be supposed to push? There are no further
4.3.x releases.
Nothing, if that's the case.
That means bugs will no longer be fixed, is that a price we want to pay just
to avoid the small risk of
Juha Tuomala wrote:
Was it so that mysqld wants to communicate through fs sockets
which does not work on NFS $HOME?
[akonadiserver] Failed to use database akonadi
[akonadiserver] Database error: Can't connect to local MySQL server
[through socket
For all those who're claiming users don't want upgrades like KDE 4.4.0:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-February/367266.html
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/2010-March/006102.html
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
For all those who're claiming users don't want upgrades like KDE 4.4.0:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-February/367266.html
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/2010-March/006102.html
Now, lets see you take the leap in
Mike McGrath wrote:
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
For all those who're claiming users don't want upgrades like KDE 4.4.0:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-February/367266.html
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/2010-March/006102.html
Now, lets see
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 19:17 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Mike McGrath wrote:
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
For all those who're claiming users don't want upgrades like KDE 4.4.0:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-February/367266.html
Ironically it happened again, just now when these FESCO threads
are still warm.
My desktop gui processes leak enough mem that I need to restart
couple times a week or system will run out of memory. Today
I started with updating the F11 with yum. During the update,
I noticed that it's pulling
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Juha Tuomala wrote:
Then I tried to start kmail to start working. It starts, asks
passwords, whines something about Akonadi which i don't use and
then crashes/exists.
Not to mention that kaddressbook which contains all my business
contacts, is broken too:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
http://tuju.fi/fedora/11/kab-20100304.png
looks like that some icons are also missing, but hard to judge
as it wont start properly to interact with user.
That's the problem of not running Akonadi - it's central PIM part of KDE.
The funny part
Juha Tuomala wrote:
My desktop gui processes leak enough mem that I need to restart
couple times a week or system will run out of memory. Today
I started with updating the F11 with yum. During the update,
I noticed that it's pulling in the kde-4.4.0, scary. Then reboot.
[snip]
KDE SIG, you
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Whether it would be a separate backports repo or merely some more
conservativeness in our update stream
FWIW, for stuff like KDE, if we don't allow new feature upgrades even in the
current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an unofficial
one will no
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
You mean the KDE stability proposal? As this is F11, i.e. previous stable,
KDE 4.4 would actually not have been pushed to F11 under that proposal.
How i read it, you would still push *one* feature release in the
middle of stable release lifespan,
Juha Tuomala wrote:
The funny part is that Akonadi is still very much a work in
progress. I've tried to get it working many times without success.
That's the reason majority still uses those plain resources.
Uh, Akonadi is now always used for contacts as of KDE 4.4.
Few days back I asked
On 03/04/2010 07:27 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
That said, IMHO the best solution is still to have this stuff in the
official updates. But it's true that the kind of issues some users are
having with KDE 4.4 are unfortunate. This particular Akonadi issue hasn't
shown up during testing or it
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:01:29 Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
You mean the KDE stability proposal? As this is F11, i.e. previous
stable, KDE 4.4 would actually not have been pushed to F11 under that
proposal.
How i read it, you would still push *one*
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Juha Tuomala juha.tuom...@iki.fi wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an unofficial
one will no doubt spring up, or an existing unofficial repo will pick up
that role (for KDE, kde-redhat
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgr...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Thomas Janssen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Juha Tuomala juha.tuom...@iki.fi wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
current stable release nor support an official backports repo, an
unofficial one will no doubt spring up, or an existing
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:58:32 Thomas Janssen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:30:43 Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
current stable release nor support an official backports repo,
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Go ahead, make that to your kde-hardcore-followers-repo. In my
understanding, that's what it has been for past years already
anyway.
Third party repos are highway to hell unfortunately.
Quite interesting statement from the KDE SIG who runs that
Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
I would argue having this within Fedora infrastructure would be better as
it would prevent proliferation of third-party repos replacing Fedora
packages and the resulting compatibility issues (see e.g. the chaos we're
having for RHEL
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
will pick up that role (for KDE, kde-redhat stable would probably be
revived, currently it's mostly empty for Fedora as the kind of stuff
which would be in there is usually just pushed as official Fedora
updates).
Go ahead, make that to your
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Upstream has no policy about what kind of releases are to be provided as
updates, this is a distribution decision.
They add features to own releases just for that reason, so
downstreams and users could avoid such mess that has just happened.
If you
Juha Tuomala wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
You mean the KDE stability proposal? As this is F11, i.e. previous
stable, KDE 4.4 would actually not have been pushed to F11 under that
proposal.
How i read it, you would still push *one* feature release in the
middle of
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
That's why nobody can't enjoy the upstream's intended stability in bugfix
releases and plan major upgrades.
You keep saying that, yet you have provided no evidence of such a stance
from upstream. KDE upstream actually has no policy on what versions
Mike McGrath wrote:
Alternatively, the KDE SIG could stop ignoring the problems that were
caused this week by the updates they released. Even an I'm sorry I broke
your desktop would go a long way. The update the busted my desktop
happened on a pretty vanilla install, I suspect lots of users
On 03/04/2010 10:15 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
In other words, SIG's current policy is doing more harm than good
for Fedora.
Not necessarily. There has also been some very positive feedback for the KDE
4.4 updates, and some people are using Fedora BECAUSE such updates get
pushed.
I agree
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 14:57 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Whether it would be a separate backports repo or merely some more
conservativeness in our update stream
FWIW, for stuff like KDE, if we don't allow new feature upgrades even in the
current stable release nor
On 03/04/2010 10:59 PM, Ryan Rix wrote:
The problem is that there _aren't_ bug fixes for these old releases. When 4.x
comes out, upstream pretty much drops development on 4.x-1 except for security
issues which are backported from 4.x.
If upstream really issues security fixes for 4.x-1, then
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:19 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
yup, this is very likely. One reason Mandriva's backports repository
was initiated was because, when MDV allowed only conservative
updates and had no official facility for adventurous updates, a
forest of third-party repos offering new
On 03/04/2010 04:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:19 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
yup, this is very likely. One reason Mandriva's backports repository
was initiated was because, when MDV allowed only conservative
updates and had no official facility for adventurous
On 03/04/2010 04:36 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 13:28 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
As a little gedankenexperiment, let's explore for a second a 4th option:
Fedora-blessed/hosted/sponsored/whatever repos for things that we don't
feel should be mandated on users, but
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:43 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
We already have systems for checking common guideline compliance
problems and things like dependency issues within a single
repository; we don't have tools for doing this across a bunch of
separate quasi-independent repos.
Do you
On 03/05/2010 03:09 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
Option two is one more repo for all updates. Which may be well and
good, but might also be less interesting than a more general approach. In
#4, what I'm suggesting is essentially the possibility of a SIG having
overlay repos for whatever distro
On 03/04/2010 04:44 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/05/2010 03:09 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
Option two is one more repo for all updates. Which may be well and
good, but might also be less interesting than a more general approach. In
#4, what I'm suggesting is essentially the possibility of a
On 03/04/2010 05:13 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 17:02 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
On 03/04/2010 04:44 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 03/05/2010 03:09 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
Option two is one more repo for all updates. Which may be well and
good, but might also be less
Juha Tuomala wrote:
For all those who say that latest stuff is the
reason why
I use Fedora!!!1, there is rawhide for you.
I have tried this, but that is not possible.
Generally, a few weeks after the release of a new
fedora, rawhide becomes unusable for a while,
even unbootable. My last
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
What bugfix releases would we be supposed to push? There are no further
4.3.x releases.
Nothing, if that's the case.
In case there is a major security hole and they only fix it in SCM
and notify about it without making a release - I expect you to add
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Could you try to run it manually and paste log/output somewhere?
akonadictl start
Was it so that mysqld wants to communicate through fs sockets
which does not work on NFS $HOME?
[akonadiserver] Failed to use database akonadi
[akonadiserver]
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
It's actually almost no extra work to build the updates also for the
previous stable release. We have to build them for the current stable
anyway. It just means doing the usual routine (copying the specfile,
committing and running
50 matches
Mail list logo
