Am 31.03.2011 00:38, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
I can do a review in exchange for hotot
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692281
Hi Rahul,
I've taken the review request. It would be nice if you could review
liblouisutdml for me:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677946
-Original Message-
From: devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Orion Poplawski
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 7:06 AM
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Subject: firefox/xulrunner-bin confusion
Fired up top on my F-15
On 03/30/2011 11:48 AM, Tim Niemueller wrote:
Hi fellow Fedorans.
I'd like to push a minor update of Lua, which incorporates a small
bugfix patch, and some cosmetic fixes to the builds script. First
testing by a proven tester has been done successfully, but I need more
testing to be able to
Fedora QA holds Test Day regarding ABRT 2 and Retrace Server
on March 31:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-03-31_ABRT_Retrace_Server
This test day will focus on Retrace Server feature [1] in
Fedora 15 as well as ABRT 2.0. Refreshed and bright new
test cases are prepared for your
Am 31.03.2011 01:38, schrieb Chris Adams:
Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de said:
/etc is static configuration data.
There are a number of things under /etc that are not static
configuration data.
/etc is read-only during boot.
/run is writable all the way.
On 03/30/2011 03:21 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04, Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) wrote:
Also, can somebody point me to the place where the FHS
On 03/30/2011 04:12 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 04:05:27 PM Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 15:08, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/30/2011 02:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 30.03.11 18:04,
On Thu, 31.03.11 13:13, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
cite
Applications must never create or require special files or
subdirectories in the root directory. Other locations in the FHS
hierarchy provide more than enough flexibility for any package.
/cite
Well, we are not
On 03/31/2011 12:06 PM, Martin Gieseking wrote:
Am 31.03.2011 00:38, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
I can do a review in exchange for hotot
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692281
Hi Rahul,
I've taken the review request. It would be nice if you could review
liblouisutdml for me:
On 03/31/2011 02:56 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
-Original Message-
From: devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Orion Poplawski
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 7:06 AM
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Subject:
On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 17:57 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/27/2011 05:27 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 03:58:06PM +0200, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
Hi.
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:48:14 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote
NM supports static IPs these days. So I think that rather
Hi folks,
Could you please glance through this? I intend to commit it tomorrow.
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/misc/comps-diff-design-suite.patch
Thanks,
Ankur
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Ankur Sinha wrote:
Could you please glance through this? I intend to commit it tomorrow.
I'd suggest listing digikam at least as optional.
If you do, you'll probably also want a:
packagereq type=conditional requires=digikamkipi-plugins/packagereq
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
This doesn't seem right. Can't compare across releases?
Original Message
Subject: rpmguard: PASSED; 0 warnings for netcdf-4.1.2-1.fc16
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:14:27 + (UTC)
From: aut...@fedoraproject.org
To: autoqa-resu...@lists.fedorahosted.org,
First of all, I do not want to take any credit for this idea, it belongs
to John Rose, and has been bouncing around, trying to come to life,
since July 2010. I am just happy to help it finally hatch!
John, Jared, Paul, Max, and I all want to thank Fedora users and
contributors for everything that
On 03/31/2011 01:17 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
This doesn't seem right. Can't compare across releases?
At the moment, this is expected behavior. Rpmguard only compares builds
within a release or, more specifically, within a koji tag (dist-f16 in
this particular case).
If you would like to see
Hi
Just a find on my Fedora 15 system for .la files, results in the
following. Do we run any routine tests for things like this? is AutoQA
meant to improve packaging?
---
/usr/lib64/gnome-bluetooth/libgnome-bluetooth-applet.la
/usr/lib64/gnome-shell/libgnome-shell.la
On 03/31/2011 02:31 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
I'll whip up a Feature page (probably we'll announce it for F-16) if
there's an interest.
Sure. That would be awesome.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 03/31/2011 07:28 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 17:57 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/27/2011 05:27 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 03:58:06PM +0200, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
Hi.
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:48:14 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote
NM supports static
On 03/31/2011 01:22 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 31.03.11 13:13, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
cite
Applications must never create or require special files or
subdirectories in the root directory. Other locations in the FHS
hierarchy provide more than enough
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 01:22:14PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 31.03.11 13:13, Ralf Corsepius (rc040...@freenet.de) wrote:
cite
Applications must never create or require special files or
subdirectories in the root directory. Other locations in the FHS
hierarchy provide
On 04/01/2011 03:17 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Just a find on my Fedora 15 system for .la files, results in the
following. Do we run any routine tests for things like this? is AutoQA
meant to improve packaging?
I sense a misunderstanding. Though it's right, in general *.la's should
not
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 05:20:03AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/31/2011 07:28 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
domainname is only used for NIS,
Hmm, this doesn't match with my understanding.
Summary of changes:
0c540e8... Import. (*)
c720fc6... - Upstream update. (*)
c15bb3c... - Upstream update. - Hack around incorrect hard-coded path (*)
6baae9d... - Upstream update. (*)
3f2a83a... - Upstream update. (*)
4e0a2b3... - Rebuilt for
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669862
--- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 09:04:05 EDT ---
It's only blocked in koji - not officially retired
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Config-MVP:
f07790e8f0f00c3d2a048bde29799c97 Config-MVP-2.21.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The lightweight tag 'perl-Perl-Critic-1.114-1.fc15' was created pointing to:
2868c63... Tidy dependencies and add --with authortests build option
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
The lightweight tag 'perl-Perl-Critic-1.114-1.fc16' was created pointing to:
2868c63... Tidy dependencies and add --with authortests build option
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=677888
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31
17:12:42 EDT ---
perl-Perl-Critic-1.114-1.fc15
29 matches
Mail list logo
