Hi all,
It turns out mozjs60 60.2.0 (in F29 updates-testing and rawhide)
silently broke ABI and that broke gjs that gnome-shell uses. I've
rebuilt gjs; if you've already updated and can't log in, then
gjs-1.54.0-3.fc29 and gjs-1.54.0-3.fc30 should help.
While rebasing indent package to a fresh new 2.2.12 release (done
after 8 years), I corrected license declaration from "GPLv3+" to
"GPLv3+ and BSD and Verbatim".
-- Petr
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
Hi,
On 10-09-18 14:40, Abhiram Kuchibhotla wrote:
According to the LICENSE file in their git repo, the code in the repo seems to
be gplv2. Not sure if that proves anything. I'll do the licensecheck -r later
and update you guys.
On Mon 10 Sep, 2018, 6:08 PM Richard Shaw,
Hi,
I am working on a project that require a fedora spin with firefox which
point to specific web url as the default home page.
This will be applicable to all users and I could not find anything on skell
directory against mozilla.
I have manually altered (just for testing) vim
On 13.9.2018 22:44, Petr Šabata wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 04:43:15PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hi,
I was thinking about this for a while and I got the impression that this is
something I don't know the answer for. The question is a bit harder to
formulate simply, so let put it in
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Manas Mangaonkar
wrote:
>> Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the > > same approach
>
> TBH I don't really know how that'd be done with the current package,would
> love to learn.
>
Please take a look at my slides :
On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 04:43:15PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was thinking about this for a while and I got the impression that this is
> something I don't know the answer for. The question is a bit harder to
> formulate simply, so let put it in examples:
I see no one's really
On 13/09/18 22:16, Danishka Navin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am working on a project that require a fedora spin with firefox which point
> to specific web url as the default home page.
> This will be applicable to all users and I could not find anything on skell
> directory against mozilla.
>
> I have
Release status of the Fedora 29 Beta is NO-GO.
Due to in-progress RC2 for the F29 Beta release and presence of
blocker bugs, the decision is “No Go”. The Beta release slips for one
week to “Target #1” date (September 25th)[1]. We are not going to slip
the Final GA yet.
For more information
Hi all.
I'm going to retire the packages 'nini' and 'smuxi' on rawhide within
24h since now. Both upstream project look like over.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 14/132 (x86_64), 4/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20180912.n.0):
ID: 279381 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/279381
ID: 279384 Test:
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20180912.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20180913.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 53
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 371.45 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0
On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 18:17 +0200, Tomas Orsava wrote:
> We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries
> to install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf would recommend
> them alternative packages. These offered packages would advertise
> that they are an alternative
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 06:17:39PM +0200, Tomas Orsava wrote:
> Hi!
> We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries to
> install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf would recommend them
> alternative packages. These offered packages would advertise that they are
> an
On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 16:07 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10-09-18 14:40, Abhiram Kuchibhotla wrote:
> > According to the LICENSE file in their git repo, the code in the repo seems
> > to be gplv2. Not sure if that proves anything. I'll do the licensecheck -r
> > later and update you
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 9:17 AM, Tomas Orsava wrote:
> Hi!
> We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries to
> install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf would recommend them
> alternative packages. These offered packages would advertise that they are
> an
Hi!
We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries to
install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf would recommend them
alternative packages. These offered packages would advertise that they
are an alternative for XYZ using a specially formatted Provides tag.
For
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:58 PM Tomas Orsava wrote:
>
> On 09/13/2018 06:43 PM, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 18:17 +0200, Tomas Orsava wrote:
> >> We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries
> >> to install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf
On 09/13/2018 06:43 PM, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 18:17 +0200, Tomas Orsava wrote:
We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries
to install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf would recommend
them alternative packages. These offered packages would
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628414
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System ---
ctstream-29-1.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-ad15c39249
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System ---
ctstream-29-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-2ce47ca6ac
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
ctstream-29-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-7f2b1bc3e5
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System ---
ctstream-29-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-f77039ed26
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628414
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System ---
perl-Archive-Zip-1.64-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-a922bd5761
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1626980
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On 13.9.2018 05:27, Scott Talbert wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello.
In line with
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompil
ation_phase_2
I plan to mass push the following 3 lines on the top of your package
spec:
I updated my
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628552
Bug ID: 1628552
Summary: perl-Archive-Tar-2.32 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-Archive-Tar
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello.
In line with
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompil
ation_phase_2
I plan to mass push the following 3 lines on the top of your package spec:
I updated my packages to set _python_bytecompile_extra to 0, but
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628551
Bug ID: 1628551
Summary: perl-Config-IniFiles-3.00 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-Config-IniFiles
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628550
Bug ID: 1628550
Summary: perl-BSON-v1.8.0 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: perl-BSON
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628552
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
Release status of the Fedora 29 Beta is NO-GO.
Due to in-progress RC2 for the F29 Beta release and presence of
blocker bugs, the decision is “No Go”. The Beta release slips for one
week to “Target #1” date (September 25th)[1]. We are not going to slip
the Final GA yet.
For more information
On Mon, 2018-08-20 at 19:06 +1000, William Brown wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I was talking to mkosek earlier, and he informed me that the FreeIPA
> project have adopted a Coc - which is great!
>
> I remember that last year we implemented the fedora coc in our
> project.
> I think that given our
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2018/09/14/report-389-ds-base-1.4.0.16-20180913gite59b309.fc28.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
95 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-3835d39d1a
unrtf-0.21.9-8.el7
46 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-f9d6ff695a
bibutils-6.6-1.el7 ghc-hs-bibutils-6.6.0.0-1.el7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System ---
ctstream-29-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623268
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
mod_perl-2.0.10-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628414
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
Hi!
We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries to
install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf would recommend them
alternative packages. These offered packages would advertise that they
are an alternative for XYZ using a specially formatted Provides tag.
For
> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes:
ZJ> Heh, I don't think the FPC policy is very robust.
It's as robust as is reasonable to implement.
When fedora-obsolete-packages was introduced, there was considerable
controversy over whether it is remotely acceptable to remove installed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1628413
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System ---
ctstream-29-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623265
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System ---
mod_perl-2.0.10-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You
On 09/13/2018 06:43 PM, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 18:17 +0200, Tomas Orsava wrote:
We'd like to propose a new functionality for dnf: When a user tries
to install a package XYZ and dnf doesn't find it, dnf would recommend
them alternative packages. These offered packages would
46 matches
Mail list logo
