On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 13:15:04 -0500,
Tony Nelson wrote:
>
> Put SELinux into Permissive mode for single-user mode? Or just print a
> suggestion to do that? (I'd think that SELinux would normally be
> perceived as an obstacle to the normal uses of single-user mode.)
I think doing it auto
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 18:46:32 -0800,
Eric Smith wrote:
>
> The Licenses page of the MeshLab wiki gives a privacy disclaimer stating
> that it phones home periodically to check for availability of updated
> versions, and that it uploads some aggregated statistical data about the
Updates s
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 22:32:57 +0100,
Gianluca Sforna wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:00 PM, John Poelstra wrote:
> > A friendly reminder that yesterday, January 26, 2010, we reached the
> > Feature and Spin submission deadline.
>
> Where is the list of accepted spins?
> https://fedorapro
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 17:16:14 -0500,
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
> Who's been told to fork Fedora because of the status-quo-target-audience?
The guy who was complaining about nonfree firmware. He actually made a forked
distribution for at least a while.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedor
On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 18:04:29 +0200,
Felix Kaechele wrote:
> Furthermore I'd be interested in comaintaining the Asterisk stack,
> especially also the DAHDI package, as I plan to submit the DAHDI kmods
> to RPMFusion and it would be easier for me to keep stuff in sync if I
> had commit access.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 13:27:05 +0200,
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Problem is not an image (we will provide it in the future, forever), the
> issue
> is size constraint - software grows faster and faster, we have more
> dependencies
> etc. -> means less software on LiveCD...
I hope to occasi
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 14:50:38 -0400,
Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>
> One thing I am curious about is why, when slipping for an Alpha target,
> the whole schedule slips. Can't we just take a week out of the Beta
> cycle? The amount of testing time is roughly the same.
We've tried that in the
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 13:19:29 -0500,
Mike McGrath wrote:
> Since 2006 we've slipped at least 16-18 weeks by my count. That's more
> than half of a full release cycle.
>
> Thoughts?
One thing I have noticed is people landing big changes (such as python and
systemd) that break things for a wh
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:00:29 -0700,
Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> We usually catch most initial blockers for any given release at the
> first TC stage. Bugs we slip for are usually ones identified at that
> stage that we couldn't fix in time, bugs introduced between TC and RC by
This is anoth
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 14:32:21 -0400,
Felix Miata wrote:
>
> So users of absent or dysfunctional DDC and/or EDID should be committed to
> 800x600 or 1024x768 @96DPI until they replace their (quality, antique, still
> working just fine) displays or learn the cryptic and complicated methodology
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 01:18:29 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > I hope to occasionally push back a little against this. When LZMA squashfs
> > makes it upstream (it looks like it won't happen in time for F14) we will
> > probably gain about 1
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 16:54:22 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Chris Adams wrote:
> > Why don't you give the kernel maintainers the same courtesy?
>
> Because LZMA SquashFS is a feature which affects the live images, and almost
> exclusively the live images, and as such the SIGs controlling the
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 22:22:18 -0700,
Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> How do you suggest we be "more conservative"? If you expect the
> developers to do this on their own, good luck. If you want there to be
> some sort of enforcement I welcome suggestions.
My suggestion would be to ask developers
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 09:49:42 -0600,
"Nathanael D. Noblet" wrote:
>
> Since the move to git, would it not be easier to allow features to
> branch rawhide, get their individual bits together (syncing with 'trunk'
> periodically)... Then like the kernel does, merge back the working bits
> t
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 10:04:22 -0500,
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Do you like fixing things but don't care what?
> >
> > Are you a jack of all trades sort of person?
> >
> > We need your help!
>
> Hey Mike,
>
> I know you're a cool guy and would be interested in sign
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 18:20:29 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > I really think the benefits and costs need to be looked at on a case by
> > case basis and the package maintainers should be the ones making the call.
>
> The problem is, the kernel
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 19:07:57 +0200,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > Most features are fairly independent and don't cause problems when they
> > run late or have problems, outside of that feature. Some are somewhat
> > disruptive and can make it
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 00:32:46 +0200,
Sven Lankes wrote:
>
> Smartphones seem to be changing this and the number of full-quote,
> top-post emails is increasing steadily.
I prefer that if it's too hard to intersperse text, that all of the old
message be removed.
The signatures that are prima
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 19:02:36 +1000,
David Timms wrote:
>
> I was wondering if there is any process that we (spin developers - music
> list) could use to confirm that a spin iso was
> 1. built with a particular kickstart file (or list of files when there
> is kickstart %include x directives)
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 16:44:29 -0700,
Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 01:15 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Some web sites are indeed abusing JavaScript.
>
> > A web site is
> > not and should not be an application, an application is not and should not
> > be a web site.
>
> J
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 15:48:14 -0700,
Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Meanwhile, back in the real world, it is effectively impossible to use
> all sorts of useful websites without Javascript enabled. Even for
Then don't use them. If sites don't get used they may stop requiring
people to significa
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 17:08:27 -0700,
"J. Randall Owens" wrote:
>
> Maybe you should file a bug against Javascript in Firefox? Oh, wait,
> bugzilla uses Javascript, doesn't it? Scratch that, no bugzilla for the
> purists.
I don't use it with javascript enabled. Unfortunately the javascript
Release bump scripts bumping release version numbers for prereleases should
be handled more carefully or they can cause update problems later on.
For example xorg-x11-drv-ati-6.13.1-0.20100705git37b348059.fc14 got bumped
to xorg-x11-drv-ati-6.13.1-1.20100705git37b348059.fc14 and then later
xorg-x11
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:04:33 -0700,
Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> This likely happened because the original release string was non-conformant.
I missed that. After that happened it looks like the release string did get
changed to be conformant.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.o
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 23:05:11 +0200,
Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> I know I am repeating myself: everything's wonderful.
Maybe now, but the landing close to alpha made it harder to do some other
testing needed before the alpha. (Though the fallout from Python and Boost
updates, seemed wors
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 23:30:22 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
>
> Being "2 months old" isn't a problem in itself ... bugs on the other
> hand might be if they can't be fixed in time (this does not include
> already fixed ones).
It is already too late. The bugs impacted alpha testing and probably in
a
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 16:45:49 -0500,
Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
>
> I'm of two minds here. On the one hand it would be nice to preserve the
> long-standing syntax convention for the reason Matt described. But on
> the other hand, putting the verb before the object seems to mesh well
> wit
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 09:10:35 -0700,
Jesse Keating wrote:
> - -updates. A potential way to fix this is to have bodhi not /move/ the
> build from dist-f14-updates-candidate into -testing or -updates, but
> instead just add -testing or -updates as a secondary tag to the build.
> This should en
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 17:16:12 +,
"\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\"" wrote:
> It's not far from reality that Red Hat will get bought by a company
> like Oracle so what's preventing us to get the same treatment as
> OpenSolaris got?
>
> What happens to all the work the community has done, the fru
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 17:43:35 +,
"\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\"" wrote:
>
> Unfortunate this has the side effect off taking side of one part of the
> community over the other ( and the problem that comes with that ) and
> usually people that are asked in cases like these are not the once
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 11:42:15 -0700,
Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> This is utter bullshit. It assumes that anybody who works in the corporate
> world and happens to have an interest in Fedora is somehow going to be a
> puppet for the Smokey backroom corporate overlords and their evil designs
>
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 16:14:42 -0400,
Chris Ball wrote:
>
> How are you defining which things are sponsored and paid for? If it's
> "whatever things Red Hat chooses to pay for", then the answer to how
> much RH pays for is 100% by definition. If it's "all of the things
> Red Hat requires fr
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 05:46:31 +,
"\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\"" wrote:
> Times change and people with it and I'm willing to put money were my
> mouth is. So let's separate the infrastructure to a neutral ground,
> let's find a good place to host the community on. I don't have much to
> sp
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 21:56:17 +0200,
Sven Lankes wrote:
>
> Also - and this is a question that I have asked myself and others a
> couple of times - if you could implement Fedora the way you want: What
> unique selling points are left for Fedora? "Fedora is Ubuntu with rpm"
> sounds about as
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 17:33:33 -0400,
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
> Well for one, if there is nothing different mission wise between
> Fedora and Ubuntu, but Ubuntu gets more attention from desktop users,
> then people might as well just all use Ubuntu.
Despite being derived from Debian, the U
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 00:45:49 -0400,
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
> So far the only brokeness I have had in all of F13 is with `seabios-bin`.
Wasn't there recently a packagekit problem where it stopped doing updates,
making it kind of hard to get a fix unless you knew about yum? That's
a prett
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:40:29 -0800,
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>
> I'm a package maintainer for one such application. I have yet to hear
> from a single user...ever..that tracking releases from upstream has
> been unwanted for this specific application regardless of the UI
> tweaks that happen bet
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 17:20:23 -0400,
Al Dunsmuir wrote:
>
> Please do not ignore that the browser is there for the user to use,
> not for Fedora to stream information in spite of the user's wishes.
Nor for Mozilla to track its users. There shouldn't be a start page at
all as it opens a c
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 17:46:53 -0400,
Matt McCutchen wrote:
>
> The update page is remote. If you want to disable it, set
> "startup.homepage_override_url" to the empty string. There is also
> "startup.homepage_welcome_url" for the first run of the browser.
Thanks!
--
devel mailing list
d
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 11:41:34 +0100,
David Howells wrote:
>
> Would it be worth our while putting into Fedora basic gcc and binutils rpms
> for cross compilers for all the Linux arches? I keep finding the need to
> compile kernels for arches other than the x86_64 boxes I normally use, and I
On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 17:26:28 +0200,
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/9/2 Daniel J Walsh :
> > It could be an SELinux problem. Look for AVC messages.
>
> No AVC's releated to flash-plugin. I disabled SELinux and it still
> doesn't work - so it's not a "security issue" ;)
Note that its bette
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 19:24:58 -0400,
Neal Becker wrote:
> I need to make a minor edit to one of the sources of a package. I want the
> sources on my machine in a state so that emacs will recognize the files are
> under git control and act accordingly, so I can do my edits and use emacs
>
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 20:06:41 +0530,
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > livecd-tools-034-1.fc15
> > ---
> > * Sat Sep 11 2010 Bruno Wolff III - 034-1
> >
>
> [snipped]
>
> Thanks for working on this. I was getting worried that this tool woul
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 11:43:03 +0200,
Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> heyyas,
>
> ogre3d, one of the most important 3d engines we have in fedora is
> already lagging behind over half a year in rawhide:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=576286
>
> would be nice to see it finally updated
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 08:21:33 -0500,
"Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ)" wrote:
> I don't think it would have been too late for Fedora 14. It isn't a core
> package that needs to be available in a spin, afaik...
It wasn't when I was going to try to work on it, but I got swamped with
Spins SIG / livecd-to
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 21:26:41 -0400,
Máirín Duffy wrote:
>
> Hmm. Here's a couple ideas I could think of:
>
> - "If you don't place a vote by $DATE, your vote will be assumed to be
> $POSITION" can be scarily motivating.
>
> - Nag emails sent out by trac daily until you click on the email'
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:27:07 +0100,
M A Young wrote:
>
> I agree. I was worried when systemd appeared in F14 just before the alpha.
> Really we should have been much closer to where we are now at the start of
> the alpha phase, and systemd should have gone in soon after F13 was forked
>
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:01:04 +0200,
Andrea Musuruane wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Thomas Janssen
> wrote:
> > File a ticket with FESCo. We should have "*all* packages go trough
> > updates-testing, regardless of who's the maintainer or what's the
> > reason of an update". If FE
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:09:58 -0400,
"John W. Linville" wrote:
>
> AIUI, they main technical reason that they were finally willing to
> open-up was that they were able to add some regulatory enforcement code
> in their firmware. The added firmware functionality required more
> firmware reso
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 07:20:30 -0700,
John Poelstra wrote:
>
> And we are already reviewing and accepting features for Fedora 15. The
> process never stops.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy
Thanks for the reminder; I'll put LZMA back in for F15 and hope the kernel
change
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 17:11:03 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
>
> That doesn't work ... someone has to be activly pushing the patches
> upstream .. instead of just waiting and hoping that they magically
> make it in.
It's somewhere on Lougher's to do list. We can still be ready to take advantage
of i
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 17:20:22 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
>
> I said _someone_ not _you_ ;) ... if Lougher is working on it fine.
It's on his to do list, which isn't really the same thing. Lately he
has been doing more getting the extended attributes feature cleaned up
and a bit with the lzo stuf
syslinux recently split out a a subpackage syslinux-extlinux.
livecd-tools uses /sbin/extlinux in livecd-iso-to-disk.
My questiomn is it better to use requires on syslinux for F13 (and maybe
F12) and syslinux-extlinux going forward or should I require /sbin/extlinux
allowing the same spec file to
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 18:48:03 +0200,
Till Maas wrote:
>
> Latest design decisions for package management tools include to sign and
> verify packages before they are installed. Rawhide RPMs are afaik not
> signed, therefore using it for any non testing system that might contain
> sensitive da
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 18:52:41 +0200,
Michal Schmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:07:05 -0500 Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > My questiomn is it better to use requires on syslinux for F13 (and
> > maybe F12) and syslinux-extlinux going forward or should I
> > require /sbin/
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:17:19 -0700,
Carl Byington wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> desktop-i386-20100916.15.iso fails to boot from cd on dell dimension
> 2350. Does it work for other folks?
Do you have some more symptoms you can tell us? I did a local compose fr
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 13:23:27 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:17:19 -0700,
> Carl Byington wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > desktop-i386-20100916.15.iso fails to boot from cd on dell dimension
&g
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 23:56:54 +0200,
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What are the current plans for SystemD in F14? Systemd is still listed
> as F14 feature. Will it be developed in F14 or in external repo as
> Rahul Sundaram suggested?
From what I have seen discussed, probably neither.
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 16:00:46 -0400,
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Michel Alexandre Salim writes:
> >> Note: I don't think Mark was proposing to do the packaging work himself.
> >> But it'd be great if whoever picks this up (Michał, are you
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:41:31 -0700,
John Reiser wrote:
> Executable program files built by gcc+glibc on Fedora 14 contain a PT_NOTE
> which says "for GNU/Linux 2.6.32". (For example, see "file /bin/date";
> the presence of a NOTE is indicated by "readelf --segments /bin/date",
> but readelf
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 01:51:03 +0200,
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>
> Setting up "official" backport repo will avoid repos fragmentation.
> Keeping all cool updates in one place appears to be a reasonable idea.
> Am I right?
If we had infinite manpower this might be doable on request. As things
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:59:06 -0400,
Brandon Lozza wrote:
> However, if for example Microsoft had a similar system and did package
> software for it. Their users would be up in arms for the latest
> firefox too and Microsoft wouldn't keep them on an old firefox
> version. Where is the logic i
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 15:47:04 -0600,
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> I'd like to ask for feedback and helping cleaning up an updates policy
> draft page:
Do you want feedback on the mailing list or the Talk page pn the wiki?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https:/
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:35:01 +0200,
Tomas Mraz wrote:
>
> - Avoid changing the user experence if at all possible. - this is too
> strong condition. In some cases fixing a bug might inevitable change the
> user experience and in some cases for example the user experience might
> be just seve
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:24:38 +0100,
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> I use Rawhide on my laptop and one of my servers, so I'll tell you the
> answer to this: because critical components such as the kernel are
> often broken. IME this is because there is no testing of these
> components befo
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 14:06:12 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
> Some of the reasons I can think of:
>
> 2) No signed packages
There is a plan to deal with that, but I am not sure what its current
status is.
> 5) To many broken deps, which might prevent applying updates and security
> fixes
Hopeful
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 09:59:51 -0400,
Al Dunsmuir wrote:
>
> If a second rawhide-specific staging repository (equivalent to
> updates-testing, so call it rawhide-testing) was added with some
> autoqa automation to prevent gratuitous problems (such as broken
> dependencies
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 15:34:34 +0100,
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> No, I think you are wrong.
>
> First of all, I can see no benefit in pushing a package that cannot do
> its basic function to Rawhide. Even in Rawhide, no one wants a kernel
> that doesn't boot, even if in some circumstan
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 17:01:02 +0200,
Tomas Mraz wrote:
> I say that the example of Webkit should be removed because if it is not
> possible to backport the security patch and due to the version update
> Midori has to be updated to a new version regardless of the changes of
> user experience.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 17:05:30 +0200,
Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> It isn't going to be perfect, but it'll definitely be better than what
> we have now.
The other case to consider is two updates in rawhide-pending that each
are OK with rawhide, but which together have dependency issues.
--
deve
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 17:27:43 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 17:01:02 +0200,
> > Tomas Mraz wrote:
> >> I say that the example of Webkit should be removed because if it is not
>
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 17:51:01 +0200,
Tomas Mraz wrote:
> Of course, the issue might be very minor, but in that case it is not a
> "judgement call based on how intrusive thec changes are" but "judgement
> call on whether the pros and cons of doing the update are significantly
> in favor of pro
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 18:58:25 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
>
> In case of a security issue a random note somewhere "don't do that" is
> not acceptable ... that's all I am saying here.
> You are leaving users at risk by assuming that they will read that
> notice (note: most wont).
I disagree. There
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:35:38 -0600,
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, that would be, BAD:
>
> - Changing User interface (moving menu items or buttons around)
> - Changing names of commands for command line.
> - Changing behavior of command line options (ie, --foo does something
> totally differen
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:35:55 -0600,
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 17:09:32 -0500
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 15:47:04 -0600,
> > Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > Greetings.
> > >
> > > I'd like t
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 13:05:23 -0600,
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> ok. I Changed 'Beta' mentions in the Pre Beta section to "Alpha or Beta
> releases". Does that work?
That looks fine now. Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 20:56:07 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
>
> Might be true but a random notice on some website / mailinglist /
> $whatever is NOT a fix. period.
If one decided to use a notification to mitigate a security issue, one would
put the notice where the affected people would be likely t
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 13:01:49 -0600,
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> Right. Also, added to that is: Are the bug fixes worth shipping to
> millions of people? ie, do they fix bugs that Fedora users would/have
> encountered.
That's another gray area without much guidance currently. I think mostly
pac
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 19:33:22 +,
Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
>
> But branched releases stabilize sometime before the beta point is
> reached, which triggered off this huge discussion in the first place,
> because Postgresql 9.0 came out too late for inclusion.
But if you are trackin
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 14:45:03 -0500,
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>
> Rawhide kernels or using a stable kernel w/ Rawhide are not valid
> options. Rawhide is rawhide - development of Fedora, not for production
> use. Period. You can't jazz it up no matter how hard you try (Looking at
> you
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 22:38:21 +0200,
Benny Amorsen wrote:
>
> I don't know about "many", but there is at least one organisation
> which runs production databases on Postgres on Fedora. People keep
> saying that "Fedora isn't for servers", but I just don't see why not.
Because it is more wor
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 09:34:12 -0400,
Brandon Lozza wrote:
>
> Some people also pointed out another interesting tidbit and that is
> proprietary video drivers. Some of us use them and want to be able to
> use them. We wouldn't be using a rawhide kernel if it won't load the
> modules. I assume
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 15:51:37 +0200,
FlorianFesti wrote:
>
> 1) Comps groups. Not even used by PK to the full extend. Nevertheless
> several groups are huge with over 100 packages (winner being "Games"
> with over 300). Sorry, 100 packages in one list view doesn't work for me.
Games have
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:23:25 -0500,
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > The kmod rpms for rawhide are already provided by rpmfusion. I don't know
> > how often they do them nor how often new kernel releases just plain
> > break the proprietary
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 17:43:47 +0100,
Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> For the fact that its gone from version X to version Y yes. For the
> actual application changed between version X and version Y they can
> see the ChangeLog that's in the %doc or alternatively check the
> release notes for the n
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 10:40:22 -0700,
John Reiser wrote:
> Compiled code for minimum(), maximum(), etc. suffers from a compiler bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634757-O1 wrong-code by cmove
> Unfortunately this bug can corrupt user data silently.
>
> I have hit the bug
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 20:32:14 +0200,
Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:58:05 +0200, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 10:40:22 -0700, John Reiser
> > wrote:
> > > Compiled code for minimum(), maximum(), etc. suffers from a c
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 21:50:21 +0200,
Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:53:09 +0200, seth vidal wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 13:48 -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > > When will the Fedora project begin recommending x86_64 as the
> > > preferred option on the relevant hardware?
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 22:15:48 +0200,
Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 21:58:26 +0200, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 21:50:21 +0200, Jan Kratochvil
> > wrote:
> > > F14+ livecd-tools have now /usr/bin/mkbiarch for live images auto
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 23:00:45 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
>
> The x86_64 vs. i686 thing aside ... IMO the CD size limit does more
> harm than good and should have been lifted a while ago.
The CD size limit is self imposed by the Spins that choose to do so.
The 4 GiB size limit is a Spins SIG rul
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 23:35:43 +0200,
drago01 wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 23:00:45 +0200,
> > drago01 wrote:
> >>
> >> The x86_64 vs. i686 thing aside ... IMO the CD size limit does more
&g
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:57:11 -0400,
James Laska wrote:
>
> In fairness, reboot was tested by a proventester for this update. The
> bug doesn't surface on reboot alone. The problem happens after prelink
> has run ... then you're hosed.
You still had a chance if you didn't reboot. rpm st
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 08:29:32 -0400,
Brandon Lozza wrote:
>
> Interesting, from the meeting we can tell
>
> 1) A number of people want to give Mozilla an exception.
>
> 2) BRANDING is an issue, like I said in another thread. Which is why
> people are against removing it.
People have claim
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 10:59:08 -0400,
Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>
> I have an idea... I'm going to create a fork of Fedora. I'm going to
> fill it full of proprietary shit. I'm going to find the buggiest closed
> drivers I can find and load them into the kernel. I'll also make it so
> that
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:29:59 -0400,
Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>
> The only possible room for debate that I see is that there is, in
> Firefox, a potential conflict between our "ship upstream" and "don't
> bundle libs" values. We have FESco to sort that out.
Those are the policies I was re
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:25:27 -0500,
Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Bruno Wolff III said:
> > Some have
> > also hoped that Mozilla would change with regard to bundled libraries in the
> > near future, but that seems pretty unlikely.
>
> I think that&
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 12:04:49 -0500,
Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> We also decided to allow yubikeys as an authentication option for the
> larger community to some hosts and services like fedorapeople.org or
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/community/. When asked for a password,
> just use your
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 11:41:13 +0100,
"Richard W.M. Jones" wrote:
>
> Some of the things it does which are IMHO better:
>
> - starts disk formatting / copying / installing in parallel
>with asking user questions
I think that is a misfeature. I don't want anything irreversible to be don
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 12:44:49 -0500,
Chris Adams wrote:
> >
> > I think that is a misfeature. I don't want anything irreversible to be done
> > until I say go.
>
> You know that Fedora has done partitioning/mkfs about halfway through
> the install for a while now, right? I don't see why th
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 09:57:48 -0700,
John Poelstra wrote:
>
> 641476 :: ASSIGNED :: kernel :: a...@redhat.com :: devicemapper UUID
> field cannot be assigned after map creation ::
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641476
>* next steps ...
> 1) Waiting for new build from mai
1 - 100 of 1153 matches
Mail list logo
