Re: Yum Package Remove Order

Besides a call to /sbin/chkconfig perhaps I see no reason for anything to be done in %post, %preun etc. in a setup like the on you describe. These scripts are supposed to be used for very simple and very unlikely commands like adding a user or a service to boot, they should not install or

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

And _maintain_ them, with all security fixes. The problem with duplication is above all one of scalability of maintenance. - Original Message - From: Aleksandar Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Thursday,

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

Note that two versions of a product that is already being maintained anyway could be a candidate, but of course this is something _for_ the OS, not part of it (RHEL, not Fedora in the exemple I have in mind). - Original Message - From: Fernando Nasser fnas...@redhat.com

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

see in line - Original Message - From: Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 2:33:13 PM Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora? On Tue,

For Fedora vs. In Fedora [Was: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?]

Hi all, As we have EPEL _for_ RHEL we can have things _for_ Fedora as opposed to _in_ Fedora. It is how several VARs do with their software _for_ RHEL in the Red Hat world. Some years ago JPackage.org had a yum repo with JBoss AS (community version) that was tailored to be installed in Fedora.

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

discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 4:42:39 PM Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora? On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 03:18:42PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote: From: Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com

Re: For Fedora vs. In Fedora [Was: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?]

Message - From: Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 6:23:36 PM Subject: Re: For Fedora vs. In Fedora [Was: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?] * Fernando Nasser [11/12/2012 23:05] : As we

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Apache OpenOffice

What about dependency conflicts? Which one will determine the version of the dependencies? I think it will have to be the current existing OO right? So the new one, if added, must build and run with any shared dependency at the original one levels. Makes sense? --Fernando - Original

Re: Xerces 3.0.1 is now built - retire Xerces 2.8?

Jonathan Robie wrote: I have built Xerces 3.0.1 for Rawhide. Xerces 3.0.1. was released in February, 2009. I think it should replace Xerces 2.8, which was released in August, 2007. Do any packages require Xerces 2.8? Is there anyone who can not build against the new 3.0.1 packages?

Re: [fedora-java] Headless JRE in Fedora

Also, will this change be ackported into the Java packages of RHEL_5 and RHEL-6? Our products use only one spec file, we'll have to add lots of %if osversion in our spec files (and we have 300+ of them). - Original Message - From: Stanislav Ochotnicky sochotni...@redhat.com To: Jiri

Re: replacing folders with symlinks leads to rpm cpio rename errors

triggers could be used too (to rm -fr the directory installed by old versions of the package) Another *be careful* warning for this one too. - Original Message - From: Panu Matilainen pmati...@laiskiainen.org To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 4:17:27 AM

Re: replacing folders with symlinks leads to rpm cpio rename errors

It worked because the first (broken) installation at least removed the old version with the real directory. Then on the second time the old version was no longer there, so no real directory and then the symlink could be installed. But this means a manual process: install once, remove, install

Re: Software Management call for RFEs

This is basically the major impediment to the uninstall of a product that consists of several packages. Some of these packages may be, at time of uninstall, also required by other packages, so the and no other package requires them part is essential. --Fernando - Original Message -

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: Anthony Green

I will probably meet him personally tomorrow if he is not traveling or on vacations. He is definitively still around, so I will point him to your e-mail. --Fernando - Original Message - From: Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc: gr...@redhat.com

Re: Your Outstanding Requests on closed bugs

On 2015-03-30 9:55 AM, Paul Wouters wrote: On Mon, 30 Mar 2015, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 03/30/2015 08:39 AM, Paul Wouters wrote: There are currently no flags set at all. Check the flags on the attachment itself (your second link). Ohh. there is shows up. How odd. Thanks. Now at

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

On 2015-10-09 10:02 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/09/2015 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:50:27PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: This opens the door to all kinds of duplication, waste of disk space, waste of RAM, symbol conflicts and unfixed security issues! I

Re: Self-Reintroduction: DJ Delorie

DJ is being modest, this is a small sample of his contributions. On 2016-01-28 2:42 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: I've been around for a while, but as I'm taking on a new role inside Red Hat, I'll be showing up in different places here and upstream, so I figured I'd refresh everyone's memory as well

Re: rpm: %patch needs --fuzz

On 2016-05-04 9:25 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Neal Becker wrote: In an rpm .spec I need a patch with more fuzz %patch macro doesn't seem to accept --fuzz=xxx What's a good solution? Clean the patch up so it applies without fuzz. That is

Re: drop obsolete static uid/gid allocations

On 2017-01-16 2:03 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 12:13:16AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: == The following are completely unused? console, wnn, haldaemon, vcsa, realtime, nocpulse, desktop, jonas, pvm, xfs "jonas" is (was?) the userid/group for the OW2

Re: drop obsolete static uid/gid allocations

On 2017-01-15 12:54 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 08:13:42AM +0100, Pavel Raiskup wrote: On Sunday, January 15, 2017 12:30:51 AM CET Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Sun, Jan

Re: Unversioned Obsoletes (was Re: Mass issue: /usr/bin/env dependency)

A few issues I remember caused by unversioned Obsoletes (before they were banished to Hell) were: - Not being able, ever again, to provide the thing being obsoleted. And believe me, things change ;-) - The Obsoletes affects other channels as well, not only the content of the channel that

Re: Rotation logs - use or not to use

On 2017-03-16 2:04 PM, Samuel Rakitničan wrote: Cheers all, I'm trying to do something with a patch in MariaDB, but I need to know current situation about rotation logs. *What's the problem:* Upstream ship rotation log, we drop it out. This started sometimes between F15 and F16. Mostly because

Re: Unversioned Obsoletes (was Re: Mass issue: /usr/bin/env dependency)

On 2017-03-31 4:04 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 15:16:22 -0400, Fernando Nasser wrote: A few issues I remember caused by unversioned Obsoletes (before they were banished to Hell) were: - Not being able, ever again, to provide the thing being obsoleted. And believe me

Re: BTRFS dropped by RedHat

On 2017-08-04 11:12 AM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: The release notes for RHEL 7.4 announce that RedHat gave up on btrfs: Is it only RHEL? What are other distros doing?

Re: RFC: retiring yum

On 2017-09-01 2:52 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 02:38:59PM -0400, Fernando Nasser wrote: 1) Can we use existing repositories created with yum createrepo with dnf? Yes. 2) Are "groups" supported?  (E.g.: yum instalgroup xxx) Yes. Thanks Matthew.  I guess it wi

Re: RFC: retiring yum

On 2017-09-01 1:01 PM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 So I think F28/F29 would be best time for retiring YUM. Right now DNF should be already stable and provide same capabilities (or documented that something will not be supported). Hopefully

Re: RPM spec style

On 2018-05-11 10:33 AM, Merlin Mathesius wrote: Greetings. I'd like a quick opinion on spec file style... Nearly all specs I've seen dealing with subpackages group all the %package/%description stanzas near the beginning, and put all the %files stanzas near the the end. (Example 1 below)

Re: common location of spec files in upstream sources

On 2017-10-26 5:39 PM, William Moreno wrote: 2017-10-26 15:02 GMT-06:00 Mátyás Selmeci >: Hi, For upstream projects that provide spec files in their repositories, do y'all tend to see a common location for the spec files?

Re: Package Question

On 2018-01-08 12:21 PM, Steve Dickson wrote: Hello, Is it a problem for a package to pull from two different upstream tar balls? Basically have Source0: http://server.com/package1/package1.tar Source1: http://server.com/package2/package2.tar Important questions: 1) Are the lifecycles the

Re: Package Question

On 2018-01-08 3:07 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 2:32 PM, Fernando Nasser <fnas...@redhat.com> wrote: On 2018-01-08 12:21 PM, Steve Dickson wrote: Hello, Is it a problem for a package to pull from two different upstream tar balls? Basically have Source0

BSD 2-Clause license

Hi, Would it be possible to add: BSD 2-clause to our table of valid licenses? It is already in https://spdx.org/licenses/ BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License |BSD-2-Clause| and is OSI-approved. For reference:

Re: BSD 2-Clause license

On 2018-02-19 11:33 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 11:22:56AM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote: Hi, Would it be possible to add: BSD 2-clause to our table of valid licenses? Which table are you referring to ? The main list of licenses in the following page already

Re: question about Obsoletes/Provides

On 2018-03-08 5:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 11:23:45AM +0100, Jos de Kloe wrote: I have a question about an open review request on the eccodes package, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508950 Eccodes will replace grib_api for which downstream will

Re: Un-orphaned NodeJS packages upgrades in rawhide

On 2019-04-29 10:31 a.m., Tom Hughes wrote: > On 29/04/2019 15:21, Jan Staněk wrote: > >> Only other option I can think of is going the Rust route (packages only >> in rawhide, anything depending on them must be a module), which I'm not >> a fan of. > > Module don't work for Node.js though. > >

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: huwang?

On 2019-11-14 5:03 a.m., Fabio Valentini wrote: > Hi everybody, Hi Fabio, All the maven-*-plugin packages were related to the mvn command we used to maintain in Fedora to build Maven-based software. It was a modified maven that would use RPMs to provide the dependent artifacts.  We initially