yum
update than it is with the current setup, where a manual change of a
config file is required.
You don't have to edit the config file, it's enough to run yum with
--enablerepo=rawhide (or --enablerepo=* !).
+1 for branching, with default disabled.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
/python2.6/site-packages/fedora/client/proxyclient.py,
line 275, in send_request
request.perform()
pycurl.error: (60, 'Peer certificate cannot be authenticated with known
CA certificates')
make: *** [bodhi] Error 1
What's the problem and how do I fix it?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project
, which should be a slowly moving distribution.
[1]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Who_is_allowed_to_modify_which_packages
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman
On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 16:35 +0530, Huzaifa Sidhpurwala wrote:
Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Even though any proven packager could do the change, that bug does not
fall in the items listed in the proven packager policy [1]. You haven't
listed any problems with the current package, you're just
Hi all,
pondus was previously licensed under GPLv3+; now starting from 0.7.0 the
license is MIT.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
+* Sun Dec 27 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussileht...@fedoraproject.org - 1:1.4.2-1
+- Update to 1.4.2.
+- Fix spelling in rpm version: 1.4.1 instead of previous 1.41.
+
+* Mon Dec 7 2009 Stepan Kasal ska...@redhat.com - 1.4.1-5
- rebuild against perl 5.10.1
-* Sun Jul 26 2009 Fedora Release Engineering
-rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+rm -rf %{buildroot}
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
@@ -55,12 +56,22 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
-* Wed Apr 15 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi - 1.41-3
+* Sun Dec 27 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussileht...@fedoraproject.org - 1:1.4.2-1
-rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+rm -rf %{buildroot}
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
@@ -55,12 +56,22 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
-* Wed Apr 15 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi - 1.41-3
+* Sun Dec 27 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussileht...@fedoraproject.org - 1:1.4.2-1
-rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+rm -rf %{buildroot}
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
@@ -55,15 +56,22 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
-* Sun Jul 26 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 1.41-4
+* Sun Dec 27 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussileht
would auto-Require the libjpeg and libtiff RPMs?
And if it actually needs the binaries, then you can just put in
Requires: libjpeg, libtiff
and safely ignore the rpmlint warning. AFAIK resolving file dependencies
is a lot slower than resolving explicit dependencies.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora
to the packager.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
/show_bug.cgi?id=523998
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
as for normal updates. For instance:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-package-announce/2009-November/thread.html
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora
can fetch the new build of kpathsea manually from
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=137909
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora
will be used. I'm not sure whether this is a problem, though,
since the module is not loaded by default and one does not run into any
conflicts. Renaming binaries is a nuisance, too.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
,
should be given first priority or is there any criteria as such? or is
it left to the Packagers?
Not especially, but the review bugs have bug numbers that are in
increasing order in time, so older reviews have smaller numbers. Picking
what to review is up to the packager.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora
On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 17:10 +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 04:48:49PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
It seems your spec making program has some bugs, as some packages have
names such as texlive-csplain.ARCH, this probably shouldn't be..?
Nope, it is intentional
: texlive-titlepic is needed by package
texlive-collection-latexextra-2009-14750.fc11.noarch (texlive)
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
numpy dependencies in pygtk.)
But one can compile against LAPACK, which admittedly is slower than
ATLAS, but works like a charm.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman
Hi,
why does %configure still use
--build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu
--target=i586-redhat-linux-gnu
in rawhide i386, shouldn't the target be i686-redhat-linux-gnu?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 18:34 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 08/08/2009 12:19 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Hi,
why does %configure still use
--build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu
--target=i586-redhat-linux-gnu
in rawhide i386, shouldn't the target be i686-redhat-linux
into account yet.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 12:17 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
JL == Jussi Lehtola jussileht...@fedoraproject.org writes:
JL (I'm not very sure, however, about the current policy of wanting
JL sponsors to review first packages. IMHO anyone should be able to
JL review them, just as long
package links against OpenSSL?
GPL with exceptions or what? Or is it even allowed?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
')
but calling
%dconfigure
gives me
+ CFLAGS=-O2
+ -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.mvjW71: line 42: -g: command not found
What's the correct way to do this?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project
On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 13:42 +0200, Mattias Ellert wrote:
What's the correct way to do this?
%global dconfigure %(rpm -E %%configure | sed 's!./configure!../configure!g')
%dconfigure
This works, but isn't it bad style to call rpm from within a spec
file..?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project
On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 14:47 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jussi Lehtola jussileht...@fedoraproject.org writes:
So far I've tried
%global dconfigure %(echo %{configure} | sed
's|./configure|../configure|g')
Since %configure expands to a text containing double quotes this gets
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 18:06 +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 17:26 +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
To test things I've written a small application called solv that
works like a very tiny package manager. It's available via:
http://software.opensuse.org/search?baseproject
.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
hour window in between the F11 and F12 build
(F11 being first), so the rawhide compose has been during that window.
The next refresh should pick up the correct F12 version.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel
-macros
Setup an rpm build tree in your homedir
$ rpmdev-setuptree
and build the rpm with
$ rpmbuild --rebuild boost-1.39.0-3.fc12.src.rpm
Or, even better, you can use mock.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel
:
The above page states that the flags will be
-march=i686 -mtune=atom
on i386, but a build I just did in rawhide has
-march=i686 -mtune=generic
so -march has changed but -mtune hasn't?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
and built.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
?
In other cases, for example, %dist suggests that a spec/src.rpm would be
dist-independent and could simply be copied to multiple branches. That
doesn't need to be true.
Yes, that is true.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list
to the branch that previously targeted rawhide. F-10 in your
example.
And it automatically ends up in F-11? I can't tag and build for F-11 if
the tag with same EVR already exists in F-10.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
is obsolete.)
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1473086name=build.log
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
contains some multilib packages. If you don't specify
the wanted architecture when installing, yum might install both 32- and
64-bit versions if available. Try adding the .x86_64 arch specifier,
e.g. instead of
# yum install foo
perform
# yum install foo.x86_64
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project
Hi,
is the default attribute definition
%defattr(-,root,root)
the same as
%defattr(-,root,root,-)?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel
really be a macro in rpm, as it has to be duplicated in so
many places. Say, %{_noarch_subpackage} which would expand to
%if 0%{?fedora} 9 || 0%{?rhel} 5
BuildArch: noarch
%endif
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
Lainaus yersinia yersinia.spi...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Rick L. Vinyard, Jr.
rviny...@cs.nmsu.eduwrote:
Jussi Lehtola wrote:
This should really be a macro in rpm, as it has to be duplicated in so
many places. Say, %{_noarch_subpackage} which would expand to
Yes
, in case
the package gets too much karma..
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
if it is loaded.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476844
Related to this is bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504357
Openmpi needs some TLC.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
such as yum?
This is quite important if the version in the old distro is newer than
that on the DVD.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
and netboot CD and remove the other
CD images.
Hmm, I'd want netboot.img back, since I normally use a USB stick to
start the network install (OK, there is the possibility of using
livecd-iso-to-disk, but that's a lot more hassle than downloading a
minimalistic img and running dd).
--
Jussi Lehtola
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 11:12 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 07:04:12PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Hmm, I'd want netboot.img back, since I normally use a USB stick to
start the network install (OK, there is the possibility of using
livecd-iso-to-disk, but that's a lot more
currently have a howto: debug failing builds on esoteric
architectures. Is it as simple as running mock
$ mock -r fedora-11-ppc package.srpm
and testing the binaries with
$ qemu-system ./binary
?
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing
system (Recommends, Suggests) could also be treated this way:
you could have a treat-recommends-as-requires flag and a
treat-suggestions-as-requires flag. This would enable a more
fine-grained control.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list
problem in that page
Yes, they have: there's no way there's going to be a Packaging Guideline
on the matter (a Packaging Draft is a Packaging Guideline wanna-be /
to-be).
If you want such a page just do it and don't try to make it an official
guideline.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
. Simply start from a minimal
install and add only the packages you need.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Author: jussilehtola
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-UPnP/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv27587/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore sources
Added Files:
import.log perl-Net-UPnP.spec
Log Message:
* Sat Apr 18 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi
Author: jussilehtola
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-UPnP/EL-5
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv28389/EL-5
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-UPnP.spec
Log Message:
* Sat Apr 18 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi - 1.41-3
- Import package
Author: jussilehtola
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-UPnP/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv28389/F-10
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-UPnP.spec
Log Message:
* Sat Apr 18 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi - 1.41-3
- Import package
Author: jussilehtola
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Net-UPnP/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv28389/F-11
Modified Files:
sources
Added Files:
perl-Net-UPnP.spec
Log Message:
* Sat Apr 18 2009 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi - 1.41-3
- Import package
56 matches
Mail list logo
