On Tuesday 05 January 2010, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 01/05/2010 11:50 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
What exactly do you mean 'no longer work' ? Can we expect to get a formal
RPM build error for this bogus construct, or will it silently build and
do the wrong thing ? From your long
On Tuesday 22 December 2009, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
- Use the alternatives system to point to one stack or the other for the
system default stack (think standalone applications).
Not that I'm anywhere near an expert in ruby matters, but I have some (bad)
experience with alternatives, so:
On Tuesday 15 December 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
fpkg checkout --full kernel
fpkg checkout kernel
fpkg checkout F-12
The first two Google hits I get for fpkg are already two different tools that
have something to do with software packaging, so I suggest not adding the
third but coming up
On Wednesday 09 December 2009, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 12/08/2009 09:26 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
These probably aren't things to be generally overly concerned
about though,
... try a yum update over GSM or over a modem and you'll very soon
experience what I am talking about.
Been
On Tuesday 08 December 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
* More packages (rpms) to cope with.
Only if you pollute your system with 32-bit multilibs. A pure x86_64 system
doesn't have any more packages than a 32-bit one.
Fedora x86_64 repos do however carry ix86 packages
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Module-Signature/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv29293
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Module-Signature.spec sources
Log Message:
* Thu Nov 19 2009 Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi - 0.61-1
- Update to 0.61 (#538780
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Module-Signature/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv32459
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Module-Signature.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Nov 17 2009 Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi - 0.60-1
- Update to 0.60 (#538043
On Friday 13 November 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le vendredi 13 novembre 2009 à 11:58 +, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit :
Nicolas, if possible next time please give the package maintainer
(ie. FAS username) next to each package in the list. Otherwise it's
harder to tell which packages I
On Thursday 12 November 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 12:26 -0800, Conrad Meyer wrote:
Is part of the reason the F-12 kernel is so much larger that the
debugging
switch is still flipped on?
That's only true for the older F12 development kernels. The kernels
since
On Thursday 05 November 2009, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
KF == Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com writes:
KF Well, the script I am running uses 'spectool -g' and indeed, it
KF doesn't handle self signed certs:
Honestly, I find it easier to just hack spectool rather than reject
valid URLs that
On Monday 02 November 2009, Kushal Das wrote:
I am getting unable to execute intltool-update: Permission denied
error in a scrach build.
Details can be found here [1].
How to fix this ?
IIRC I've seen koji (or mock?) sometimes report missing commands like this
instead of command not found,
On Tuesday 27 October 2009, Adam Jackson wrote:
+%multilib32 sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 sparc64 sparc64v ppc64 s390x
Remind me what the asymmetry is for here? Why is %{ix86} not in
%{multilib32} ?
Hm, maybe a stupid question: in what sense are %{ix86}
On Wednesday 07 October 2009, Adam Williamson wrote:
taglib is probably the best actively-developed modern alternative.
I might not apply to all cases - kid3 for example uses both. Based on a brief
look in the code and http://kid3.sourceforge.net/kid3_en.html#settings-menu,
id3lib is used
On Tuesday 08 September 2009, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
I'll plan to upgrade fuse in Rawhide (and, possibly, in F-11) up to
ver. 2.8.0, and there will be so-name bump.
Rationale for considering doing it in F-11?
See also
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Config-General/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv18309
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Config-General.spec sources
Log Message:
* Tue Sep 8 2009 Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi - 2.44-1
- Update to 2.44 (#521756
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-SGML-Parser-OpenSP/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15273
Modified Files:
perl-SGML-Parser-OpenSP.spec
Log Message:
* Thu Sep 3 2009 Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi - 0.994-4
- Filter out autoprovided OpenSP.so
On Wednesday 02 September 2009, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 08:55 -0400, Eduard Benes wrote:
Greeting!
This Tuesday was the Sectool Test Day / Fit Finish [1] (TD/FF).
Though we expected higher attendance, the results are really valuable.
I think part of the problem may
On Saturday 29 August 2009, Muayyad AlSadi wrote:
warning: leaves in package-cleanup or remove-with-leaves could be your
preferred application because it's a leaf [ie. no installed package
depends on it, eg. pidgin or uget]
FWIW, there's also a show-leaves plugin which just lists installed
On Tuesday 11 August 2009, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/sourcecheck/sourcecheck
It doesn't seem to process https sources, only http and ftp. Is that an
oversight?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On Monday 10 August 2009, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Ville Skyttä (ville.sky...@iki.fi) said:
I ran a few scripts on the CVS tree and will commit the resulting
improvements in a few days to devel and rebuild changed packages if ACL's
allow. Let me know if you for some reason don't want your
On Sunday 09 August 2009, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 10:08 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
Preferably, somebody who takes this also has some interest in triaging
XMMS bugs, as there have been several unresponded tickets that got lost
when the bug-triaging project closed
On Friday 31 July 2009, Adam Williamson wrote:
ahhh, licensing! Spot will likely have better thoughts on all of this,
plus thoughts on the other license compatibility stuff. I don't think
MIT / BSD licensed stuff has any problem linking against GPL stuff
(unless it's under the _original_ BSD
On Friday 31 July 2009, Tim Waugh wrote:
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 22:47 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
This might cause problems for a bunch of packages.
$ repoquery --repoid=rawhide --whatrequires --alldeps ghostscript
ghostscript- gtk --qf=%{NAME}: %{LICENSE} | grep -vP '\bGPL(v3|\S
On Thursday 30 July 2009, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Thursday 30 July 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/failed-f12-rebuilds.html
scop (1):
perltidy
BuildrootError: could not init mock buildroot, mock exited with status 30;
see root.log for more information
On Sunday 02 August 2009, drago01 wrote:
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Ville Skyttäville.sky...@iki.fi wrote:
On Thursday 30 July 2009, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Thursday 30 July 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/failed-f12-rebuilds.html
scop (1
On Friday 31 July 2009, Tim Waugh wrote:
Beginning with the 8.70 release, Ghostscript will be licensed as GPLv3+.
This might cause problems for a bunch of packages.
$ repoquery --repoid=rawhide --whatrequires --alldeps ghostscript ghostscript-
gtk --qf=%{NAME}: %{LICENSE} | grep -vP
On Thursday 30 July 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/failed-f12-rebuilds.html
scop (1):
perltidy
BuildrootError: could not init mock buildroot, mock exited with status 30; see
root.log for more information
DEBUG util.py:256:
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Config-General/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv24379
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Config-General.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sun Jul 26 2009 Ville Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi - 2.43-1
- Update to 2.43 (#513796
On Tuesday 21 July 2009, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
Hallo,
I have a package with a xemacs lisp file which refer to lpr-command.
If I try to compile this file, I will get an error message that the
symbol's value may be void.
As far as I can tell, lpr-command is a customizable variable defined in
On Monday 13 July 2009, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 22:07 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Sunday 12 July 2009, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
is the default attribute definition
%defattr(-,root,root)
the same as
%defattr(-,root,root,-)?
Currently yes, the latter is just
On Tuesday 14 July 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 17:33 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
Your guess is as good as mine, but I don't know why it would need to
change.
%defattr and %attr appear to use different syntax, as I tried to use the
same %defattr syntax for an %attr line
On Friday 03 July 2009, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Thursday 02 July 2009, Xia Shing Zee wrote:
I'm a new package maintainer, but I'll try dumpasn1 and id3v2
Thanks (ditto to the others who grabbed the rest of the packages). Please
go ahead and take ownership of these in pkgdb, they have been
On Sunday 12 July 2009, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
is the default attribute definition
%defattr(-,root,root)
the same as
%defattr(-,root,root,-)?
Currently yes, the latter is just more explicit.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On Monday 06 July 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
But that's what /you/ want to do, not me. Me, I'll just apply a patch to
the configure script, directly.
And you'll be violating the GPL (unless you're talking about a
BSD-style-licensed software or configure.ac is
On Tuesday 07 July 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Ville Skyttä wrote:
The FSF seems to disagree with that.
http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/html_node/Distributing.html#D
istributing
That applies to the automatically copied shell code, but not necessarily to
the code from
On Thursday 02 July 2009, Xia Shing Zee wrote:
I'm a new package maintainer, but I'll try dumpasn1 and id3v2
Thanks (ditto to the others who grabbed the rest of the packages). Please go
ahead and take ownership of these in pkgdb, they have been orphaned already.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing
On Thursday 02 July 2009, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
The implementation of mingw32 debuginfo packages has recently been
discussed on the Fedora-MinGW mailing list:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-mingw/2009-June/001613.html
[...]
I think it's best to continue this discussion on
Hello,
I noticed a bunch of mingw32*-debuginfo packages that contain only *.debug (no
sources, no build id) appeared in Rawhide. Is this how mingw32 debuginfo
packages are supposed to look like, or is the infrastructure for creating the
debuginfo packages not quite complete, or are these
I have released ownership of the following packages I haven't used in a while
and don't feel like maintaining just for the fun of it. They're all simple,
very low maintenance ones, in good shape (no open bugs and otherwise), and up
to date with latest upstream versions.
dumpasn1
freedroid
On Tuesday 30 June 2009, drago01 wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Richard Junerj...@bravegnuworld.com
wrote:
Does archetecture get exported anywhere by javascript?
If so, it would provide a simple way to query the users' hardware.
No.
Sure it does get exported, kind of, but at
On Thursday 25 June 2009, Jerry James wrote:
It appears to me that we either need to split xdg-open into two tools,
representing the two modes of operation, or else give xdg-open a
command-line switch to demand synchronous operation.
IMO the latter is clearly preferable, and would be even a
On Thursday 25 June 2009, Fernando Nasser wrote:
Not all under our control, not all authors still around etc. And these
fails are subtle and sometimes only detected too late. The truth is that
the regexp syntax is almost impossible (actually, I believe it is
impossible) if the prefix is not
Rakesh Pandit wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504521
Will SevenZip be apt name for this. if no? What is most apt name in
accordance to packaging guidelines ?
LZMA SDK http://www.7-zip.org/sdk.html
So what you're packaging exactly is the Java version of that SDK,
On Saturday 20 June 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
— FPC and FESCO were very late in reviewing and approving new packaging
guidelines. Also, FPC requested last-minute changes in font package
naming. That caused a lot of confusion in the first months of the Fedora
11 cycle. Packagers that
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perltidy/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11727
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perltidy.spec sources
Log Message:
* Thu Jun 18 2009 Ville Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi - 20090616-1
- Update to 20090616.
Index: .cvsignore
On Tuesday 16 June 2009, Steven M. Parrish wrote:
The OLPC folks have made a commitment use Fedora as the base for future
releases for not only the XO-1.0 but for the new XO-1.5 which is still in
development.
Does use Fedora as the base mean they'll be using binary packages as is from
On Wednesday 17 June 2009, Adam Jackson wrote:
Really we just need the moral equivalent of %exclude for autoreqprovs.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.extras.packaging/5854
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/BetterRpmAutoReqProvFiltering
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On Sunday 14 June 2009, Richard Fearn wrote:
We have the wheel group which would fit the bill.
Yeah, I always uncomment the %wheel line in sudoers and then add
myself to that group.
Ditto.
See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462161
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On Thursday 11 June 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le mercredi 10 juin 2009 à 17:06 -0500, Matt Domsch a écrit :
Fedora Rawhide-in-Mock Build Results for x86_64
using the first rawhide of the Fedora 12 development cycle, cut on
6/8/2008.
Full logs at
On Friday 05 June 2009, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
I gave up and renumbered on my newest boxes. It sure is a pain today
when I'm trying to use NFS between an old box and a new one.
I think that Sun supports UID mapping on NFS but Linux does not.
It's supported with NFSv4. That might not
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Config-General/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14695
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Config-General.spec sources
Added Files:
perl-Config-General-2.42-system-ixhash.patch
Log Message:
* Sun Jan 4 2009 Ville
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-Config-General/F-9
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv23744
Modified Files:
.cvsignore perl-Config-General.spec sources
Log Message:
* Sat Jun 21 2008 Ville Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi - 2.40-1
- 2.40.
Index: .cvsignore
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cpan2rpm/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15066/cpan2rpm/devel
Modified Files:
cpan2rpm.spec
Log Message:
* Sun Sep 21 2008 Ville Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi
- Fix Patch0:/%patch mismatch.
Author: scop
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-JSON-Any/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv13155/perl-JSON-Any/devel
Modified Files:
perl-JSON-Any.spec
Log Message:
* Sun Sep 21 2008 Ville Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi
- Fix Patch:/%patch0 mismatch.
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 16:00 -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote:
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 03:36:27PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It looks like the new version of amavisd-new is going to be a painless
upgrade, so I'm pushing builds for FC-4, FC-5, and devel.
Is anyone on this list able to sign
On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 09:02 -0600, Steven Pritchard wrote:
fighting sourceforge's CVS).
OT: in case you didn't know, SourceForge now offers Subversion too. I
switched one project over and have been very pleased so far. *knocks
wood* https://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=544830
On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 14:49 -0600, Steven Pritchard wrote:
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 02:10:12PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
So where are we at? We can't mess with buildroot (because the
module's signing stuff will complain) and we can't mess with
sourcedir. How about just making
On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 11:17 +, Paul Howarth wrote:
Curious. I tried it on a Net-SSH-Perl package on FC4 and used:
Is that package available somewhere online?
%define bogusreqs 'perl(Crypt::RSA)\
perl(Crypt::RSA::Key)\
perl(Crypt::RSA::Key::Private)\
perl(Crypt::RSA::Key::Public)\
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 17:26 +, Paul Howarth wrote:
%global filtered_requires sh -c '%{__perl_requires} $@ | %{__sed} -e
/^perl(unwanted_require)$/d'
%define __perl_requires %{filtered_requires}
Anyone see any problems with this?
I don't see any technical problems offhand, but it'll
On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 09:58 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I am inclined to consider letting rpms provide: perl(main) as
packaging bug (perl(main) should better be filtered out for them),
but am not sure about it.
I tend to agree, because one cannot do use main or require main in
perl code -
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 11:12 -0500, Warren Togami wrote:
Can we remove perl-RPM2 from FC? AFAICT nothing depends on it and I
haven't seen anyone actually rely on it.
Any objections from the Fedora Perl Devel team?
None here.
While at it, if you feel like pruning more perl-* packages from
On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 14:52 -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote:
So, I swear I'm not trying to whine, but is there someone with
sufficient access to Core CVS who will apply the fixes for these
issues if I create/update patches?
Wouldn't this stuff be better off applied in upstream rpm instead of
62 matches
Mail list logo
