On 08/06/2009 02:37 AM, Till Maas wrote:
>
> The IT prefix is only used in the group id, which is afaik not visible
> to the used and not translated.
That's not true. yum -v grouplist will display them. I use them all the
time as a shorter form of the full group names. Something like
# yum in
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 23:05 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> The problem with that approach is that, in the conventional approach to
> updates, the key factor is _continuity_. You don't change behaviour or
> risk regressions. If an update fixes ten bugs but changes the behaviour
> of some component
> From: awill...@redhat.com
> To: fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 23:27:32 -0700
> Subject: Re: rt2860 driver (fc11)
>
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 21:58 -0700, Markus Kesaromous wrote:
>> I know this is a staging and thus experimental dri
> From: ceme...@u.washington.edu
> To: fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 23:17:12 -0700
> Subject: Re: rt2860 driver (fc11)
>
> On Wednesday 05 August 2009 09:58:44 pm Markus Kesaromous wrote:
>> I know this is a staging and thus experi
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 21:58 -0700, Markus Kesaromous wrote:
> I know this is a staging and thus experimental driver.
> I only wanted to point out that if you compile the kernl
> without SMP support, then this driver module will have these
> undefined symbols:
>
> spin_lock_bh
> _per_cpu_offset
>
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 09:58:44 pm Markus Kesaromous wrote:
> I know this is a staging and thus experimental driver.
> I only wanted to point out that if you compile the kernl
> without SMP support, then this driver module will have these
> undefined symbols:
Which Fedora kernels are compiled
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 05:42 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > If we are - or _want to be_ - that kind of a distribution, we have to
> > provide a stable update set so we can stop telling people who just want
> > a distro to run Aunt Flo's desktop or their webserver or whatever
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 05:37 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I probably couldn't do much justice to a comprehensive plan as I have
> > insufficient knowledge of how the buildsystem works. I was acting at a
> > higher level - just trying to point out that it's essentially doom
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 15:08 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> A few days back I ran into
>>
>> http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2009-July/001293.html
>>
>> I am wondering, since we are already using KMS in most pla
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 15:08 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
> A few days back I ran into
>
> http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2009-July/001293.html
>
> I am wondering, since we are already using KMS in most places in Fedora,
> how far are we from achieving this by default in a Fedora r
I know this is a staging and thus experimental driver.
I only wanted to point out that if you compile the kernl
without SMP support, then this driver module will have these
undefined symbols:
spin_lock_bh
_per_cpu_offset
synchronize_irq
spin_unlock_irqrestore
del_timer_sync
spin_lock_irqsave
I
Matthias Clasen wrote:
> - It would pull along a good-sized portion of the 'plumbing' layer: new
> udev, kernel, pulseaudio, X...
Hmmm, that's interesting. KDE seems to be a lot more flexible there, you
sure don't need to run the latest kernel to use the latest KDE.
That said, some stuff like th
Adam Williamson wrote:
> If we are - or _want to be_ - that kind of a distribution, we have to
> provide a stable update set so we can stop telling people who just want
> a distro to run Aunt Flo's desktop or their webserver or whatever on to
> run CentOS or Ubuntu instead. If, however, we really d
Adam Williamson wrote:
> I probably couldn't do much justice to a comprehensive plan as I have
> insufficient knowledge of how the buildsystem works. I was acting at a
> higher level - just trying to point out that it's essentially doomed to
> try and please everyone with a single update repository
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Mandriva has a /testing repository for /updates, but not for /backports,
> on the basis that /backports is fundamentally unstable so you may as
> well just do your testing in the repo. This works fine, so far.
That's not going to work for KDE SIG. Updates like KDE 4.3.0 re
2009/8/6 Adam Williamson
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 17:23 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:36 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Well
On 08/05/2009 10:51 AM, Mike Chambers wrote:
2 - My mouse was not detected at all during install. Or at least, I
never saw the mouse arrow during it. Had to use keyboard the whole
time.
someone has filed a bug against this.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=513879
3 - I used the
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 17:23 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:36 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Well, I think it's really the same issue. The
On 08/05/2009 02:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:25 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> Sure. I'm just pointing out that you're trying to solve a different
>> problem than either the original poster or Thorsten. (And now that I
>> understand your problem better, perhaps your
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 00:56 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> I'll make sure one of the Desktop-y guys updates this (presumably
> Matthias).
>
I've updated it recently and bumped it to 75%. It would seem
disingenuous to bump it to 100% when GNOME 2.28 has not been released
yet.
It is fine for the
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:36 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> >
>> > Well, I think it's really the same issue. The problem is one of
>> > expectation: we have two similar components, G
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:34 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > That was the problem I initially thought of with this method, but then
> > I
> > thought - there's no actual reason we can't have different trains of
> > updates in a single
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:36 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > Well, I think it's really the same issue. The problem is one of
> > expectation: we have two similar components, GNOME and KDE, in the same
> > distribution, following differ
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 00:56 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 15:15 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:
> > Hi FESCo,
> >
> > After requesting status updates, including direct email to the feature
> > owners, the following feature pages do not have a current status or
> > their abilit
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 15:15 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:
> Hi FESCo,
>
> After requesting status updates, including direct email to the feature
> owners, the following feature pages do not have a current status or
> their ability to tested during the Alpha is unclear based on the lack of
> infor
Tasks Beginning or Ending in the Next Two Weeks
Name Start End
Test 'Test Compose' (boot media testing) Wed 2009-07-29 Wed
2009-08-05
Compose Alpha CandidateThu 2009-08-06 Thu
2009-08-06
Test Alpha
On 08/05/2009 01:31 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
It's also the reason why firefox doesn't yet build.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1581586&name=build.log
It's being worked on by Martin and Jan. They'll get the rebuilds for F12
ready too.
In the interim, the F11 builds of X
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Tom spot Callaway said:
>> On 08/05/2009 02:38 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
>> >Apropos, what's the license in case a GPL package links against OpenSSL?
>> >GPL with exceptions or what? Or is it even allowed?
>>
>> So, in this spec
Once upon a time, Tom spot Callaway said:
> On 08/05/2009 02:38 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> >Apropos, what's the license in case a GPL package links against OpenSSL?
> >GPL with exceptions or what? Or is it even allowed?
>
> So, in this specific case, I'm still arguing with Red Hat Legal, and we
Hi FESCo,
After requesting status updates, including direct email to the feature
owners, the following feature pages do not have a current status or
their ability to tested during the Alpha is unclear based on the lack of
information provided or percentage of completion.
https://fedoraprojec
On 08/05/2009 08:02 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> http://danwalsh.livejournal.com/27571.html
This is really nice.
To partially answer my own question, Dan keeps coming up with great
stuff that seems essential for average admins to maintain an SELinux box.
-Bill
--
Bill McGonigle, Owner
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 08/05/2009 04:11 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>> The question is whether Fedora intends to be a distribution suitable for
>> day-to-day general purpose use by people who are not necessarily that
>> interested in Fedora per se - wheth
- Original Message -
From: "Ricky Zhou"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: crontab configuration
these anacron/crontab changes should hopefully be
mentioned the release notes somehow
I have a bug on release notes for this, but I have not been able to validat
On 2009-08-05 04:32:57 PM, Mike Chambers wrote:
> Ok, in F11 it had /etc/anacrontab file that I could edit to get my
> cron.daily time to be set. But I don't see that file and can't find
> where the time is set that I want it ran from. I believe it was 4am
> this morning when it ran but I don't k
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:26 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Well, I think it's really the same issue. The problem is one of
> expectation: we have two similar components, GNOME and KDE, in the same
> distribution, following different update polices - GNOME favours stable,
> KDE favours adventuro
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:24 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> That was the problem I initially thought of with this method, but then
> I
> thought - there's no actual reason we can't have different trains of
> updates in a single repository, is there?
>
> We could have:
>
> foo-1.0-2 (conservati
Ok, in F11 it had /etc/anacrontab file that I could edit to get my
cron.daily time to be set. But I don't see that file and can't find
where the time is set that I want it ran from. I believe it was 4am
this morning when it ran but I don't know where that time to run came
from?
Any enlightenment
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:03 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 12:58 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > It also would require multiple CVS branches, one for security, one for
> > adventurous, as well as different buildroots to go along with those,
> > since you wouldn't be able to bui
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:25 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > Either way it's going to be some level of extra work for someone
> > somewhere, I haven't denied that. Was just discussing the parameters of
> > addressing (or not addressing) this issue. It's not possible to make all
> > parties happy
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:14 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:04 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > An alternative would be to tag updates within a single repo in a way
> > that yum and PackageKit understand and have appropriate configuration
> > options to enable certain t
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 22:49 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> Do maintainers really push out updates for this? I've always considered
> a reason to push out a build for rawhide but not to issue updates for
> the stable releases.
It's really hard to tell when so many updates pushers put 0 information
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 04:07:59PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) said:
> > > You've also added a new toplevel category. This means this new nebulous
> > > 'IT Securty' item is pushed at the toplevel, much as 'Desktops' or
> > > 'Language Support'. That seems misp
On Wed, August 5, 2009 2:33 pm, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 16:18 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>> Maintainers are pushing updates because they
>> feel there is a reason, a bug fixed, a security hole closed, a
>> significant feature enhancement that users want (or that they th
* Jesse Keating [05/08/2009 22:38] :
>
> A bug filed by FEVEr or it's replacement saying there is a bigger number
> released somewhere.
Do maintainers really push out updates for this? I've always considered
a reason to push out a build for rawhide but not to issue updates for
the stable releases.
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 16:18 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> Maintainers are pushing updates because they
> feel there is a reason, a bug fixed, a security hole closed, a
> significant feature enhancement that users want (or that they think
> users want).
A bug filed by FEVEr or it's replace
On 08/05/2009 09:26 AM, Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
Hi,
There was a recent xulrunner/Firefox security update and all the
packages depending on the unstable xulrunner interface were rebuilt. For
some reason the Firefox extension I maintain, mozvoikko, can't be built
against xulrunner 1.9.1.2-1.fc12
On 08/05/2009 01:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 12:44 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
>> Sure, this is comparable to the present situation. But it doesn't seem
>> like it makes things much better.
>>
>> * It doesn't solve the original poster's issue (that the GNOME stack
>>
On 08/05/2009 04:11 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
The question is whether Fedora intends to be a distribution suitable for
day-to-day general purpose use by people who are not necessarily that
interested in Fedora per se - whether it's got an aim to be a
general-purpose operating system like other d
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:04 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> An alternative would be to tag updates within a single repo in a way
> that yum and PackageKit understand and have appropriate configuration
> options to enable certain types of update, which would really be much
> the same situation, j
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 15:49 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 08/05/2009 03:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > The missing bit of the argument from before is whether we actually want
> > to care about people who only want 'stable' updates, and that tracks
> > back to the question of what Fedora
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:04 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> An alternative would be to tag updates within a single repo in a way
> that yum and PackageKit understand and have appropriate configuration
> options to enable certain types of update, which would really be much
> the same situation,
Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) said:
> > You've also added a new toplevel category. This means this new nebulous
> > 'IT Securty' item is pushed at the toplevel, much as 'Desktops' or
> > 'Language Support'. That seems misplaced to me.
>
> How can I bundle the groups, if not with a category? O
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 12:44 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Sure, this is comparable to the present situation. But it doesn't seem
> like it makes things much better.
>
> * It doesn't solve the original poster's issue (that the GNOME stack
> isn't going to be updated for F10 since the maintainer
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 12:58 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> It also would require multiple CVS branches, one for security, one for
> adventurous, as well as different buildroots to go along with those,
> since you wouldn't be able to build a security update for a gnome
> package against the newer adv
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 12:44 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
> Sure, this is comparable to the present situation. But it doesn't seem
> like it makes things much better.
>
> * It doesn't solve the original poster's issue (that the GNOME stack
> isn't going to be updated for F10 since the maintain
On 08/05/2009 03:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
The missing bit of the argument from before is whether we actually want
to care about people who only want 'stable' updates, and that tracks
back to the question of what Fedora actually is, which I don't believe
the Board has settled yet. If we don't
On 08/05/2009 12:11 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 11:58 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> Also, having the expectation that the other repository is for security
>> updates doesn't address the problem of a security release breaking ABI.
>
> That's rather unlikely (well, except i
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 15:28 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Care to write up a proposal on how this work-flow would look like? Without
> some of the details, I'm confused how one would avoid all kinds of weirdness
> from repo conflicts if you have multiple of these repos enabled. That, and
> the
> f
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 11:47:24AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 08:01 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
>> >I don't want to get between the lines here (there are good arguments and
>> >against updating Gnome and KDE for older releases) and I hate buzz-words
>> >like "Corporate iden
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 15:03 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 08/05/2009 02:38 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> > Apropos, what's the license in case a GPL package links against OpenSSL?
> > GPL with exceptions or what? Or is it even allowed?
>
> So, in this specific case, I'm still arguing with Re
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 11:58 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On 08/05/2009 11:47 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > And maintainers can choose whether or not they
> > want to take on the work of shipping updates in the adventurous
> > repository.
>
> How does this work? It would seem that the adventur
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:58 -0500, Adam Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Mark
> Bidewell wrote:
>
> >
> > +1
> >
>
>
> Would we want to consider putting together a proposal for something
> that is OpenSuSE Buildservice "styled" in order to satisfy this?
It doesn't really need tha
On 08/05/2009 02:38 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Apropos, what's the license in case a GPL package links against OpenSSL?
GPL with exceptions or what? Or is it even allowed?
So, in this specific case, I'm still arguing with Red Hat Legal, and we
have not determined our final stance.
In the inter
On 08/05/2009 11:47 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> And maintainers can choose whether or not they
> want to take on the work of shipping updates in the adventurous
> repository.
How does this work? It would seem that the adventurous repository would
be mandatory as something that changes ABI would
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Mark
Bidewell wrote:
>
> +1
>
Would we want to consider putting together a proposal for something
that is OpenSuSE Buildservice "styled" in order to satisfy this?
-Adam
--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
--
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 17:21 +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 05 August 2009 14:06:43 Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:46 +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 05 August 2009 13:08:28 Colin Walters wrote:
> > > > Because a lot of GNOME works directly with (and de
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> We've had this discussion before, but to re-state my opinion: the only
>> sane way to handle this is multiple, discretionary update repositories.
>> A repository for security and stable
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 09:33 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 21:51 -0500, Mike Chambers wrote:
>
> > 2 - My mouse was not detected at all during install. Or at least, I
> > never saw the mouse arrow during it. Had to use keyboard the whole
> > time.
>
> Pretty sure this is an
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> We've had this discussion before, but to re-state my opinion: the only
> sane way to handle this is multiple, discretionary update repositories.
> A repository for security and stable bugfix updates, and a repository
> for other updates - ma
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 08:01 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >I don't want to get between the lines here (there are good arguments and
> >against updating Gnome and KDE for older releases) and I hate buzz-words
> >like "Corporate identity", but I find it more and more odd that one
> >doesn't know what t
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 11:33 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 00:15 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>
> > > I should probably talk to Spot about that.
> >
> > So, the rule here is that we don't take outside linking into effect when
> > marking the package's licensing. We go
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 00:15 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > I should probably talk to Spot about that.
>
> So, the rule here is that we don't take outside linking into effect when
> marking the package's licensing. We go by what the source in the tarball
> tells us. Otherwise, it would be
> "JL" == Jussi Lehtola writes:
JL> That's what I think, too, but
JL> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_Sponsored
JL> thinks otherwise:
Actually it just says what I said more succinctly. An informal review
can be done by anyone. The actual full review and approval
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 12:17 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > "JL" == Jussi Lehtola 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 as a sponsor goes th
> "JL" == Jussi Lehtola 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 as a sponsor goes through them and some
JL> inofficial reviews by the submitter. It's less wo
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Ville-Pekka
Vainio wrote:
> `nsISupports::COMTypeInfo::kIID' referenced in section `.data.rel.ro' of
> /usr/lib64/xulrunner-sdk-1.9.1/lib/libxpcomglue_s.a(nsGenericFactory.o):
> defined in discarded section
> `.rodata._ZN11nsISupports11COMTypeInfoIiE4kIIDE[nsISup
Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
> results in
>
> `nsISupports::COMTypeInfo::kIID' referenced in section `.data.rel.ro'
> of
> /usr/lib64/xulrunner-sdk-1.9.1/lib/libxpcomglue_s.a(nsGenericFactory.o):
> defined in discarded section
>
`.rodata._ZN11nsISupports11COMTypeInfoIiE4kIIDE[nsISupports::COMTypeIn
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 10:06 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> > +# Description of your tag request\n\
> > +notes=Here is where you give a description of what you want to change,\n\
> > +rational for why the change is important enough to break the freeze,\n\
> > +impact of not accepting the change, and what
Hi,
There was a recent xulrunner/Firefox security update and all the
packages depending on the unstable xulrunner interface were rebuilt. For
some reason the Firefox extension I maintain, mozvoikko, can't be built
against xulrunner 1.9.1.2-1.fc12. The build has succeeded with all
previous versions
Ahmed Kamal wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm probably hitting some bug in F11. I've created the lcktest
> directory, and "date > lcktest/date-file" to create a simple file
> inside. Repeated this on a ext3 and a ext4 file-system. Now, this works
> fine on ext3, but fails on ext4. I tried the same setup on anoth
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Further: The behavior changes to much IMHO -- one reason why I use
> Fedora at home and work and suggested it to others were the major new
> kernel versions that got delivered as regular update. But that doesn't
> really work anymore sinc
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 14:06:43 Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:46 +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 August 2009 13:08:28 Colin Walters wrote:
> > > Because a lot of GNOME works directly with (and depends on) the core
> > > OS., and we want a stable system.
> >
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 10:00:24AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Recently, you've added the following groups to comps:
>
> it-security-code-analysis
> it-security-forensics
> it-security-intrusion-detection
> it-security-reconnaissance
> it-security-wireless
> it-security-password-recovery
>
>
Recently, you've added the following groups to comps:
it-security-code-analysis
it-security-forensics
it-security-intrusion-detection
it-security-reconnaissance
it-security-wireless
it-security-password-recovery
You've also added a new toplevel category. This means this new nebulous
'IT Securty'
Hi,
I'm probably hitting some bug in F11. I've created the lcktest directory,
and "date > lcktest/date-file" to create a simple file inside. Repeated this
on a ext3 and a ext4 file-system. Now, this works fine on ext3, but fails
on ext4. I tried the same setup on another F11 machine that was upgra
Josephine Tannhäuser wrote:
> KDE 4.3 will come to F11 and F10. It's a cool thing.
> There aren't updates like this for Gnome. Why not?
For the most part, those are hard decisions best left to the discretion of
the maintainers in question.
-- Rex
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-deve
On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 21:51 -0500, Mike Chambers wrote:
> 2 - My mouse was not detected at all during install. Or at least, I
> never saw the mouse arrow during it. Had to use keyboard the whole
> time.
Pretty sure this is an anaconda glitch. X doesn't show a cursor until
you define one. I'll
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 11:49 +0200, Josephine Tannhäuser wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> KDE 4.3 will come to F11 and F10. It's a cool thing.
> There aren't updates like this for Gnome. Why not?
> F10 with Gnome 2.26 sounds fine to me.
GNOME has stable bugfix updates, and we do bring all of those into
releas
On 31/07/09 01:09, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Bill McGonigle wrote:
What's it going to take to make most
people who shut off SELinux stop doing that?
...being able to install bleeding-edge devel KDE to
/usr/local/my-kde-install and be able to use that as my primary desktop.
I guess that would - a
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 12:23:12PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>On 05.08.2009 12:02, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> 2009/8/5 Josephine Tannhäuser :
>>> KDE 4.3 will come to F11 and F10. It's a cool thing.
>>> There aren't updates like this for Gnome. Why not?
>>> F10 with Gnome 2.26 sounds fine to me
>> 2009/8/5 Alex Lancaster :
>> There was a mass rebuild, but unfortunately they failed because of
>> some (presumably) transient problem with the build system, because the
>> rebuild now.
>>
>> However once the deps failed there should have been regular nagmail
>> from the rawhide broken dep ch
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 13:46 +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday 05 August 2009 13:08:28 Colin Walters wrote:
> > Because a lot of GNOME works directly with (and depends on) the core
> > OS., and we want a stable system.
>
> Does this mean, that every time I've installed my system and l
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 13:08:28 Colin Walters wrote:
> Because a lot of GNOME works directly with (and depends on) the core
> OS., and we want a stable system.
Does this mean, that every time I've installed my system and left
GNOME out, I made a broken system?
Is there a list of those '
On Wednesday 05 August 2009 12:04:21 Till Maas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:55:11PM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > The KDE SIG is now working on KDE-4.3.0-related builds for Fedora 10 and
> > 11 candidate updates. As this requires some buildroot overrides, if your
> > package uses KDE librarie
On 05.08.2009 12:02, Richard Hughes wrote:
> 2009/8/5 Josephine Tannhäuser :
>> KDE 4.3 will come to F11 and F10. It's a cool thing.
>> There aren't updates like this for Gnome. Why not?
>> F10 with Gnome 2.26 sounds fine to me.
> Because I don't want to _support_ the latest and greatest GNOME on o
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Josephine
Tannhäuser wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> KDE 4.3 will come to F11 and F10. It's a cool thing.
> There aren't updates like this for Gnome. Why not?
> F10 with Gnome 2.26 sounds fine to me.
Because a lot of GNOME works directly with (and depends on) the core
OS., and
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:55:11PM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> The KDE SIG is now working on KDE-4.3.0-related builds for Fedora 10 and
> 11 candidate updates. As this requires some buildroot overrides, if your
> package uses KDE libraries, it may inadvertently build against KDE 4.3.0
> librar
ka - 1.19.6-1
- updated to 1.19.6
- don't display *_IN locale in /dev/tty/X it does not work (#511193)
shortrpm-1.2-1.fc12
---
* Tue Aug 04 2009 Lubomir Rintel - 1.2-2
- New upstream release
- Fix operation with more recent rpm config
skkdic-20090805-1.T0306.fc12
-
2009/8/5 Josephine Tannhäuser :
> KDE 4.3 will come to F11 and F10. It's a cool thing.
> There aren't updates like this for Gnome. Why not?
> F10 with Gnome 2.26 sounds fine to me.
Because I don't want to _support_ the latest and greatest GNOME on old
versions. A lot of the GNOME stack would requi
Hi all.
KDE 4.3 will come to F11 and F10. It's a cool thing.
There aren't updates like this for Gnome. Why not?
F10 with Gnome 2.26 sounds fine to me.
--
Josephine "Fine" Tannhäuser
2.6.29.6-213.fc11.i586
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mail
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
