Hi,
I download the latest kvm-88 from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/kvm/files/ . But when i did /'make'/ its
failing for following error,
CC [M] /dl/kvm-88/kvm/kernel/x86/x86.o
In file included from /dl/kvm-88/kvm/kernel/x86/trace.h:355,
from
On Thursday 01 October 2009 03:02:04 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
That's not about standardize on GTK+
That was just an example of how one size fits it all doesn't always work
when it comes to libraries, there will always be more than one library for
some purposes.
We
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 23:40 +0200, Florian Festi wrote:
On 09/30/2009 07:43 PM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
Fedora's rpm used to have a
modified copy of zlib so that the created rpms were more rsync
friendly. As deltarpm needs to recreate the same compressed
payload I also had to support
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 04:46 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
But we also need to reasonable, and unless someone volunteers to do the
actual work *without* breaking the tool in the process, I think a policy
like this need to be evaluated case by case and not just blindly and
rigidly enforced.
And, in
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 07:02:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Garzik jgar...@pobox.com writes:
The lack of big endian builds by default is a notable loss, and will
lead to a decline in software quality.
I think this is a net-negative for Fedora.
I think the same, but it's getting
Kevin Kofler, Thu, 01 Oct 2009 02:58:15 +0200:
Yes. It slowed down builds, and it often triggered bizarre build
failures which were NOT bugs in the program, but in the toolchain or in
some core library like glibc, which in turn delayed important updates to
the affected packages.
I.e., it was
Tom Lane wrote:
[ ppc64 horror story snipped ]
Well, I'm by no means wedded to ppc64; I just want *some* BE
architecture in the primary set. Maybe a reasonable compromise would be
to include ppc but not ppc64? That would cover basic BE portability
issues, if not the occasional
Richard W.M. Jones píše v Čt 01. 10. 2009 v 10:29 +0100:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 07:02:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Garzik jgar...@pobox.com writes:
The lack of big endian builds by default is a notable loss, and will
lead to a decline in software quality.
I think this is a
Steve Dickson, Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:41:51 -0400:
Maybe removing the Final Development part and replace it with
something like Beta Freeze (Bug Fixes ONLY) might have helped.
Well my problem with the current state is that it is not Bug Fixes
ONLY, we are getting to acks (Red Hat people know
Jeff Garzik, Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:55:56 -0400:
Both ppc and ppc64 have been excellent at catching software bugs in my
projects that long went unnoticed on i386/x86-64.
The lack of big endian builds by default is a notable loss, and will
lead to a decline in software quality.
I think this
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 11:32:59AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
[ ppc64 horror story snipped ]
Well, I'm by no means wedded to ppc64; I just want *some* BE
architecture in the primary set. Maybe a reasonable compromise would be
to include ppc but not ppc64? That would
2009/9/14 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
Hi, everyone. We - the QA group - have recently been researching the
feasibility of using zsync to reduce the size of live image downloads.
This has hit a roadblock in the form of the problem where both rsync and
zsync use forked zlibs rather than
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:34:38AM +, Matej Cepl wrote:
Steve Dickson, Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:41:51 -0400:
Maybe removing the Final Development part and replace it with
something like Beta Freeze (Bug Fixes ONLY) might have helped.
Well my problem with the current state is that it is not Bug
Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com writes:
Is ARM big endian?
It can be either. Intel's IXP4xx networking chips are usually running
BE since their internal network engines are BE-only and it's thus
more efficient.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On 10/01/2009 05:34 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
Steve Dickson, Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:41:51 -0400:
Maybe removing the Final Development part and replace it with
something like Beta Freeze (Bug Fixes ONLY) might have helped.
Well my problem with the current state is that it is not Bug Fixes
ONLY,
Compose started at Thu Oct 1 06:15:05 UTC 2009
Broken deps for i386
--
PolicyKit-olpc-1.2-2.fc11.noarch requires /var/lib/PolicyKit-public
argus-2.0.6.fixes.1-16.fc11.i586 requires libpcap.so.0.9
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Simo Sorce wrote:
see that we can remove it now.
Not to be distrusting but I am also going to watch out and see how
easily we might break something, just for nazi-like mindset in enforcing
a policy.
Godwin's law? Really? This early in the thread?
Maybe we should cool
On 09/30/2009 08:47 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 20:26 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Was ppc really such a burden?
When it breaks and only it breaks, slowing down or delaying a release,
yes.
I know that last week several ppc people (IBM, etc) expressed alarm and concern
Matej Cepl wrote:
I.e., it was discovering bugs ... not in your program but in glibc, gcc,
etc. (I have experienced this couple of times with pspp on Sparc).
But usually in target-specific code.
Plus, it's not the toolchain's updates which get stalled, but the updates
for some package which
On Oct 1, 2009, at 6:49, Ric Wheeler rwhee...@redhat.com wrote:
On 09/30/2009 08:47 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 20:26 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Was ppc really such a burden?
When it breaks and only it breaks, slowing down or delaying a
release,
yes.
I know that
On Oct 1, 2009, at 2:28, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-06-12/fedora-
meeting.2009-06-12-17.01.html
Ah, there it is, I must have missed it when going through the
summaries,
sorry. :-(
So I'll have to
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 07:45:22AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
I know that last week several ppc people (IBM, etc) expressed alarm
and concern about the demotion of ppc to a secondary arch. Most of
those people I pointed at Bill and Jesse who were staffing the fedora
booth.
Did we get
On Oct 1, 2009, at 7:58, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 07:45:22AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
I know that last week several ppc people (IBM, etc) expressed alarm
and concern about the demotion of ppc to a secondary arch. Most of
those people I pointed at Bill
Jeff Garzik (jgar...@pobox.com) said:
But you're dodging the larger point -- Fedora has, de facto, demoted
big endian support in its entirety to a second-hand effort, rather
than distributed the workload much more widely. Given M package
maintainers and N secondary-platform volunteers, it is
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 11:10:51AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Jeff Garzik (jgar...@pobox.com) said:
But you're dodging the larger point -- Fedora has, de facto, demoted
big endian support in its entirety to a second-hand effort, rather
than distributed the workload much more widely. Given
Matej Cepl wrote:
Well, RHEL commits (hopefully I am not leaking some NDA-covered
information ;)) have to have something like fixes #123435 in the commit
message. We could do the same easily but requesting that updates in bodhi
have to be just bugfixes.
I can make a bug out of almost
On 10/01/2009 03:10 AM, Josephine Tannhäuser wrote:
2009/9/14 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
Hi, everyone. We - the QA group - have recently been researching the
feasibility of using zsync to reduce the size of live image downloads.
This has hit a roadblock in the form of the problem
2009/10/1 Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com:
On 10/01/2009 03:10 AM, Josephine Tannhäuser wrote:
2009/9/14 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
Hi, everyone. We - the QA group - have recently been researching the
feasibility of using zsync to reduce the size of live image downloads.
This has
On 10/01/2009 09:42 AM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
2009/10/1 Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com:
A) You're a coder and want to get your hands dirty with the rsync
protocol. Check out how librsync manages to use the system zlib and if
possible to do this compatibly, apply it to zsync and
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Jesse Keating jkeat...@j2solutions.net wrote:
I know that last week several ppc people (IBM, etc) expressed alarm and
concern about the demotion of ppc to a secondary arch. Most of those people
I pointed at Bill and Jesse who were staffing the fedora booth.
Proposal: Python 3 in Fedora 13
Evolutionary, not revolutionary: build a python 3 stack
parallel-installable with the python 2 stack.
= High-level summary =
- Python 3.0 was released almost 10 months ago, on 2008-12-03, and the
latest release of the 3.* branch is 3.1.1, released on 2009-08-17.
and the solution is ?
have you reported that on bugzilla against kde ?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
2009/10/1 Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at:
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Was ppc really such a burden?
Yes. It slowed down builds, and it often triggered bizarre build failures
which were NOT bugs in the program, but in the toolchain or in some core
library like glibc, which in turn delayed
2009/10/1 Trever L. Adams trever.ad...@gmail.com:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Actually, new packages can be pushed as updates. You can add them even to
F11, and F10 if you're really quick (new packages are accepted in F10 until
1 month before its end of life, which is basically the day of F12's
2009/10/1 Trever L. Adams trever.ad...@gmail.com:
Hello all,
About a year ago, I suggested that BedeWork (http://bedework.org) be
included. I offered to package it with some help. I unfortunately ran
out of time. I now have time to package it and hopefully maintain the
package.
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:15:09PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
Scoping:
- this work would target Fedora 13. I'd avoid pushing it into F12
until it's proven safe to do so
I'm going to think on the overall proposal more, but I very very very much
wish this sentence said I will not push this into
On Oct 1, 2009, at 11:00, Tom Lane t...@redhat.com wrote:
Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk writes:
Nice bug; this one is my favourite:
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1308 -- PPC64 noarch builds
don't expand %{_libdir} to the correct place.
You absolutely *cannot* build Eclipse
On Oct 1, 2009, at 10:59, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:15:09PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
Scoping:
- this work would target Fedora 13. I'd avoid pushing it into F12
until it's proven safe to do so
I'm going to think on the overall proposal more, but I
Once upon a time, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com said:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:15:09PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
Scoping:
- this work would target Fedora 13. I'd avoid pushing it into F12
until it's proven safe to do so
I'm going to think on the overall proposal more, but I very very
John Reiser jrei...@bitwagon.com writes:
The IXP4xx networking engine operates big endian only. Nevertheless
many NSLU2 machines run little-endian and still use that networking
hardware.
With a performance penalty since all buffers have to be swapped.
Little-
endian operation of the CPU
Jan Klepek wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 09:58 -0400, L. Gabriel Somlo wrote:
Not using argus anymore, and no cycles to do right by it.
I will take it.
Please make sure you fix the broken dependency in F-12 (on an old version of
libpcap) as soon as possible and get the fixed package tagged
On 10/01/2009 11:11 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Oct 1, 2009, at 10:59, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:15:09PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
Scoping:
- this work would target Fedora 13. I'd avoid pushing it into F12
until it's proven safe to do so
I'm
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 13:07 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com said:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:15:09PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
Scoping:
- this work would target Fedora 13. I'd avoid pushing it into F12
until it's proven safe to do so
I'm
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 06:42:08PM +0100, Mat Booth wrote:
Nice bug; this one is my favourite:
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1308 -- PPC64 noarch builds
don't expand %{_libdir} to the correct place.
I'm pretty sure I have seen 'noarch builds shouldn't be using %{_libdir}'
repeated
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 11:23 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On 10/01/2009 11:11 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Oct 1, 2009, at 10:59, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 01:15:09PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
Scoping:
- this work would target Fedora 13. I'd
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, David Malcolm wrote:
Treating it as a new language is the intent, and I'll make every effort
to keep them separated.
In theory there wouldn't be any problems. However if I screw up and
somehow cross the streams, I run the risk of breaking _lots_ of things;
yum is the
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:39 PM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
I'm not volunteering to put it into F12. I think that anyone wanting to
push it into F12 needs to sign up for a lot of testing (brainstorming
some testcases: can you still compile and build external modules with
both
On 10/01/2009 10:15 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
Proposal: Python 3 in Fedora 13
Evolutionary, not revolutionary: build a python 3 stack
parallel-installable with the python 2 stack.
First: Overall +1.
Note: liberally snipped, throughout.
= Proposal =
Where I would draw the line is on
2009/10/1 Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 06:42:08PM +0100, Mat Booth wrote:
Nice bug; this one is my favourite:
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1308 -- PPC64 noarch builds
don't expand %{_libdir} to the correct place.
I'm pretty sure I have seen 'noarch builds
* read the dracut man page
* remove rhgb from the kernel command line and maybe quiet
* add rdshell to the kernel command line and you are dropped to a shell
* add rdshell rdinitdebug to the kernel command line and dracut shell commands
are printed as they are executed
* with dracut = 002-11 (
When: Friday, 2009-10-02 @ 15:00 UTC (11 AM EDT)
Where: #fedora-bugzappers on irc.freenode.net
Join us this Friday for another alliterative installment of ...
drumroll ... the Beta Blocker Bug review. Previous reviews have been
successful at keeping the blocker bug list active. Let's continue
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 01:01:32PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
Hello,
I have fully updated Fedora 11 x86_64 system, and when I run
preupgrade-cli I get this:
..
..
Saving Primary metadata
Saving file lists metadata
Saving other metadata
Am 01.10.2009 21:35, schrieb Harald Hoyer:
* read the dracut man page
* remove rhgb from the kernel command line and maybe quiet
* add rdshell to the kernel command line and you are dropped to a shell
* add rdshell rdinitdebug to the kernel command line and dracut shell
commands are printed as
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 21:35 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
* read the dracut man page
* remove rhgb from the kernel command line and maybe quiet
* add rdshell to the kernel command line and you are dropped to a shell
* add rdshell rdinitdebug to the kernel command line and dracut shell
commands
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 21:35 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
* read the dracut man page
* remove rhgb from the kernel command line and maybe quiet
* add rdshell to the kernel command line and you are dropped to a shell
* add rdshell rdinitdebug to the kernel command line and dracut shell
commands
Jesse Keating wrote:
Ditto. This is not something you would push as an update to a released
product.
I don't see why a parallel-installable python3/python3000 would cause any
problems as an update.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 23:21 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
Ditto. This is not something you would push as an update to a released
product.
I don't see why a parallel-installable python3/python3000 would cause any
problems as an update.
Kevin Kofler
The
Kevin Kofler said the following on 10/01/2009 02:28 AM Pacific Time:
So I'll have to blame the previous FESCo for voting this through with
practically no feedback, as they observed themselves before the vote:
17:14:04 nirik has there been any feedback on lists or wiki?
17:14:15 * nirik just
Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at said:
Jesse Keating wrote:
Ditto. This is not something you would push as an update to a released
product.
I don't see why a parallel-installable python3/python3000 would cause any
problems as an update.
Are you able to guarantee
On 10/01/2009 08:02 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 21:35 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
* read the dracut man page
* remove rhgb from the kernel command line and maybe quiet
* add rdshell to the kernel command line and you are dropped to a shell
* add rdshell rdinitdebug to
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 22:09 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Please also see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Dracut_problems , the
permanent reference for this topic. I'll add anything in Harald's mail
that's not currently on that page to it. Thanks.
Is this the
John Poelstra wrote:
The current FESCo might also want to consider taking more of a
leadership role in monitoring the release processes, tracking the
schedule, and evaluating the quality of the release under development
and our ability to release on time. As the group responsible for
guiding
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 12:17 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On 10/01/2009 10:15 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
Proposal: Python 3 in Fedora 13
Evolutionary, not revolutionary: build a python 3 stack
parallel-installable with the python 2 stack.
First: Overall +1.
Note: liberally
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
David Malcolm wrote:
Naming convention proposal:
How does this sound:
- an rpm with a python- prefix means a python 2 rpm, of
the
default python 2 minor version (for Fedora this will be the
most
recent stable upstream minor release, for
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 19:12 -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
David Malcolm wrote:
Naming convention proposal:
How does this sound:
- an rpm with a python- prefix means a python 2 rpm, of
the
default python 2 minor version (for Fedora this
On 10/01/2009 10:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 22:09 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Please also see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Dracut_problems , the
permanent reference for this topic. I'll add anything in Harald's mail
that's not currently on
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 23:39 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
set while other
voices in the community think that they should have University, RHCE
or
some other degree stuck up their ass to be able to participate in
testing or other aspects of the community
I think you're setting up a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 19:12 -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
Could we do something similar to what qt and kdelibs packages
have done? While qt3 was default, the 'qt' package points to
qt3
and qt4 is an entirely separate package.
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 12:53:21AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
John Poelstra wrote:
The current FESCo might also want to consider taking more of a
leadership role in monitoring the release processes, tracking the
schedule, and evaluating the quality of the release under development
and our
On 10/01/2009 11:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 23:39 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
set while other
voices in the community think that they should have University, RHCE
or
some other degree stuck up their ass to be able to participate in
testing or other aspects
Sorry for the late notice. There's only one agenda item for
tomorrow's FESCo meeting, and that's the dropping of features that are
not yet 100% complete. The meeting will be held tomorrow at 17:00UTC
(13:00EDT) in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net
I've also copied the relevant feature owners,
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see any way around this atm but it is something to think about
possibilities more.
One way around this that I use at $DAYJOB (to minimize exposure of a
PHP enabled webserver, thus minimizing attack surface, and
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
How about starting now? Our last two meetings took about 20 min combined.
We're through the Feature process mostly, and we're entering the part of the
development cycle that people need help with, reminders for, planning,
On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 01:35 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
As I said other voices I never said they resided on this list ( I dont
keep tap who's on this list or any other list for that matter ) however
you should recall atleast one such debate when we rewrote/redesigned the
QA
perl-POE-Component-Client-HTTP has broken dependencies in the development tree:
On ppc:
perl-POE-Component-Client-HTTP-0.85-3.fc11.noarch requires
perl(POE::Component::Client::Keepalive) = 0:0.0901
On x86_64:
perl-POE-Component-Client-HTTP-0.85-3.fc11.noarch requires
Hello,
perl-POE-Component-Client-HTTP has broken dependencies in the development
tree:
perl-POE-Component-Client-HTTP-0.85-3.fc11.noarch requires
perl(POE::Component::Client::Keepalive) = 0:0.0901
who knows what the development tree is?
Anyway, dist-f12 and dist-f13 are ok, AFAIK,
76 matches
Mail list logo
