Re: Does anyone else think yumex is broken?

2010-01-07 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 01/07/2010 04:08 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: The yum command line tool is great for anyone who wants to see more of the guts of package management. However, PackageKit is neither unreliable nor barely communicating in my experience, and I use it most of the time in Fedora. Well, ... * ...

Re: Our static Libraries packaging guidelines once more

2010-01-05 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 01/05/2010 05:48 PM, Tom spot Callaway wrote: On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: On the other hand, with the guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to comply with it ... Isn't that a chicken/egg

Re: packaging a static library

2009-12-29 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/29/2009 11:52 AM, Daniel Drake wrote: Hi, OLPC's security system uses libtomcrypt / tomsfastmath, both at the Linux level and the firmware level. OLPC has previously had a specific version of tomcrypt/tommath profesionally audited for security reasons. So we obviously want to stick with

Re: packaging a static library

2009-12-29 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/30/2009 07:29 AM, Jon Masters wrote: On Tue, 2009-12-29 at 14:41 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 12/29/2009 11:52 AM, Daniel Drake wrote: OLPC has previously had a specific version of tomcrypt/tommath profesionally audited for security reasons. So we obviously want to stick

Re: WTF is wrong with thunderbird????

2009-12-22 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/22/2009 10:15 AM, Frank Murphy (Frankly3D) wrote: On 21/12/09 22:08, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Unfortunately, I don't know if who the culprit actually is: dovecot, TB3 or x86_64 or else. Ralf I have 3.0-4.fc12 Thunderbird on 64bit. (gmail-imap) None of the problems you describe. Only

Re: WTF is wrong with thunderbird????

2009-12-22 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/22/2009 12:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 12/22/2009 11:43 AM, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: What I am actually doing is to filter incoming mails from several remote imap and pop accounts into a local dovecot-imap applying thunderbird filtering. Have you disabled Keep messages

Re: WTF is wrong with thunderbird????

2009-12-21 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/21/2009 02:47 PM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote: OK, so I'm an email hog. I don't like to use the delete key. Here's my setup: My email server is F10.i386 (yeah, yeah, I know its EOLed) Its up-to-date, running dovecot as my IMAP server. My laptop is F11.x86_64. I'm running the new

Re: WTF is wrong with thunderbird????

2009-12-21 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/22/2009 01:23 AM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote: On 12/21/2009 05:08 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Welcome to the club - You seem to be facing the same issues as I have been facing ever since the TB3 betas hit Fedora. After things had somewhat smoothed since the inital Fedora release, with TB-3.0

Re: WTF is wrong with thunderbird????

2009-12-21 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/22/2009 04:58 AM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote: On 12/21/2009 10:36 PM, Mail Lists wrote: On 12/21/2009 09:29 PM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote: Ralf This could be a GLODA bug ... please confirm it is off and of not try turning GLODA off and see if that helps. Edit - Preferences -

Re: Fwd: rpms/perl/devel perl.spec,1.246,1.247

2009-12-18 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/19/2009 04:29 AM, Chris Weyl wrote: Hmm. Sanity check here: are we sure just excluding these is the way we want to go? I certainly think so, otherwise I would not have applied the patches. Apart of this, my changes we emergency changes to get rid of broken package deps. Whether these

Re: Fwd: rpms/perl/devel perl.spec,1.246,1.247

2009-12-18 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/19/2009 06:14 AM, Tom spot Callaway wrote: On 12/19/2009 12:07 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Also... Even if we exclude these modules w/o providing them as sub-packages, we ought to ensure that they're still pulled in by perl-core (and perl itself, when we make the perl-core/perl/perl

Re: Tar oddity...

2009-12-17 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/17/2009 11:51 PM, DB wrote: Hi All, I've just (re)installed F12 on my laptop, tried to copy my home directory (F11) from my desktop using tar. The create went OK, I can do tar tvh on the desktop no probs. But when I connect the external drive to the laptop, tar tvh says it's closing

Re: packages requiring me to reboot...

2009-12-16 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/16/2009 06:34 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote: Am 2009-12-16 18:21, schrieb Seth Vidal: On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, nodata wrote: we're talking about the experienced user who is comfortable knowing what does and does not need a reboot. All I'm saying is - we've

Re: x86-64 on i386 (was Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?)

2009-12-14 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/14/2009 10:27 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Dim 13 décembre 2009 22:35, Chris Adams a écrit : As for the RAM overhead of 64 bit code vs. 32 bit code, I don't see it much in the real world. The worst case I've seen reported is when the RAM overhead managed to annihilate register

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-12-09 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/09/2009 02:05 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 06:51:59 +0100, Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de wrote: Seems to me, as if some people in Fedora's leadership don't want to understand that being able to deploy Linux on old or recycled hardware used to be one big

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-12-09 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/09/2009 04:14 PM, James Antill wrote: On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 15:26 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: So, yeh, if _you_ want to support slower machines Well, I do not want to, I can't avoid to ... ... _you_ will have to do the work, you might get help from the community but just ranting

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-12-09 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/09/2009 05:51 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 12/09/2009 04:14 PM, James Antill wrote: On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 15:26 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: So, yeh, if _you_ want to support slower machines Well, I do not want to, I can't avoid

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-12-08 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/08/2009 06:41 PM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Rallias UberNerd robinstar1...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:39:16 -0600, Kevin Koflerkevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Bill McGonigle wrote: Are you installing Fedora on the computer you're using now? [YES] [NO]

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-12-08 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/08/2009 09:26 PM, Ville Skyttä wrote: 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

Re: Proposed F13 feature: drop separate updates repository

2009-12-04 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/03/2009 07:22 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 06:24 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: People doing network installs can either add the updates repo to their kickstart, or check the box in the anaconda UI, so that the updates repos are considered at install time. No download

Re: Proposed F13 feature: drop separate updates repository

2009-12-04 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/05/2009 06:22 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: On Fri, December 4, 2009 9:20 pm, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 12/03/2009 07:22 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 06:24 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Yes, for people who are doing full featured networked installs w/ custom kickstart

Re: Proposed F13 feature: drop separate updates repository

2009-12-02 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/02/2009 03:39 PM, Matthew Booth wrote: The separate updates directory has been a pain for as long as I've been using RHL/Fedora Core/Fedora. It means you have two places to look when searching for packages manually, and twice as much to configure when you're configuring yum. It has never

Re: Proposed F13 feature: drop separate updates repository

2009-12-02 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/02/2009 06:01 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote: On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:06:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: However, other than 'browsing manually for packages', I'm not really sure what problem you are trying to solve by getting rid of the updates repository. It would seem like this has quite a

Re: Proposed F13 feature: drop separate updates repository

2009-12-02 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/02/2009 06:40 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 18:09 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: * It shifts costs from users to vendor and from mirrors to master. * It helps users who are using networked installs to spare bandwidth (avoids downloading obsolete packages from Everything

Re: Proposed F13 feature: drop separate updates repository

2009-12-02 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/02/2009 07:09 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: the merger of repos is already happening at the yum layer. On the client's side - With a combined Everything+updates, this would happen on the server side. It's one of the aspects which made me said a combined Everything+updates shifts costs from

Re: Proposed F13 feature: drop separate updates repository

2009-12-02 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 12/03/2009 06:32 AM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 12/02/2009 07:09 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: the merger of repos is already happening at the yum layer. On the client's side - With a combined Everything+updates, this would happen on the server side. It's

Re: [RFC] unified i386/x86_64 install media.

2009-11-25 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/25/2009 01:13 PM, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: On 11/25/2009 08:38 AM, Nicu Buculei wrote: Instead of this I would pretty much like to have the normal install DVD being full (4GB, instead of 3.0-3.3GB as now), so when installing a computer I have more content on local media and less stuff to

Re: Is F12 ready to upgrade ? Is it worth it ?

2009-11-25 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/25/2009 05:13 PM, Linuxguy123 wrote: I'm perplexed by the posts I am seeing regarding F12 upgrades. Lots of upgrade issues and darn faint praise as far as I can tell ? AFAICT, almost all of the upgrade issues are related to preupgrade demands on /boot's sizes ;-) I was expecting a

Re: [RFA] Your [PACKAGE_NAME] did not pass QA

2009-11-23 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/23/2009 09:00 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le lundi 23 novembre 2009 à 13:48 -0600, Chris Adams a écrit : Once upon a time, Nicolas Mailhotnicolas.mail...@laposte.net said: Le lundi 23 novembre 2009 à 09:51 -0700, Jerry James a écrit : 1) I'm going to nag you forever about a problem

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-11-20 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/20/2009 09:02 AM, Nicu Buculei wrote: On 11/19/2009 08:14 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 18:45 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: You must not confuse moblin with netbooks, nettops or with i386/32bit machines in general. The moblin desktop is addressing a completely different

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-11-20 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/20/2009 11:58 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: IMO, they are targetting MID devices, competing with Android, Smart phones and similar. Not at the moment they're not/ Then please explain what they are targetting. So far, all of Moblin I have seen was them trying to turn a multi-user

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-11-19 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/19/2009 07:14 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 18:45 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: You must not confuse moblin with netbooks, nettops or with i386/32bit machines in general. The moblin desktop is addressing a completely different audience. Oh? That's not what I got from

Re: Promoting i386 version over x86_64?

2009-11-19 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/20/2009 06:31 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 11/20/2009 08:22 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 11/19/2009 07:14 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 18:45 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: You must not confuse moblin with netbooks, nettops or with i386/32bit machines in general

Re: A silly question about our FC tag

2009-11-17 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/17/2009 09:08 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: Henrique Junior wrote on 16.11.2009 23:57: I have a question that may sound a little stupid, but that came as I write a short article about some Fedora's curiosities. Why are our packages still using the tag f*c*X, f*c*Y, f*c*W since Fedora does

Re: Broken deps for rawhide the past few days

2009-11-17 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/16/2009 08:22 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: Many of you received emails over the weekend and this morning regarding broken deps in rawhide. If these emails mentioned that the deps were broken on ppc or ppc64 they can be ignored. We are no longer producing ppc/ppc64 as a primary arch, however

Re: Broken dependencies script at it again

2009-11-14 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/14/2009 05:12 PM, Paul Howarth wrote: Please make it stop. +1 ... ... so far, I've received ca. 1200 of these mails and the figure is still growing by the minute. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com

Re: Broken dependencies script at it again

2009-11-14 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/14/2009 10:12 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: On Sat, 14 Nov 2009, Henrique Junior wrote: +1 Are people +1'ing getting rid of the broken dependencies script altogether? or +1'ing to predicting the future and stopping it before it breaks? No, it's raising hands to a) draw attention of

Re: should I go for 64bit version of Fedora 11 ?

2009-11-03 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 11/03/2009 08:38 AM, Jatin K wrote: Dear all I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major configuration[1] , My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit version ? Depends on what you plan to use this notebook for. is there any significant benefit if I use 64bit version ? In

Re: firefox 3.5.4 broken?

2009-10-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/30/2009 12:26 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: 1. Highlight a word on a web page. 2. Right click on word. 3. Select Search Google for word... 4. ??? 5. Crash box appears. Anyone else? I am not observing this issue, but I already had 2 firefox segfaults and one firefox desktop freeze since

Re: firefox 3.5.4 broken?

2009-10-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/30/2009 04:25 PM, Antonio M wrote: 2009/10/30 Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de: On 10/30/2009 12:26 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: 1. Highlight a word on a web page. 2. Right click on word. 3. Select Search Google for word... 4. ??? 5. Crash box appears. Anyone else? I am not

Re: firefox 3.5.4 broken?

2009-10-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/30/2009 05:20 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: Aaron Konstam on 10/30/2009 09:17 AM wrote: I am getting and Assert error when I do the above. You need to restart Firefox. P.S. This thread is closed. ;) You mean, works for you ;) Here is a back trace of a segfault which just happend

Re: firefox 3.5.4 broken?

2009-10-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/30/2009 06:03 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 16:38 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Well I can reproduce the segfaults semi-deterministically: http://www.paulmccartney.com Firefox-3.5.4 either immediately dies, or dies after a little bit of browsing. The standard

Re: firefox 3.5.4 broken?

2009-10-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/30/2009 07:38 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 18:20 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/30/2009 06:03 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 16:38 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Well I can reproduce the segfaults semi-deterministically: http

Re: firefox 3.5.4 broken?

2009-10-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/31/2009 05:35 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 03:52 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Not so. Plugins and extensions don't run in a sandbox in current versions of FF. Future versions will be different. You don't have to have a sandbox for this. All that would be required

Re: How does one remove the nvidia driver and install nouveau ?

2009-10-23 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/23/2009 04:01 PM, Linuxguy123 wrote: On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 08:38 -0400, Matthew Saltzman wrote: Run 'livna-config-display --active off' to prevent the starutp script from modifying xorg.conf. Then edit xorg.conf and change the driver from 'nvidia' to 'nouveau'. The reboot. I think

Re: How does one remove the nvidia driver and install nouveau ?

2009-10-23 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/23/2009 04:29 PM, Linuxguy123 wrote: On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 16:14 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Run nvidia-config-display disable and reboot It didn't work. $ lsmod | grep vid nvidia 9579020 40 video 18744 0 uvcvideo 50572 0 videodev

Re: How does one remove the nvidia driver and install nouveau ?

2009-10-23 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/23/2009 04:29 PM, Linuxguy123 wrote: On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 16:14 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Run nvidia-config-display disable and reboot It didn't work. $ lsmod | grep vid nvidia 9579020 40 video 18744 0 uvcvideo 50572 0 videodev

Re: Are packages w/o necessary kernel modules allowed?

2009-10-14 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/14/2009 03:04 PM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: Hello All! Imagine an application, which relies on a specific kernel module. This module is not a part of stock Fedora kernel (at least, yet), and we don't allow stand-alone kernel modules. Whether or not this package can be allowed? IMO: no.

Re: Updates-testing

2009-10-14 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/14/2009 05:47 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: yum downgrade pkgname it works fine for the simple-ish cases. Is there a thunderbird-2.0 package for F11? For me, all thunderbird-3.*'s in FC11 were simply too bugged to be usable (The UI changes are not an issue for me - for me, TB3 is simply too

Re: Are packages w/o necessary kernel modules allowed?

2009-10-14 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/14/2009 06:30 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 05:29:13PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/14/2009 03:04 PM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: Hello All! Imagine an application, which relies on a specific kernel module. This module is not a part of stock Fedora kernel

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/11/2009 11:29 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote: On 10/11/2009 11:16 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: On 10/11/2009 04:54 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then it would have

Re: Howto handle multilib conflict?

2009-10-10 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/10/2009 01:48 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: Am Freitag, den 09.10.2009, 18:56 -0400 schrieb Neal Becker: What if the generated docbook documents are different due to different ids? Do we need to separate the docs into a noarch

Re: Rpmfusion?

2009-10-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/06/2009 11:37 AM, Erik P. Olsen wrote: What has happened to rpmfusion? Its web site and download site seem to be gone. Same for me. I guess on a serious dns problem somewhere. Ralf -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe:

Re: Rpmfusion?

2009-10-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/06/2009 12:07 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote: On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 12:04 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/06/2009 11:37 AM, Erik P. Olsen wrote: What has happened to rpmfusion? Its web site and download site seem to be gone. Same for me. I guess on a serious dns problem somewhere. Ralf

yum update vs. blender

2009-09-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
Hi, today's yum update came along with this: # yum update ... Updating : blender-2.49b 1.fc11.x86_64 16/57 Unknown media type in type 'all/all' Unknown media type in type 'all/allfiles' Unknown media type in type 'uri/mms' Unknown

Re: anyone out there still using NIS?

2009-09-26 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 09/26/2009 08:48 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: i'm putting together a tutorial on network services, and i'm really uninterested in investing any time in covering NIS. anyone out there still using it? is it worth it? Yes to both. Ralf -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com

Re: #! /usr/bin/perl preferred

2009-08-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/28/2009 10:07 PM, Stepan Kasal wrote: Hello, let me explain. I was told they are doing this env clenup with python scripts don't you want to do it for perl as well? Then let me add: The FPC had discussed this topic during its last meeting and didn't agree upon the proposal. cf.

Re: #! /usr/bin/perl preferred

2009-08-28 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/28/2009 04:11 PM, Stepan Kasal wrote: Hello, at certain periods of time, it was recommended to use #!/usr/bin/env . Some people consider it ugly. (The humble opinion of the author of this mail is the same.) My opinion is converse. Actually I think _you_ (as a perl maintainer) are

Re: Proposed F12 perl cleanups

2009-08-17 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/15/2009 09:00 PM, Tom spot Callaway wrote: Out of the thread on p5p, I'd like to propose the following changes for F-12: * Rename perl-core to perl * Rename perl to perl-minimal The biggest change here is that there are still packages which Require: perl, usually to specify a specific

Re: Updates lacking descriptions

2009-08-14 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/14/2009 07:32 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 05:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure

Re: Updates lacking descriptions

2009-08-13 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/13/2009 10:41 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: Correct, such a step will add a significant bureaucratic burdons to maintainers. As maintainers hate bureaucrazy and prefer investing time on dealing with technical issues (such as bug fixes), this will likely introduce

Re: Updates lacking descriptions

2009-08-13 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/13/2009 06:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:32:24PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 08/13/2009 09:29 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:53:57 +0200, Kevin wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: With you folks demanding more explicit changelogs you

Re: Updates lacking descriptions

2009-08-12 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/12/2009 11:54 PM, Ben Boeckel wrote: If this is enforced (and it may be good to add it to the critical-path suggestion), updates will be reduced since when there's little to write about, there's less justification for an update in the first place. Correct, such a step will add a

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-10 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/10/2009 05:17 PM, Bill McGonigle wrote: On 08/07/2009 02:54 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Pointing it out on a review and restoring to calling the packages bad quality if people don't follow your controversial recommendation isn't going to scale at all. This is a good perspective, Ralf.

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-10 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/10/2009 08:48 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: I am applying this approach to several of my Fedora packages (some of which I know to suffer from such issues, e.g. Coin2), fixed some packages (owned by others) this way, which had failed during the F11-mass-rebuild, exactly

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-10 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/10/2009 09:01 PM, Bill McGonigle wrote: On 08/10/2009 11:44 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: They are very easy to demonstrate. Commonly known cases are building gcc, binutils, gdb, firefox etc. Are these of the sort where a bug is reported, it's found that autotools made a bad decision

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-10 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/10/2009 11:56 PM, Ben Boeckel wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 08/10/2009 09:01 PM, Bill McGonigle wrote: Are these of the sort where a bug is reported, it's found that autotools made a bad decision, and then patching autotools fixed

Re: Broken dependencies: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader

2009-08-09 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/08/2009 08:23 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 18:32 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: This bug was fixed in perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.04006-5.fc12.noarch.rpm Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:13:03 UTC (3 days ago). cf. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=125804

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-08 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/08/2009 07:25 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: lack of maintainer skills (e.g. running the autotools), You are insulting maintainers for having a different opinion, It's not a matter of opinions it's a matter of technical facts. It doesn't matter how many people deny

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-08 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/08/2009 07:03 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:51 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: IMHO, the proper way is to express opinion, and even when disagreement happens, approve review == switch off your brains, morals, knowledge Pardon, but you don't want how disgusting I find

Re: --target in %configure in rawhide i386

2009-08-08 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/08/2009 08:58 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote: 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

Re: Broken dependencies: perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader

2009-08-08 Thread Ralf Corsepius
This bug was fixed in perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.04006-5.fc12.noarch.rpm Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:13:03 UTC (3 days ago). cf. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=125804 No idea, why these broken broken deps messages are still being issued. Ralf On 08/08/2009 11:40 AM,

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-07 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 09:12 PM, Matej Cepl wrote: Ralf Corsepius, Thu, 06 Aug 2009 18:14:47 +0200: I turned away from supporting Mr. Robinson, ignored his reviews and left reviews to others So you lost your right to slander him now. Do you expect people to continue a review even when you'd have

Re: Make upstream release monitoring (the service formerly known as FEVer) opt-out?

2009-08-07 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/07/2009 10:48 AM, Till Maas wrote: On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 06:35:14AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 08/06/2009 09:33 PM, Till Maas wrote: currently upstream release monitoring[0] bug filing is opt-in, which means that it will be only performed for packages that have been activly

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-07 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/07/2009 04:19 PM, Matěj Cepl wrote: Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de writes: On 08/06/2009 09:12 PM, Matej Cepl wrote: Do you expect people to continue a review even when you'd have to decide against the best of your knowledge and conciousness? Actually, yes, I do. Your job is not to

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 10:39 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: 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

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 10:55 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 08/06/2009 02:14 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: IMO, this feature should be scratched, because the packages in question are of immature nature (... and of low packaging quality from my POV). Be specific. This is not enough information to influence

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 12:32 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 10:44 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 08/06/2009 10:39 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: After requesting status updates, including direct email to the feature owners, the following feature pages do not have a current status

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 02:10 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 06.08.2009, 13:39 +0200 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: On 08/06/2009 12:32 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 10:44 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 08/06/2009 10:39 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: After requesting status

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 02:18 PM, drago01 wrote: On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de wrote: * IM (NSH) O, the packaging quality of the submitted packages is close to being inacceptable low. Can you be more verbose on that one? 3 Examples: 1. He is running the

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 05:20 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 06.08.2009, 16:20 +0200 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: On 08/06/2009 02:18 PM, drago01 wrote: On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de wrote: * IM (NSH) O, the packaging quality of the submitted packages

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 05:16 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 06.08.2009, 16:14 +0200 schrieb Ralf Corsepius: On 08/06/2009 02:10 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: I asked you to write down the problems you found in bz and CC me, but so far I haven't received a mail. I haven't received any

Re: Make upstream release monitoring (the service formerly known as FEVer) opt-out?

2009-08-06 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/06/2009 09:33 PM, Till Maas wrote: Hiyas, currently upstream release monitoring[0] bug filing is opt-in, which means that it will be only performed for packages that have been activly added by probably a maintainer of the package. There is at least one maintainer that does not like having

Re: An easy way to redefine configure?

2009-08-04 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 08/04/2009 02:01 PM, Jussi Lehtola wrote: 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

Re: F12 mass rebuild status

2009-07-30 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/30/2009 01:40 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: I've now generated the first of the mass rebuild status pages. http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/needed-f12-rebuilds.html corsepiu: OpenSceneGraph Seems as if you modified the *.spec (traces in CVS), but haven't launched any built (no traces

Re: Updated Anaconda packages

2009-07-29 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/29/2009 08:03 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 01:51 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 07/28/2009 01:19 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 06:27:00PM -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: That means that you can take revisor, pungi or livecd-tools in your existing

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-28 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/29/2009 12:37 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 13:43 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: With all due respect to fedoraunity and you. To me it is a serious Fedora management and rel-eng mistake causing major harm to fedora's and RH's reputation to not provide updated media, thus

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/27/2009 07:33 AM, David Cantrell wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, Björn Persson wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 07/26/2009 02:37 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Alan Cox wrote: all of my system has a wrong openssl version all

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/27/2009 11:26 AM, David Cantrell wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 07/27/2009 07:33 AM, David Cantrell wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, Björn Persson wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/27/2009 11:25 AM, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de wrote: On 07/26/2009 09:28 PM, Björn Persson wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 07/26/2009 02:37 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Alan Cox wrote: all of my system has

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/27/2009 03:39 PM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: * Ralf Corsepius [27/07/2009 13:49] : Your problem, if you are using a non-reboot persistant /tmp Although data stored in /tmp may be deleted in a site-specific manner, it is recommended that files and directories located in /tmp be deleted

Re: Updated Anaconda packages

2009-07-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/27/2009 10:21 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote: Regenerating the images is expensive -- it requires effort on the part of the developers doing fixes, release engineering doing builds with the fixes, QA testing the fixes, infrastructure (mirrors) carrying a significant amount more bits[1], ... Not

Re: Updated Anaconda packages

2009-07-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/28/2009 01:19 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 06:27:00PM -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: That means that you can take revisor, pungi or livecd-tools in your existing Fedora system None of these are what I am looking for. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list

Re: Updated Anaconda packages

2009-07-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/28/2009 01:43 AM, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: On 07/28/2009 12:54 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 07/28/2009 12:27 AM, Jeremy Katz wrote: As it turns out, we ship all the tools to build the distribution the exact way we do! And as David said, he's been working with Jeroen for occasional

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-26 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/26/2009 08:12 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 21:42 +0200, Farkas Levente wrote: On 07/25/2009 08:56 PM, Björn Persson wrote: Fortunately I had read in this list that upgrading breaks Yum so I did a fresh install instead, and only had to spend a few days getting all the

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-26 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/26/2009 10:40 AM, drago01 wrote: On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de wrote: It may be news to you, but a single negative result invalidates a whole series of positive tests ;) No, that means that they are bugs / problems but not that the feature is

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-26 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/26/2009 02:37 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Alan Cox wrote: all of my system has a wrong openssl version all these symptoms sound like your upgrade went horribly wrong. I've seen preupgrade mash up a box by half upgrading like that. It's the main reason I don't think

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-26 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/26/2009 09:28 PM, Björn Persson wrote: Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 07/26/2009 02:37 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Alan Cox wrote: all of my system has a wrong openssl version all these symptoms sound like your upgrade went horribly wrong. I've seen preupgrade mash up a box

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-26 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/26/2009 09:34 PM, John Poelstra wrote: Ralf Corsepius said the following on 07/26/2009 11:35 AM Pacific Time: Are there bug numbers for these issues? I filed some BZs for which I couldn't find as already filed by others (some already were): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id

Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release

2009-07-26 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 07/26/2009 02:37 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Alan Cox wrote: all of my system has a wrong openssl version all these symptoms sound like your upgrade went horribly wrong. I've seen preupgrade mash up a box by half upgrading like that. It's the main reason I don't think

  1   2   3   >