https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #31
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #33 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #35 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com ---
Already exists.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #36 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com ---
Sorry not sure what happened then.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #29 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com ---
This doesn't seem to be to do with 32 bit. Xdr.safe_add is
an ocamlnet symbol, and whenproto_aux.ml is a generated file
(from /usr/bin/ocamlrpcgen). We need to add to %build:
rm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #30 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com ---
Updated:
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17.src.rpm
F17 scratch build:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #22 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com ---
No, that's not normal. All I can think is that I must have
done a 'make dist' twice and included another copy of the
tarball.
Here is a corrected SRPM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #23 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org ---
It doesn't seems to build in mock ( who has been running since 2/3h ).
It seems to block at :
/bin/bash - ./test_run.sh ./t100_counter.ml
Is this expected ( ie, it take a long time, I am
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #24 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com ---
Are you using 32 bit? This patch was required for 32 bit
ARM:
commit d6da1b74e241e79eb0af9c01e390e98ceead3a49
Author: Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com
Date: Sat Apr 28 20:40:39
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #25 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com ---
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #26 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com ---
Koji scratch build which I guess proves that it builds on
32 bit ...
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4209135
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #27 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org ---
Yup, this laptop is 32 bits. Let me start again mock and go on with the review.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #21 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-04-17 16:56:23 EDT ---
Sorry for not updating this review.
While
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #20 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-04-07 06:52:41 EDT ---
Indeed, i tought it would be used for the %build,
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #17 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-04-06 15:04:13 EDT ---
The %global opt is still unused in the spec, so
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #18 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-04-06 15:12:24 EDT ---
And yes, a new rpm would help me to make sure I
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #19 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-04-06 15:27:33
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
The %global
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #16 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-04-02 15:44:53
EDT ---
This is working out well for me, after
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #15 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-23 14:19:44
EDT ---
I just posted a patch that fixes the
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #9 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-22 02:56:56 EDT ---
So :
- The guideline say that you should use
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #10 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-22 04:42:11
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
So :
- The
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #11 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-22 06:04:56 EDT ---
Then I think it would be nice to add this fact to
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #12 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-22 09:09:21
EDT ---
It turns out there's a problem with the
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #13 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-22 11:47:58 EDT ---
Fedora-review complaint about the address of the
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #14 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-22 12:08:39
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Fedora-review
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-21 11:59:29
EDT ---
Spec URL:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #8 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-21 12:02:19
EDT ---
Spec URL:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #6 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-19 05:44:57
EDT ---
The jobs file is parsed by the OCaml
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2012-03-18 05:55:22
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Let me start the
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-18 18:21:42 EDT ---
For the rpmlint warning about prelink file, I
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #2 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-17 18:20:35 EDT ---
and one last one, the release do not have
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #3 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org 2012-03-17 18:29:16 EDT ---
and regarding the point 6, I looked at the doc and
41 matches
Mail list logo
