https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System ---
partclone-0.3.5a-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You ar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System ---
partclone-0.3.5a-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You ar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System ---
partclone-0.3.5a-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_T
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |ON_QA
Resolution|ERRATA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Robert Scheck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(space...@gmail.co |
|m)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System ---
partclone-0.3.5a-3.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-f81abe5e43
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #20 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/partclone
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-r
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #18 from Robert Scheck ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #17)
> One last minor thing : If the package is under multiple licenses, the
> licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec.
>
> Since the breakdown i
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #17 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
One last minor thing : If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing
breakdown must be documented in the spec.
Since the breakdown is fairly complex, summarizes it to the best of your
a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #16 from Robert Scheck ---
Spec URL: https://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/partclone.spec
SRPM URL: https://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/partclone-0.3.5a-2.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #15 from Robert-André Mauchin (afk until next Thu)
---
> if we have to rip thecode from the source tarball
I don't think this is necessary.
> we could build the "binary" in question ourself and ship it as %SOURCE1
ourself
Hones
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #14 from Robert Scheck ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin (afk until next Thu) from comment #13)
> You already said it, we can't ship exfat-utils, so we can't activate support
> for it.
I am sorry for being unprecise: My though
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #13 from Robert-André Mauchin (afk until next Thu)
---
>raise your toughts regarding exFAT code/support
You already said it, we can't ship exfat-utils, so we can't activate support
for it.
>fail-mbr.bin.orig
As far as I know, w
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #12 from Robert Scheck ---
I meant "thoughts", typo. Sorry.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #11 from Robert Scheck ---
Could you please raise your toughts regarding exFAT code/support and
binary partclone-0.3.5a/fail-mbr/fail-mbr.bin.orig as well?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #10 from Robert-André Mauchin (afk until next Thu)
---
>I could wrap it like
Please do
> You noticed the mentioned upstream ticket which also references a patch
suggestion by (another) Fedora contributor?
I did, but you should
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #9 from Robert Scheck ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin (afk until next Thu) from comment #8)
> - The Group: tag is not used on Fedora. See
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections
RHEL/CentOS 6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Robert-André Mauchin (afk until next Thu) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #7 from Robert Scheck ---
(In reply to Tadej Janež from comment #6)
> Maybe we could just continue the packaging effort here, you would just post
> your SRPM and SPEC file links
Spec URL: https://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/partclo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #6 from Tadej Janež ---
(In reply to Robert Scheck from comment #5)
>
> If not, I would submit a new review request myself based on comment #1, given
> I care a lot about mentioned points (EPEL). Tadej, are you a packager, too?
Y
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #5 from Robert Scheck ---
(In reply to Tadej Janež from comment #4)
> Eric, are you still willing to package it?
If not, I would submit a new review request myself based on comment #1, given
I care a lot about mentioned points (EP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
Tadej Janež changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||space...@gmail.com
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #3 from Robert Scheck ---
Eric, ping? Any thoughts or comments regarding my thoughts and comments?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404895
--- Comment #2 from Robert Scheck ---
Oh, given partclone-0.3.5a/fail-mbr/fail-mbr.bin.orig is shipped by default
and also makes it into the RPM package...that is a binary file, that only can
be built on ix86/x86_64 hardware. Any suggestions?
28 matches
Mail list logo
