On Sat, 2019-03-16 at 12:20 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 3/16/19 7:10 AM, Akarshan Biswas wrote:
> > With the above stated reasons, I am willing to know your
> > suggestions/opinions on this.
> > Building with GCC has become quite a headache for me. If it goes against
> > the
On Thu, 2018-11-08 at 20:35 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Le jeu. 8 nov. 2018 à 19:43, Jonathan Dieter a
> écrit :
> > On Thu, 2018-11-08 at 16:57 +, Andrew Bauer wrote:
> > > I'll create a new package request for the raspberry-vc libs. I'm
> > > not
> >
On Thu, 2018-11-08 at 16:57 +, Andrew Bauer wrote:
> I'll create a new package request for the raspberry-vc libs. I'm not
> as fast as some of you, so give me a few days. I will get this done.
>
> I plan to use this specfile as a starting point:
>
On Fri, 2018-03-16 at 08:43 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> The goal is to fetch the .repo files from a web location (or even to
> have fedora to ship a default file that will be enabled on user
> request).
> The non-replacement policy apply for theses repository in fedora, but
> for EL, we may
On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 17:32 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> The mass rebuilt is mostly done, there are still few package that has
> failed, the main ones are related to ImageMagick7 update.
I'm assuming you saw that ImageMagick on both F27 and Rawhide will be
downgraded to 6 and it looks like
On Sun, 2017-07-16 at 01:18 +, Leigh Scott wrote:
> Try adding the repo to the command
>
> rfpkg co nonfree/libspotify
And that did the trick. I feel a bit stupid now. Thanks so much!
Jonathan
___
rpmfusion-developers mailing list --
I'm unable to access the rfpkg and libspotify repositories, even though
I'm listed as the owner/co-owner in pkgdb. My SSH key is configured
and seems to be used correctly, but I'm still being denied access. Is
this a known problem, or should I open a bug?
[jonathan@jdlaptop rpmfusion]$ rfpkg
On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 11:05 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Do you think that report like that would be valuable for the
> rpmfusion-users and/or rpmfusion-developers mailing list ?
FWIW, I'd love to see it on the -developers list.
Jonathan
___
Sorry if this is known to be not working, but I'm unable to approve
ACLs in https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb.
It goes around and around for a long time, and then I finally get the
following error:
Proxy Error
The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.
The proxy
On Thu, 2017-02-02 at 18:32 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Just to inform the list that I will be at FOSDEM this week-end in
> Bruxelles.
> If you want to meet there, feel free to contact me.
(Replying privately)
Nicolas, I'll be at FOSDEM as well. I'd love to get a chance to chat
with you, if
On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 12:59 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2016-11-22 12:46 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane <musur...@gmail.com>:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Jonathan Dieter <jdie...@gmail.com>
> > [..]
> > > Non-free:
> > > gens (i686 only in F
On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 19:13 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Here is a quick TODO list anyone can take:
> - clean packages not in rpmfusion anymore (moved to fedora, orphaned)
Ok, looking at the jump from F24 to F25, there are a few packages that
were in comps that are now missing, and I'd like to
On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 09:49 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Thx for this work.
> I don't expect this change can be implemented in the infra before 25
> GA, so this will be implemented only on the updates repository which
> should work.
That should be fine. This is most useful for kickstart
On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 10:06 +0100, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
> I see the following issues:
>
> devede has been retired. Now there is devedeng instead.
>
> plus4emu is nonfree but it's included in the free list.
>
> zboy, fceux are missing.
Thanks for pointing these out. All are fixed in the
On Wed, 2016-11-16 at 20:08 +0200, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> I have the beginnings of a comps for RPM Fusion Free for F24
> at http://
> lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/comps-f24.xml.in:
>
> On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 19:13 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> >
> > Here is a quic
I have the beginnings of a comps for RPM Fusion Free for F24 at http://
lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/comps-f24.xml.in:
On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 19:13 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Here is a quick TODO list anyone can take:
> - clean packages not in rpmfusion anymore (moved to fedora, orphaned)
Done.
On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 19:13 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Here is a quick TODO list anyone can take:
> - clean packages not in rpmfusion anymore (moved to fedora, orphaned)
> - Update new ones (gstreamer1-* ?)
> - add appdata as a default group when needed.( probably not base, but
> Desktop)
> -
On Fri, 2016-10-28 at 10:30 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> That was probably because the Base repo is defined in Fedora, but if
> we change Base in a 3rd part repo, one can "control" packages that
> are
> installed.
> So I don't know if the feature was kept.
FWIW, I'm the sysadmin of a school
On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 12:32 +0300, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> $ rsync download1.rpmfusion.org::rpmfusion/
> @ERROR: chroot failed
> rsync error: error starting client-server protocol (code 5) at
> main.c(1516) [Receiver=3.0.9]
This is fixed now. Rsyncing from download1.rpmfusi
I run a local mirror for rpmfusion, and over the last couple of days,
this is what I receive when I try to rsync from it:
$ rsync download1.rpmfusion.org::rpmfusion/
@ERROR: chroot failed
rsync error: error starting client-server protocol (code 5) at
main.c(1516) [Receiver=3.0.9]
Is there a
On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 17:27 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Ter, 2016-03-22 at 10:01 +0200, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
> > Maybe I've missed something here, but if you're looking for someone
> > to maintain mpd, I'd happily do it.
>
> yes , we are looking for someone to
On 01/07/2015 06:12 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
Hi all,
The wiki main page probably needs updating to show F21 packages (and
drop F18 and F19) in the Browse available packages section -- I've
heard people in Linux fora assuming there are no F21 builds yet because
of the information
On 01/07/2015 09:35 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2015-01-07 16:36 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com
mailto:jdie...@gmail.com:
Ok, I've updated the page to add F21 and remove F18 and F19. I did
notice that F21 armhfp is missing the repoview directory for both
updates
at 3:08:38 PM Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com
mailto:jdie...@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/07/2015 06:12 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
Hi all,
The wiki main page probably needs updating to show F21 packages (and
drop F18 and F19) in the Browse available packages section
On 09/30/2014 08:10 PM, Jeremy Newton wrote:
Hi,
So at the moment I can't update dolphin-emu because of RH#1069394.
It seems the developer/maintainer is not responding to the bug and is
reluctant to fix it. So the three approach that come to mind:
- Bundle polarssl until it is fixed (I would
On 09/30/2014 08:40 PM, Ken Dreyer wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Jeremy Newton alexjn...@gmail.com:
Hi,
So at the moment I can't update dolphin-emu because of RH#1069394.
It seems the developer/maintainer is not responding to the bug and is
reluctant to fix it. So the three
On 08/08/2014 09:32 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Seg, 2014-08-04 at 21:18 -0700, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
Thanks for the pointers. I've taken a look at the infrastructure wiki
page and the tracker bug for koji migration. rfpkg looks like a
reasonably easy place to start.
rpkg-1.20-1.fc20.noarch
On 08/04/2014 01:31 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
Hi Jonathan and thx for your offer to help:
Here are some info on the wiki about the infra:
http://rpmfusion.org/Infrastructure
tracker bug for Koji migration:
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3023
There are several ways to
So, as a result of the earlier problems we had with wiki defacement, I'm
volunteering to help out as an RPM Fusion sysadmin. I'm happy to do
whatever work needs to be done, whether it's simple, like setting up SSL
for the config page in the wiki, or more difficult, like helping switch
us over
We have a l33t hax0r who is defacing the RPM Fusion wiki pages,
claiming that RPM Fusion is insecure because it has an open wiki. I
would like to suggest that we lock down the wiki so only RPM Fusion devs
can change it. Or possibly wait for an admin to approve any changes
that a new user
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 08:30 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
There are 2 strong reasons to not bundle FFMPEG:
* Users (eg. me) rebuild rpmfusion's ffmpeg with options not supported
by rpmfusion:
= rpmfusion bundling xbmc's ffmpeg would void this undertaking and
reduce rpmfusion's usability.
On Sun, 2014-02-23 at 23:20 -0700, Ken Dreyer wrote:
Hi folks,
Alex Lancaster recently pointed out that XBMC upstream has completely
removed the option to use an external FFmpeg.
snip
The summary is that Alex and I need a bundling exception from the RPM
Fusion developer community in order
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:16 -0700, Ken Dreyer wrote:
Hi folks,
As it turns out I'm looking for new web hosting for the XBMC nightly
binaries. Does anyone have suggestions? Unfortunately I can't use
fedorapeople.org since since they nightly builds bundle ffmpeg. (I
wish they didn't, but
I've just noticed that there don't seem to have been any updates since
August 23. Is there a problem somewhere, or have I just missed
something?
Jonathan
On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 22:37 -0700, Jeff Mendoza wrote:
I elected to have openssl-freeworld and openssl-freeworld-devel
conflict with the regular packages. openssl-freeworld has the binary
openssl, this is not really needed, as the change is in the lib, and
the regular openssl binary will work
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 14:25 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
Im considering to package the Spotify client [1]: This is a binary
without sources aimed for the nonfree section. Two issues are not
immediately clear to me:
-Package has a frightening attachment of included licenses [2]. Do I
On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 15:50 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
Le 19 sept. 2012 08:24, Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com a écrit :
I've just finished reading http://jwboyer.livejournal.com/44787.html and
was wondering what the progress was on making sure RPM Fusion's kernel
modules
I've just finished reading http://jwboyer.livejournal.com/44787.html and
was wondering what the progress was on making sure RPM Fusion's kernel
modules will be able to be installed on a SecureBoot Fedora 18 system.
Do we have anyone actively working on this, and, if not, do we have
someone
I've been looking at what it will take to get the USBIP kernel modules
into kmod-staging, and it's just a added line. However, the official
source of the USBIP userspace is also in linux-staging.
To me, it seems like it would make more sense to split the userspace
into a separate package as it
On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 18:51 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2012/7/16 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com:
I've been looking at what it will take to get the USBIP kernel modules
into kmod-staging, and it's just a added line. However, the official
source of the USBIP userspace is also in linux
On Sat, 2012-01-07 at 18:01 +0100, Tomas Aronsson wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:10:48 +0200, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
Ok, three of the packages would need to go into RPM Fusion and one into
Fedora. Following are the review requests:
libspotify - https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 09:46 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
Le 5 janv. 2012 06:51, Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com a écrit :
I guess I'll go ahead and open up the review requests, unless I hear any
other concerns.
Good to me.
Ok, three of the packages would need to go into RPM Fusion
Does anyone object to putting libspotify into non-free? I've put
together a package, but I'm not sure what their redistribution policy
is. The main thing in their Terms of Use seems to be that it's for
non-commercial use, but I don't think that's a problem for non-free.
Jonathan
signature.asc
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 22:55 +1100, David Timms wrote:
On 04/01/12 22:31, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
Does anyone object to putting libspotify into non-free? I've put
together a package, but I'm not sure what their redistribution policy
is. The main thing in their Terms of Use seems
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 13:42 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com:
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 22:55 +1100, David Timms wrote:
On 04/01/12 22:31, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
Does anyone object to putting libspotify into non-free? I've put
together a package
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 14:27 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com:
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 13:42 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com:
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 22:55 +1100, David Timms wrote:
On 04/01/12 22:31, Jonathan
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 16:15 +0200, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 14:27 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com:
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 13:42 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2012/1/4 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@lesbg.com:
On Wed, 2012-01-04
On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 17:26 +0100, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
The idea of suggesting to move libdvdcss into RPM Fusion crossed my
mind, but I re-read the archived threads and refrained from doing so, at
least for now. I'm genuinely interest in finding out who is the current
maintainer and who
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 01:31 -0400, Stewart Adam wrote:
I like this idea, but I think that if possible we should avoid the yum
naming rule. I doubt it will change anytime soon (we should ask a yum
developer), but I think that versioning is something much more solid we
should rely on for this
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 14:41 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
to be fair - I also suggested fixing autodownloader to download a
central copy of it.
Yes, to amplify, Seth suggested giving autodownloader the ability to
download to a system-wide cache (that could be in /usr or /var).
I'm not hugely keen
I've been looking at uqm today to see how we could do this. I did come
up with one method that does work (at least in Fedora 13), though it
will be a bit of a pain for autodownloader. For uqm, it looks something
like this:
uqm is in Fedora
autodownloader is in Fedora
uqm-content is in RPM
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 12:55 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
Jonathan Dieter wrote:
I've noticed a number of games whose content is distributable as long as
it's distributed for free. A few of those games have ended up in Fedora
but use autodownloader to download the game data.
I
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 15:36 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
My point is a bit different: I consider this mechanism to be a way to
*circumvent* rpm as means of packaging and it to be a way of encourage
*sloppyness*, *lazyness* and *carelessness*, which endangers Fedora's users.
If FESCO has a
On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 18:14 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 05/16/2010 06:10 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Sunday, 16 May 2010 at 02:02, Kevin Kofler wrote:
[...]
IMHO the whole affected games should move to RPM Fusion Nonfree and
autodownloader should be removed from
I've noticed a number of games whose content is distributable as long as
it's distributed for free. A few of those games have ended up in Fedora
but use autodownloader to download the game data.
I really don't like this method because, at least as I understand it,
the game data ends up in the
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 04:16 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
OK, an attempt of a short summary:
* Technically: *-12 doesn't build for FC13 ;)
- An API change between rpmfusion's FC12 and FC13's ffmpeg breaks xbmc.
- xbmc is victim of the DSO changes in FC13.
- There is a subtile configure
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 16:45 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Hi!
Juan Rodriguez wrote on 18.11.2009 16:32:
My name is Juan Rodriguez, and I currently maintain a pair of packages
for Fedora 10, 11 and 12.
One of those packages I maintain is gnome-do, (and gnome-do-plugins),
with
On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 12:50 -0400, Stewart Adam wrote:
On 2009/08/16 1:45 PM, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 14:31 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
Anyway, If you want to give a hand for catalyst in rpmfusion the
better would be to submit an update bugreport having the spec
On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 11:25 +0200, rpmfusion-pkgs-rep...@rpmfusion.org
wrote:
catalyst-kmod-9.5-1.fc10.8
What's the story with getting Catalyst 9.7 into F10? Even for
updates-testing? Are there still problems getting Catalyst running on
the 2.6.29 and 2.6.30 kernels (which is keeping
On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 14:31 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2009/8/16 Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com:
On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 11:25 +0200, rpmfusion-pkgs-rep...@rpmfusion.org
wrote:
catalyst-kmod-9.5-1.fc10.8
What's the story with getting Catalyst 9.7 into F10? Even for
updates
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 22:50 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 22:10:03 +0300, Jonathan wrote:
FWIW, createrepo now creates the deltarpms in the Fedora infrastructure,
rather than the presto-utils.
As for hardware resources, in Fedora we're not generating deltarpms for
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 21:02 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:48:02 +0200, Thorsten wrote:
On 12.05.2009 03:01, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Any plans to support this in RPM Fusion?
Besides would be nice to have: not that I'm aware of.
There's the old thread from
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 00:58 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:29:47 +0200, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
Whichever machine builds the deltarpms needs loads of RAM (mainly for
the really big rpms). Specifically, you need (uncompressed_size_of_rpm
* 3).
Other than
Just a heads up that there are now presto test repositories for
rpmfusion available. Install yum-presto and change your baseurl to the
following:
F8 i386 - free:
http://lesloueizeh.com/f8/i386/rpmfusion-updates-free
F8 i386 - nonfree:
http://lesloueizeh.com/f8/i386/rpmfusion-updates-nonfree
F9
On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 18:34 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
For now just continue to obtain it where you got it from until now (e.g.
livna or freshrpms)
, so let's have the people willing to endorse that do it,
+1 -- I suppose those people will start to act once we definitely
decided
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 20:42 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Not that it matters much, but I'd prefer if we could keep madwifi for a
little while longer if possible without to much hassle.
But yeah, if ath5k really does all the major things the users need then
it might be time to drop
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 15:24 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 22:18 +0300, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 20:42 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Not that it matters much, but I'd prefer if we could keep madwifi for a
little while longer if possible without
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 08:17 +0300, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 15:24 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 22:18 +0300, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 20:42 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Not that it matters much, but I'd prefer if we could keep
On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 11:56 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 27.12.2007 16:27, Jonathan Dieter wrote:
Just a heads up that I have updated packages for the gspca kernel module
Built and published in livna now; sorry for the delay.
Cu
knurd
No problem! Thanks much!
Jonathan
69 matches
Mail list logo
