2012/10/6 Nicolas Chauvet
> 2012/10/6 Antonio Trande :
> > Hi all.
> >
> > I purpose to include a MOC package in RPMFusion repositories. Within few
> > days will be available a new beta release and I'm reading your Guide
> Lines
> > in order to get re
2012/10/6 Andrea Musuruane
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Antonio Trande
> wrote:
> > Hi Nicolas.
> >
> > MOC is still in development, see SVN repositories
> > (http://moc.daper.net/download).
> > My RPMs: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/moc/
> &g
2012/10/6 Andrea Musuruane
> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Antonio Trande
> wrote:
> > No problem. I can complete the Bug789 or open another one.
>
> The rule is FIFO. So the original request have the precedence. Kindly
> ask the submitter in #789 if he is still in
2012/10/6 Antonio Trande
> 2012/10/6 Andrea Musuruane
>
>> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Antonio Trande
>> wrote:
>> > No problem. I can complete the Bug789 or open another one.
>>
>> The rule is FIFO. So the original request have the precedence. Kindl
Hi all.
The MOC Package Review
Request<https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2531>is filed
since some days.
Please, let me know if it is satisfactory.
Regards
--
*Antonio Trande
"Fedora Ambassador"*
*"Fedora italian translation group"*
*"
2012/10/18 Antonio Trande
> Hi all.
>
> The MOC Package Review
> Request<https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2531>is filed.
>
> Regards
>
How long should I wait to unlock bug #30 ? :)
--
*Antonio Trande
"Fedora Ambassador"*
*"Fedora ital
integrated into official MiniZip; updated it to avoid
> clashes and made adjustments to enable merging a newer MiniZip
> easily if that is required.
>
Well, it seems to me that none is disagree with an inclusion of a
customized MiniZip, therefore we can finish t
s commit: saving log message in /tmp/cvs3DTxkM
I've already built same package in devel.
What can I do ?
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitterATfedoraproject.org
http://www.fedoraos.worpress.com
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: D400D6C4
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
On 02/13/2014 06:03 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please report on this ticket
> https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2451
>
> Nicolas will take care of that for all cases at once .
>
>
Thank you, Sérgio.
--
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter
gt;
> +%ifnarch armv6hl armv7hl +BuildRequires: ffmpeg-devel
> +BuildRequires: libmad-devel +%endif
>
>
> At least you can use %{arm} architectural macro, but can you
> explain why it would not be enabled on ARM ? At least it does build
> perfecly fine un
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/02/2014 06:11 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> On 08/31/2014 04:02 PM, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/30/2014 03:43 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>>> 2014-08-30 15:20 GMT+
On Tue 02 Sep 2014 07:43:13 PM CEST, Rex Dieter wrote:
> On 09/02/2014 12:38 PM, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 09/02/2014 06:11 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>> On 08/31/2014 04:02 PM, Antonio Trande wrote:
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi all,
i'm rebuilding my package on RPMFusion but devel-branch coincides with
the F-21.
How can i build on F-22 and F-23 ?
Package: moc
packager: sagitter
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
> On 09/29/2015 01:36 PM, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> i'm rebuilding my package on RPMFusion but devel-branch coincides
>> with the F-21. How can i build on F-22 and F-23 ?
>>
>> Package: moc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi all,
is there a provisional way to build for Fedora >22 ?
I need to update my package in RPMFusion.
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 11/04/2015 10:56 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2015-11-04 22:27 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande <mailto:anto.tra...@gmail.com>>:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi all,
>
> is there a provision
illa.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x565E653C
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
-BEGI
.
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x565E653C
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWeaUBAAoJEF5
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/22/2015 08:47 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hello
>
> On Ter, 2015-12-22 at 20:31 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> these libraries (and others probably) are not available yet on
>> Fedora 22 an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/22/2015 10:40 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Ter, 2015-12-22 at 21:00 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> On 12/22/2015 08:47 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> On Ter, 2015-12-22 at 20:31 +010
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/23/2015 09:51 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2015-12-22 20:31 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande <mailto:anto.tra...@gmail.com>>:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi all,
>
> these libraries
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/24/2015 12:32 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Qua, 2015-12-23 at 22:20 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> On 12/23/2015 09:51 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>>> 2015-12-22 20:31 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande
>>> m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/27/2015 12:26 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 December 2015 at 11:02, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> On 12/24/2015 12:32 AM, S�rgio Basto wrote:
>>> On Qua, 2015-12-23 at 22:20 +0100, Antonio
on during Fedora upgrade
however), here you're saying that RPMFusion packages must not be
audited periodically, even for months, it's enough they work.
I ask again, how can we know if a package .fc(x) compiles/works fine
on Fedora(x+n) without a rebuild?
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter '
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/28/2015 01:30 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Dom, 2015-12-27 at 11:51 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> On 12/27/2015 09:04 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 01:48:23AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius
>>> wrote:
ata subpackage is shared across releases
> to save resources, so how much does this exception violate the
> policies ...?
>
> K.
>
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org
l me that ALL
RPMFusion packages respect packaging guidelines of Fedora.
- --
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x565E653C
Check on https://keys.fedora
;
Like I said some time ago, the packages not rebuilt by time need a
recompilation at least; please, do your better to get improved all RPM
Fusion packages as much as possible.
@Sergio
If some RPM Fusion packagers are missing, please let me know, I can
update their packages.
- --
Antonio Trande
mailt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/24/2016 06:44 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Qua, 2016-02-24 at 12:40 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> On 02/23/2016 09:57 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>>> Hello, I'd like update :
>>>
>>> ffmpegthumb
ackage has been updated by me; if something is not
good (and probably there is something), original maintainer/s of
package, temporarily busy with other business, should kindly at least
check all changes before definitive approval.
As provisional maintainer, I (or Sergio) cannot be familiar with all
rds
Hi Sergio.
Let me see what I can do with gpac.
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x6CE6D08A
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signature.asc
Desc
kages to Przemysław.
Other packages beyond GPAC ?
>
> On 21.03.2016 17:10, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> >
> > On Seg, 2016-03-21 at 12:38 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 04:41 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > >
> >
mplayer-16.6.0-1.fc24.src.rpm
> [] 100% 00:00:02 4.68 MiB 1.85 MiB/sec
> GenericError: invalid channel policy
>
> On Qua, 2016-06-22 at 00:58 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
Where is rpmfusion-koji command ?
I can't find it ..
--
---
Antonio Tran
On 06/24/2016 04:19 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Qui, 2016-06-23 at 21:48 +0200, Antonio Trande wrote:
>>
>> On 06/23/2016 05:24 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>>>
>>> Kwizart,
>>> You ask me on IRC, if I can do a scratch build and no I got an
>>&
74562295f81672340e8345d76fb75cbd3): open
(buildvm-01.online.rpmfusion.net) -> FAILED: ActionNotAllowed: policy
violation (build_from_srpm)
0 free 0 open 0 done 1 failed
5559 build (f24-free,
/git/free/moc:4a4179974562295f81672340e8345d76fb75cbd3) failed
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sa
ead from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
Could not execute clone: Command '['git', 'clone',
'ssh://sagit...@pkgs.rpmfusion.org/free/lives', '--origin', 'origin']'
returned non-
On 07/08/2016 09:26 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2016-07-08 21:15 GMT+02:00 Antonio Trande :
>> Hi.
>>
>> I can't access to new repository for 'lives':
>>
>> $ rfpkg clone free/lives
>> Cloning into 'lives'...
>> Enter passp
On 07/08/2016 10:16 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2016-07-08 21:37 GMT+02:00 Antonio Trande :
>> On 07/08/2016 09:26 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>>> 2016-07-08 21:15 GMT+02:00 Antonio Trande :
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> I can't access to new
Hi.
What right way to do a scratch builds against rawhide (f25)?
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x6CE6D08A
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.o
Hi all.
RPMFusion/Contributors page says:
> A package built for a stable release (e.g. f24, f23) will go to the
"updates-testing" repository.
How? Manually? Or automatically?
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
htt
message from the developers mailing list where this
> has been discussed.
> To be, the only valid reason why a software can be banned from the
> repo is that it cannot be redistributed.
>
>
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' or
Hello.
I can't install my packages (lives and moc) from
rpmfusion-free-updates-testing yet.
Should they be automatically pushed after their build or not ?
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https
x264_sps_init T
> +x264_sps_init_reconfigurable T
> x264_sps_write T
>
> 2 symbols added
> T x264_ratecontrol_zone_init
> T x264_sps_init_reconfigurable
>
> # template for libx26410b.so.148 version script
> X264_0.148 {
> global:
>
ound
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/kojifiles/work/tasks/8217/18217/root.log
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x6CE6D08A
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
sign
Hi all.
Since 2 days at least, scratch builds on rawhide branch are impossible
because of missing downloads:
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/getfile?taskID=32719&name=root.log&offset=-4000
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32719
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagi
Hi.
I can review in return of
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258.
Any chance?
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x6CE
not just multi_encoder3. Is that intended? If yes, then what's
> the point of setting it to python2 in the line before?
>
This commit should be correct:
https://pkgs.rpmfusion.org/cgit/free/lives.git/commit/?id=5f7db3b749699e678e4bb05b32af1e8d99e6c137
(I had totally ignored first -name option in the 'find' commands).
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x6CE6D08A
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
uick review libmad, madplay mpg123 could get it, but not lame.
> Anyone to start reviewing theses into fedora ?
>
> Thx
>
I don't see any explicit page on Fedora Project's wiki or mailing list
(Tom Callaway's tweet apart) yet.
Or I'm wrong?
--
---
Antonio Tran
1772/51772/root.log
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x6CE6D08A
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
I take it.
On 04/17/2017 12:18 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> Hello ,
>
> https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4432
>
> Since maintainer looks like is unresponsive , I'd add someone as
> maintainer of this package.
>
> Thanks,
>
--
--
Antonio Trande
s
Thank you very much Xavier.
I'm updating everything.
On 04/17/2017 10:24 PM, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
> On 17/04/2017 12:44, Xavier Bachelot wrote:
>> On 17/04/2017 12:27, Antonio Trande wrote:
>>> I take it.
>>>
>>> On 04/17/2017 12:18 PM, Sérgio B
017 12:27, Antonio Trande wrote:
>>> I take it.
>>>
>>> On 04/17/2017 12:18 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>>>> Hello ,
>>>>
>>>> https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4432
>>>>
>>>> Since maintainer looks like is
On 04/18/2017 11:48 AM, Antonio Trande wrote:
> Despite your patch for ffmpeg31, xpra still fails with following error:
> https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/FUA8uWN~mNELJYwEicqWaV5M1UNdIGYhyRLivL9gydE=/raw
>
The error is not visible.
Here:
https://paste.fedoraproject.
Hello.
Please, build ffmpeg-3.2 on f25 if possible.
--
--
Antonio Trande
sagitter AT fedoraproject dot org
See my vCard.
<>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-deve
of revive Steering
> Committee
I already patched xpra-codecs-freeworld for building against ffmpeg-3.1
anyway.
I agree with Richard: all affected packages should be rebuilt offline
before to ensure all packages build at a minimum.
I have successfully rebuilt 'moc', 'xpra-codecs-fre
e repositories yet.
Please, wait before pushing new release of 'xpra-codecs-freeworld'.
--
--
Antonio Trande
sagitter AT fedoraproject dot org
See my vCard.
<>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
rpmfusion-devel
.20170601git.fc27.ppc64le
DEBUG util.py:439: (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to
replace conflicting packages)
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/getfile?taskID=132891&volume=DEFAULT&name=root.log&offset=-4000
Please, fix it as soon as you can.
--
--
Antonio Trande
sag
kID=154032
--
--
Antonio Trande
sagitter AT fedoraproject dot org
See my vCard.
<>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusi
n.org/free/lives',
'--origin', 'origin']' returned non-zero exit status 128
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signature.asc
Descri
On 07/12/2017 09:36, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2017-12-06 22:36 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande :
>> Hi all.
>>
>> I can't checkout a package's GIT module:
>>
>> $ rfpkg clone free/lives
>> Deprecation warning: kojiconfig is deprecated. Instead, koji
On 07/12/2017 09:36, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2017-12-06 22:36 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande :
>> Hi all.
>>
>> I can't checkout a package's GIT module:
>>
>> $ rfpkg clone free/lives
>> Deprecation warning: kojiconfig is deprecated. Instead, koji
On 08/12/2017 02:13, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 22:47 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
>> On 07/12/2017 09:36, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>>> 2017-12-06 22:36 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande :
>>>> Hi all.
>>>>
>>>> I can't checkout
On 13/12/2017 09:59, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2017-12-08 10:56 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande :
>> On 08/12/2017 02:13, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
>>> please try :
>>> rfpkg --user sagitter clone free/lives
>>>
>>
>> This command is working.
>
>
d ?
Yes. I downloaded it again when i realized of the access problem.
> Also do you have the recently server root ca.
> I wonder if you have run kinit for the fedpkg side ? Does it conflicts
> with rfpkg ?
>
> Thx
I don't know.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
Hello.
Packages from Fedora repositories have not same version on all
architectures:
'lives' rebuild on f29 uses 'libfreenect-0.5.7' on x86_64 and aarch64,
instead it uses (broken) 'libfreenect-0.5.5' on PPC* and i686:
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/taskinfo?
Forwarded Message
Subject:LiVES 2.8.9 relesed
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:46:45 -0300
From: salsaman
To: João Luís Marques Pinto , Alessio Treglia
, enc...@users.sourceforge.net, Glen MacArthur
, concombres fraises ,
lu_z...@gentoo.org, Vasiliy Glazov , Ulisses Leit
ated and imported a new certificate from RPMFusion,
but nothing is changed.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
t;> -Requires: ffmpeg
>> +Requires: ffmpeg%{?_isa}
>
> Why such change ?
Indeed ffmpeg is not needed by MOC for working.
I removed it.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x5E212EE1D35568BE
GPG key server: https://keys.
ranscode-1.1.7-17.el7.src.rpm
> tvheadend-4.0.9-3.el7.src.rpm
> vlc-2.2.8-2.el7.src.rpm
> x264-0.148-11.20160614gita5e06b9.el7.src.rpm
> xine-lib-1.2.9-2.el7.src.rpm
> zoneminder-1.30.4-3.el7.src.rpm
>
> (2)
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager/stati
Hello everyone.
My scratch builds on el7-free repository are failing for missing
'Packages/c/cmake3-3.12.0-1.el7.x86_64.rpm':
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/kojifiles/work/tasks/6968/256968/root.log
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject d
that we will push right to stable updates.
> We need all the infra resources for building and preparing the repos,
> so please hold your build until the next package got published.
>
> Thx for your understanding.
>
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagi
ild (or src.rpm) ?
>>> what you mean or where are "forwarded the patches" ?
>> The patches to compile ffmpeg 3.3 in el7 are available into the f27 branch.
>> So you can submit a scratch build for el7 based on the fc27 branch as a
>> start.
>
> Still anyone t
not support ffmpeg-3*)
x264-0.155-3.20180806git0a84d98_bootstrap.el7.src.rpm
x264-0.155-3.20180806git0a84d98.el7.src.rpm
xine-lib-1.2.9-11.el7.src.rpm
Tomorrow, i will look the others rpms.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org
All srpm are ready:
https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/centos7/
I have conformed/patched some of them to recent Fedora packaging guidelines.
Just tvheadend-4.2.7 has a missing dependence (dtv-scan-tables) that is
not on Fedora neither on CentOS.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto
itc2b6af67f7d8.fc29
dtv-scan-tables-1-**10**.20180606gitc2b6af67f7d8.fc30
dtv-scan-tables-1-**9**.20171226git07b18ecef174.fc29
dtv-scan-tables-1-8.20161007git0b42d8e8b44e.fc28
dtv-scan-tables-1-7.20161007git0b42d8e8b44e.fc27
...
See these examples:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Version
What's the fate of these srpms now?
Should i push them myself on repos?
On 14/11/18 15:00, Antonio Trande wrote:
> All srpm are ready:
> https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/centos7/
>
> I have conformed/patched some of them to recent Fedora packaging guidelines.
>
> Jus
package should be provided on the epel side, please
> request any provenpackager to help fix the package there if needed
> (and Mauro do not answer).
>
> Any issue on other ffmpeg/x264/x265 packages for el7 ?
>
> Thx
>
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto '
the epel side, please
> request any provenpackager to help fix the package there if needed
> (and Mauro do not answer).
>
> Any issue on other ffmpeg/x264/x265 packages for el7 ?
>
> Thx
>
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org&#x
On 19/11/18 17:23, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Le ven. 16 nov. 2018 à 22:37, Antonio Trande a écrit :
>>
>> Review request for 'dtv-scan-tables' on el7-free branch only:
>> https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5082
>
> Sorry if I've missed thing
All packages are built fine on local, test them yourself.
Only the tvheadend/dtv-scan-tables issue is pending.
PS.
Mail sent without GPG signature from Windows.
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:20 PM Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Le lun. 19 nov. 2018 à 17:52, Antonio Trande a
> écrit :
> ...
&
On 20/11/18 15:58, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Le mer. 14 nov. 2018 à 15:00, Antonio Trande a écrit :
>>
>> All srpm are ready:
>> https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/centos7/
>>
>> I have conformed/patched some of them to recent Fedora packaging guidelines.
> Okay,
On 20/11/18 17:24, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> Le mar. 20 nov. 2018 à 16:51, Antonio Trande a écrit :
> [...]
>> Most of packages treated in this discussion follow the packaging
>> timeline of the rawhide branch except these
>>
>> ffmpeg
>> audacity-freeworld
>
nfo:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/gstreamer/gst-plugins-ugly/issues/23
Thanks.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signatu
send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org
>
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signature.asc
Descript
+0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
> > It's a possibility, but i must rebuild all related packages again!
>
> Antonio , some time ago we (RPMFusion) agree use x264-0.148 in el7 ( I
> was not sure when wrote to you some day ago) .
> We choose x264-0.148 because is really stable. After 3 y
.
Thanks.
--
*--Antonio Trande*
*mail*: mailto:sagit...@fedoraproject.org
___
rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org
oraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries
[2] https://rpmfusion.org/Contributors#Read_the_packaging_guidelines
--
*--Antonio Trande*
*mail*: mailto:sagit...@fedoraproject.org
___
rpmfusion-developers mailin
gt; Fmmpeg , x264 etc
>
> FFmpeg 3.3 and x264 0.148
>
> El7 is one stable branch we need think in stable and wide tested releases
> .
>
> On Thu, 2018-11-22 at 18:13 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
>
> Hi all again.
>
> What FFmpeg version we prefer for el7?
> ffmpe
Good!
Let's go with ffmpeg-3.4.5 + x264-0.148 + libmfx-1.23 (push it on el7
please) + x265-2.9
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 2:56 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-11-22 at 22:16 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> wrote:
> > On Thursday, 22 November 2018 at
None specific requirement. Maybe Sergio has one:
"Cool , so you may update libmfx on epel 7 ? please"
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 2:05 PM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <
domi...@greysector.net> wrote:
> On Friday, 23 November 2018 at 12:19, Antonio Trande wrote:
>
//src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/adplug
--
*--Antonio Trande*
*mail*: mailto:sagit...@fedoraproject.org
___
rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org
'mpd-1:0.20.22' looks incompatible with boost-1.53 on el7.
I'm forced to keep current release (0.19.21)
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 10:30 PM Antonio Trande
wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> 'mpd-1:0.20.22' can be built on el7 if missing dependencies are rebuilt
> from
-1.1.7-23.el7.src.rpm
vlc-3.0.5-6.el7.src.rpm
xine-lib-1.2.9-11.el7.src.rpm
zoneminder-1.32.2-2.el7.src.rpm
How to manage this operation?
Shall i push them on rpmfusion-el7 branch only?
--
*--Antonio Trande*
*mail*: mailto:sagit...@fedoraproject.org
ch or master) and
> apply a minor is my 2nd choice .
> Else yes push them on rpmfusion-el7 branch only.
>
>
Can you explain what you mean with "ff (fast-forward )" please?
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e03
I need to know if you agree with this propose.
On 22/11/18 19:41, Antonio Trande wrote:
> Hi.
>
> About gpac, i see a 'gpac-devel-static' sub-package created that, as you
> know, is a naming method not permitted for Fedora guidelines [1][2].
> There are two choices in
x264-0.148 requires it.
On 25/11/18 15:30, Leigh Scott wrote:
> If there are no packages in rpmfusion that require the static lib we
> should remove it IMO.
>
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
GP
Hi.
There is an internet line breakdown here in these days (Southern Italy
looks became a "land of tornado" in last years).
Please, be patient.
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
G
To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org
>
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signatur
maintainers of oauth/urlgrabber to get these Python3 packages
--
---
Antonio Trande
Fedora Project
mailto 'sagitter at fedoraproject dot org'
GPG key: 0x6e0331dd1699e4d7
GPG key server: https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
signature.asc
Descript
Anyway, mythtv is ready for el7.
I will push it on rawhide without build.
On 08/12/18 20:15, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 1:10 PM Antonio Trande <mailto:anto.tra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi all.
>
> 'mythtv' is the last rpm that i
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
