FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-15-2010, 07:14 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's (2010-03-16) FESCo meeting (note new DST meeting time)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting tomorrow at 19:00UTC (3pm EDT) in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net.

NOTE: The Meeting Time has CHANGED. See above.

Followups:

#351 Create a policy for updates

New Business:

#353 provenpackager request for walters
#352 Proposal: Fesco should have a procedure for removing members of fesco.
#354 Desktop Spin size change should get a feature page
#346 Drop LSB package
#347 tor is not compliant with Fedora guidelines
#355 Let rel-eng untag embryo from F-13 because it breaks the chain and upgrade path
#348 Fedora Packaging Committee items for ratification (2010-02-24):

Complex Font Template fix:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fix_Complex_Font_Template%28draft%29

Which files to include in python modules:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/No_py_removal%28draft%29

- Fedora Engineering Services Tickets/Updates.
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-engineering-services/

assigned tickets / status update:

#2 SIGs roundup and pinging - jds2001
#5 Fix broken dependencies - itmarjp
#6 Fix packages that fail to build from source - bruno
#7 spec cleanup task: fix the need for perl (etc) in scriptlets - mmcgrath
#8 Document Fedora as android devel platform - stickster

unassigned tickets:

#4 tool idea: script to evaluate buildroot poisoning

Open Floor

For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The
report of the agenda items can be found at
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9

If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco,
e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
the open floor.

kevin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-15-2010, 07:20 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's (2010-03-16) FESCo meeting (note new DST meeting time)

On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 14:14 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> #355 Let rel-eng untag embryo from F-13 because it breaks the chain
> and upgrade path

Does this one really have to wait for a meeting? It's a pretty straight
forward case, deps are broken, it couldn't have been installed anywhere
to begin with.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-15-2010, 07:26 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's (2010-03-16) FESCo meeting (note new DST meeting time)

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:20:09 -0700
Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 14:14 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > #355 Let rel-eng untag embryo from F-13 because it breaks the chain
> > and upgrade path
>
> Does this one really have to wait for a meeting? It's a pretty
> straight forward case, deps are broken, it couldn't have been
> installed anywhere to begin with.

oh? I'm a bit confused there...you can install the package just fine by
itself. It's just if you try and install enlightment or have
enlightenment's stack installed that it fails. So, most people wouldn't
have it installed due to the broken dep, but you can indeed install it
by itself ok.

[root@ohm ~]# yum install embryo
Loaded plugins: changelog, presto, refresh-packagekit, security
Setting up Install Process
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package embryo.x86_64 0:0.9.9.063-1.fc13 set to be updated
--> Finished Dependency Resolution

Dependencies Resolved

================================================== ========================================
Package Arch Version Repository Size
================================================== ========================================
Installing:
embryo x86_64 0.9.9.063-1.fc13 fedora 88 k

Transaction Summary
================================================== ========================================
Install 1 Package(s)
Upgrade 0 Package(s)

Total download size: 88 k
Installed size: 199 k
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Downloading Packages:
Setting up and reading Presto delta metadata
fedora/prestodelta | 46 kB 00:00
Processing delta metadata
Package(s) data still to download: 88 k
embryo-0.9.9.063-1.fc13.x86_64.rpm | 88 kB 00:00
Running rpm_check_debug
Running Transaction Test
Transaction Test Succeeded
Running Transaction
Installing : embryo-0.9.9.063-1.fc13.x86_64 1/1

Installed:
embryo.x86_64 0:0.9.9.063-1.fc13

Complete!

[root@ohm ~]# yum install enlightenment
Loaded plugins: changelog, presto, refresh-packagekit, security
Setting up Install Process
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package enlightenment.x86_64 0:0.16.999.050-5.fc12 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: libefreet.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_evas.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_x.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_imf.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_txt.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_ipc.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libehal.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_file.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libefreet_mime.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libedbus.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_imf_evas.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_job.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libevas.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libedje.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_con.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Processing Dependency: libecore_fb.so.0()(64bit) for package: enlightenment-0.16.999.050-5.fc12.x86_64
--> Running transaction check
---> Package e_dbus.x86_64 0:0.5.0.050-3.fc12 set to be updated
---> Package ecore.x86_64 0:0.9.9.050-7.fc12 set to be updated
---> Package edje.x86_64 0:0.9.9.050-6.fc12 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: libembryo.so.0()(64bit) for package: edje-0.9.9.050-6.fc12.x86_64
---> Package efreet.x86_64 0:0.5.0.050-5.fc12 set to be updated
---> Package evas.x86_64 0:0.9.9.050-3.fc12 set to be updated
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: edje-0.9.9.050-6.fc12.x86_64 (fedora)
Requires: libembryo.so.0()(64bit)
You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-16-2010, 02:49 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's (2010-03-16) FESCo meeting (note new DST meeting time)

Kevin Fenzi (kevin@scrye.com) said:
> NOTE: The Meeting Time has CHANGED. See above.
>
> Followups:
>
> #351 Create a policy for updates

As has happened in the past, I'd suggest handling this meeting item later
in the meeting so that other business actually gets attended to.

Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-16-2010, 03:05 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's (2010-03-16) FESCo meeting (note new DST meeting time)

On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:49:46 -0400
Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> wrote:

> Kevin Fenzi (kevin@scrye.com) said:
> > NOTE: The Meeting Time has CHANGED. See above.
> >
> > Followups:
> >
> > #351 Create a policy for updates
>
> As has happened in the past, I'd suggest handling this meeting item
> later in the meeting so that other business actually gets attended to.

Yeah, I intended to leave it for the end to allow more time for
discussion.

kevin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-16-2010, 05:45 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's (2010-03-16) FESCo meeting (note new DST meeting time)

Jesse Keating wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 14:14 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> #355 Let rel-eng untag embryo from F-13 because it breaks the chain
>> and upgrade path
>
> Does this one really have to wait for a meeting? It's a pretty straight
> forward case, deps are broken, it couldn't have been installed anywhere
> to begin with.

The question is whether to allow doing the untagging without an Epoch bump,
making F-13 go backwards.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-16-2010, 06:16 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Plan for tomorrow's (2010-03-16) FESCo meeting (note new DST meeting time)

On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 19:45 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 14:14 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >> #355 Let rel-eng untag embryo from F-13 because it breaks the chain
> >> and upgrade path
> >
> > Does this one really have to wait for a meeting? It's a pretty straight
> > forward case, deps are broken, it couldn't have been installed anywhere
> > to begin with.
>
> The question is whether to allow doing the untagging without an Epoch bump,
> making F-13 go backwards.
>
> Kevin Kofler
>

I had misunderstood the problem. I assumed when the maintainer told me
that the deps were broken and nobody could install it, that he meant
nobody could install it, not that "it is unlikely that anybody would
install it".

Going backwards only really matters if the package happens to get into
people's systems, that's what we're trying to protect against.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:34 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org