devel September 2003

devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

139 participants
90 discussions

yum + cache delete files after.
by Balint Cristian 05 Mar '04

05 Mar '04

Hi ! Can yum be setted to delete files from /var/cache/yum*** after upgrading/updateing ? I dig the man but probablyI miss something or is not possible ? Thanks, Cristian -- Life in itself has no meaning. Life is an opportunity to create meaning. \|/ ____ \|/ "@'/ .. \`@" /_| \__/ |_\ \__U_/

3 3

Re: PowerPC support
by Nicholas Wourms 22 Oct '03

22 Oct '03

Paul Iadonisi wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 06:20:43AM -0400, mike(a)flyn.org wrote: > >>Is there any plans to add a PowerPC build of Fedora? > > > [snip] > > >>Are there any like-minded folks out there? > > > Yes. Me. ;-) > > Well, not just PowerPC, but also some other non-x86 platforms in general. > One request I'd like to make to Red Hat (and any other package maintainers) > is to please, please, please, don't make rpms ExclusiveArch unless absolutely > necessary. I realize that may already be the case, but I'm just putting my [SNIP] > Also, will patches for non-x86 (even not [yet] supported) platforms be > accepted? I'm guessing that the answer is 'as time permits' which is fine, > I would just like to know if it's worth submitting patches at all for Alpha, > Arm, (as well as Sparc and PowerPC). Given that Fedora is intended for > the hobbyist, developer, enthusiast, I'm hoping that the answer is yes. [SNIP] Some of us actually remember when Red Hat had a sparc product :-(. Perhaps it is time for Aurora to merge back into the fold? It seems that Fedora would be a perfect means to do this... Cheers, Nicholas

5 5

/etc/redhat-release?
by Michael Schwendt 13 Oct '03

13 Oct '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Is known yet what will happen to /etc/redhat-release? In case the 2nd Severn Beta will be the first Fedora Core "test" release, will /etc/redhat-release be gone already and reappear as /etc/fedora-release? Sort of $ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora Core release 0.90.94 (Severn) or similar? Or will there be a different transition? Any known details would be interesting in order to prepare some src.rpms in Fedora.us's Severn repository for Cambridge. - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/cMik0iMVcrivHFQRAj6GAJoC2iiPUGkpBomgLnYtBJ5UCy3G7ACffma2 TrM3jChftfTtzwwTUVClpRM= =ljtj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

23 70

Re: Kind request: Set release version to "10" (was: Retain upgrade paths)
by Rex Dieter 06 Oct '03

06 Oct '03

Florian La Roche wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > > I'd like to kindly request to set to release version to "10" or > > something higher than "9.0.94". > > The decision about the version number is already done. If by that, you mean that the decision is to stick with 0.94 without much discussion (that I've seen or heard) and despite it's obvious shortcomings... that's a shame. Heading down this path will also lead to lots of, IMO, uncessessary Epoch inflation. One example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105746 I'm sure if nothing is done, many more will follow. I don't know about you Axel, but until I see a better alternative, I'll personally be inflating Fedora X.Y to rh(X+10)Y in the release tag of packages I maintain. The only other alternative is to simply increment Epoch for everything, which is yucky, yucky. -- Rex

16 60

automated build tool for an src.rpm tree ?
by Balint Cristian 05 Oct '03

05 Oct '03

Hi ! Have someone developed a tool or have knowledge of some perl/python scripted stuff for automated build of a src.rpm tree wich inteligently compute dependency and start compiling/installing packages step by step in right order till whole tree is compiled and installed. PS: dont need to knoledge even some bug hunting skill :))) Thanks a lot, Cristian -- Life in itself has no meaning. Life is an opportunity to create meaning. \|/ ____ \|/ "@'/ .. \`@" /_| \__/ |_\ \__U_/

4 3

xmms release number
by Harald Hoyer 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Hi Bill, can't we name our release s.th. like -0.x for xmms, so that users can use up2date and install the original xmms-xxx-1 from www.xmms.org with MP3 support? -- Harald Hoyer, Senior Software Engineer Harald.Hoyer(a)redhat.de Red Hat GmbH Tel. : +49-711-96437-0 D-70178 Stuttgart, Germany Web : http://www.redhat.de gpg fingerprint E930 20E6 CCF8 C76C 8582 CF9F B7B7 45C2 C557 5542

13 27

GUI xml-rpc bugzilla tool
by Alexander Larsson 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

A couple of weeks ago jrb and I spent some time writing a GUI (pygtk) frontend to the redhat bugzilla xml-rpc interfaces. It does local caching of bug data, so after a possibly slow initial query bug work is really fast. Packages availible at: http://people.redhat.com/~jrb/files/bugtool-0.1-1.noarch.rpm http://people.redhat.com/~jrb/files/bugtool-0.1-1.src.rpm At the moment you can only view bugs and add comments. The tool is clearly not finished yet, but might still be of use to peopl. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc alexl(a)redhat.com alla(a)lysator.liu.se He's an all-American playboy assassin She's a plucky gypsy opera singer living homeless in New York's sewers. They fight crime!

5 5

Developer's Guide
by Roozbeh Pournader 02 Oct '03

02 Oct '03

Attached is a suggested patch for the Developer's Guide document, against the current version in CVS. One issue I didn't patch, is that 'epoch' is never explained in the document, although it's referenced twice. It certainly needs to be written about, since there are people who don't know what it is (I didn't). Changes are: 1. Fixed a typo in the legal notice. 2. Explained that anonymous access, as specified in the CVS guidelines, is not enough for changing the files on the server. 3. Mentioned that the Guidelines on RPM should be used as a checklist (almost all of its items were already explained elsewhere). 4. Mentioned that 'all' of the criteria should be met for a Beta Exception (was I right?) roozbeh

2 3

fedora only for US users ?
by Cosmic Flo 02 Oct '03

02 Oct '03

this message is a little hard but : - at first time wizard, keyboard configuration is US, not the selected language at install. - mozilla is only configured for US (language for web page, interface), the selected language at install have no importance. - evolution's meteo is Boston US, I have selected an other city in Europe. - the fedora.redhat.com web site (presentation, pages, documentation) is only in English language, I have made some propositions to translate it but no translation project have started. I think that now the fedora project is more open to community, it's time to really open it to all languages. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Search, le moteur de recherche qui pense comme vous ! http://search.msn.fr/

18 35

I volunteer
by Jack Neely 02 Oct '03

02 Oct '03

Folks, I volunteer. First off, I am the Linux guy at NC State University. I maintain a Red Hat based distribution called Realm Linux (http://linux.ncsu.edu) along with large Beowulf clusters and all the meetings and mess to spear head a Linux movement at NCSU. I can be found on irc.freenode.net as slack. What I am interested in: LPRng - NCSU can't use Cups until me or someone else has the time to make cups use kerberos authentication. I'm thinking this will appear in Alternatives RSN but I'll keep an eye out for it. OpenAFS - I maintain some pretty decent OpenAFS packages that I like a lot more than the RPMs from upstream. Mine are FHS compliant, and build kernel modules properly. I would even volunteer to maintain OpenAFS packages for the community. However, I need some help to figure out how a default configuration should work and how site specific configuration should be done. Namely, each site must specify what AFS cell they are in and probably wish to make changes to the list of cells that the client can see. Also I would be willing to maintain an aklog package since 1) it doesn't change much and 2) I assume that most folks (I am) are using MIT kerberos with OpenAFS. 18 month lifetime - I need an 18 month or longer lifetime. Looks like this is where Fedora Legacy comes in to play. I've been talking with several people along the same lines. I'm fortunate in that I've gotten most things taken care of to the point that I'll only need to support RHL 9 and greater past Red Hat's EOL date. Although, I think I may have a couple 7.3 servers to take care of (binary Promise RAID drivers). I'd like to do what I can to help form the Fedora Legacy part of the project. -- Jack Neely <slack(a)quackmaster.net> Realm Linux Administration and Development PAMS Computer Operations at NC State University GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4 EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89

11 23

grub.conf, please?
by Chris Wilson 01 Oct '03

01 Oct '03

Could someone kindly sed me their grub.conf file? I made a booboo and installed a redhat test kernel rpm and when uninstalling it I got this msg: grubby fatal error: unable to find a suitable template I got the same error when yumming the original kernel back in. thanks, chris PS: Where can I find a fedora 2.6 test kernel?

3 3

redhat logo on gnome menu / menu bar.
by Trae McCombs 01 Oct '03

01 Oct '03

Sorry if this is off-topic... (If it is, please tell me what list I need to direct this to). I know a wee bit about marketing, and I don't know if anyone has brought it to the attention of those in the know at RH's branding department about the fact the RH logo is still present in the fedora test2 0.94 release. I would suggest replacing it with the "favicon" that is present on the fedora.redhat.com website. The convention would be that under the Enterprise edition, the RH logo would be present(on the menu bar and other places), and on Fedora Core, a Fedora logo would be present. I think the [F] favicon would suffice in this area unless there is work being done on an official fedora logo. The idea, from what I have gathered, is to split out the two identities: a.) Fedora -- community distro b.) Redhat -- Enterprise server Sorry if I've missed something here. -Trae

21 34

Fedora Project: Announcing New Direction
by Michael K. Johnson 01 Oct '03

01 Oct '03

Red Hat and Fedora Linux are pleased to announce an alignment of their mutually complementary core proficiencies leveraging them synergistically in the creation of the Fedora Project, a paradigm shift for Linux technology development and rolling early deployment models. We are <...> *thud* One two ... one two ... testing, is this thing on? Hello, this is, um, the Engineers speaking. We are still really excited about the project, but this time we have more than just dates. We hope fedora.redhat.com will answer lots of your questions, and are sure it will pose a few new ones. Why Fedora? Red Hat has a lot of experience in building solid dependable core distributions while the Fedora Linux Project has lots of experience in building effective infrastructure and policy to create many high quality add on packages. Both groups decided to merge the two projects and build outward using our shared experience, and to use the name "Fedora Project". We don't pretend the merge will be smooth or immediate, but we firmly believe that working with the Fedora Linux Project will get external projects and add-ons up and running better and faster than we could on our own and we are proud to be working with them. The Fedora Project is something special. It enables Red Hat and the community to work together to provide the community with rapid rolling releases and to get new technology into the hands of developers. With the solid establishment of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Red Hat now has a platform for predictable change and high quality support for customers, and for our ISV and IHV partners. Fedora is about the community, about cool new technologies, and extending existing Red Hat tools in a collaborative community. Our new up2date, for example, supports YUM and apt-get repositories. Fellow Fedorans, a new dawn is upon us, let us begin. Please note: The http://rhl.redhat.com/ web site has been renamed http://fedora.redhat.com/ and the mailing lists have all been renamed: rhl-list(a)redhat.com -> fedora-list(a)redhat.com rhl-beta-list(a)redhat.com -> fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com rhl-devel-list(a)redhat.com -> fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com rhl-docs-list(a)redhat.com -> fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com Your subscriptions have been preserved, moved over to the new names for the lists. michaelkjohnson "He that composes himself is wiser than he that composes a book." Linux Application Development -- Ben Franklin http://people.redhat.com/johnsonm/lad/

23 51

Re: Fedora Project: Announcing New Direction
by Jesse Keating 01 Oct '03

01 Oct '03

On Tuesday 23 September 2003 13:10, Paul Iadonisi wrote: > I am not a Red Hat employee or a lawyer, but I think you would be > in violation of Red Hat's contract for RHEL if you did that. > (Whether or not Red Hat's contract violates the GPL *has* been > brought up in other forums, but I think the fact that complete > sources are available may be sufficient. In fact, the company even > provides the sources to the non-GPL pieces that isn't required by > most of the other licenses.) I don't think it's RHEL's license in question, but what about RHN's? Isn't it RHN's license that states if you have one hooked up, you must have all, or is it RHEL's? -- Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE http://geek.j2solutions.net Mondo DevTeam (http://www.microwerks.net/~hugo/) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating

8 13

Re: Kind request: Set release version to "10" (was: Retain upgrade paths)
by Rex Dieter 01 Oct '03

01 Oct '03

Sean Middleditch wrote: > Could someone please explain why the distro version matters in any way > shape or form for any packages save the two or three things like > 'fedora-release' ? (clean) Upgradability from packages currently in fedora, before Fedora Core existed. > If you're package is depending on the distro > version, and not the actual components in the distro, your package is > probably broken. In general, I agree with you. I can also assure you, there are good reasons for (sometimes) doing it, but I digress... If you read the original post, Axel's concern to upgradability from the previous fedora release naming standard. A concern of mine is that I maintain packages for all redhat releases going back to rh73, and I do it all from a single src.rpm, and dynamically generate a Release tag based upon the contents of /etc/redhat-release. Like Axel, I also would like to maintain upgradability from previous releases. I argue that having to increment Epoch solely for the purpose overcoming the Release drop (9 -> 0.9 ) to maintain upgrade paths is yucky. -- Rex

3 2

HAL 0.1 available
by Havoc Pennington 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

Hi, I haven't looked at this implementation yet, but I've been cheerleading the idea. Havoc

4 5

release version numbers
by Paul Heinlein 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

I'd like to submit a patch to Mark Burgess so that cfengine can correctly parse Fedora's /etc/redhat-release file. I'm wondering if there's an official roadmap for version numbers. Currently, it's 0.94, so I assume that the first release will be 1.00. Or will it be 1.0? Or 1.0.0? And how will the numbers progress? seq 1 seq 2 seq 3 ------- ------ ----- 1.00 1.0 1.0.0 1.10 1.1 1.1.0 1.15 1.1p5 1.1.5 2.00 2.0 2.0.0 Or will there be a sequence altogether? Thanks! --Paul Heinlein <heinlein(a)madboa.com>

4 5

alpha sparc mips ?
by Balint Cristian 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

Hi ! I know it was already clarifyed the situation on redhat list and IRC of these arch from RedHat point of view but in new conjucture "Fedora" may i ask again if there are some movements or not to build for these arch too (like debian) cristian -- Life in itself has no meaning. Life is an opportunity to create meaning. \|/ ____ \|/ "@'/ .. \`@" /_| \__/ |_\ \__U_/

3 2

Re: PowerPC support
by Stephen Smoogen 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 13:43, Paul Iadonisi wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 06:20:43AM -0400, mike(a)flyn.org wrote: > > Is there any plans to add a PowerPC build of Fedora? > > [snip] > > > Are there any like-minded folks out there? > > Yes. Me. ;-) > > Well, not just PowerPC, but also some other non-x86 platforms in general. > One request I'd like to make to Red Hat (and any other package maintainers) > is to please, please, please, don't make rpms ExclusiveArch unless absolutely > necessary. I realize that may already be the case, but I'm just putting my > two cents in for this. This comes up now as I notice that, though it appears > from the changelog that it is temporary, today's errata for openssl is > exclusive to x86 :-(. I have found on several occasions that rpms with the > ExclusiveArch tag in the spec file build and work fine on both Alpha and > Arm (netwinder) once the tag is removed. Isn't there an ExcludedArch tag I think the reason for ExclusiveArch is that the software hasnt been tested on any other arch. Since Red Hat gives SLAs for those errata.. making sure that people dont complain about broken RPMS (even if they broke it themselves.. ) cuts support costs. Of course I might be smoking up a fantasy here. -- Stephen John Smoogen smoogen(a)lanl.gov Los Alamos National Lab CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 4-0645 Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S Los Alamos, NM 87545 -- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka --

1 0

Fedora security announce and discussion lists
by Nathan Grennan 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

I strongly believe that Fedora needs lists for announcement and discussion of security issues. This is to prevent the potential nightmare of the Core gets patched as usual by Red Hat, but packages by outside maintainers are stale for much longer because some maintainer isn't on every security mailing list. I think the announcement list should be low noise and controlled by someone at Red Hat, or a trusted member of the community. Just make announcements of security problems in a similar way to Red Hat's errata notes for security issues. Then there can be a second list to discuss them to get the fixes working and tested ASAP. This idea came to be because of the issue with running things from rawhide has always been a security risk. You never know when the maintainer will make a new rawhide package with the necessary security fix for the latest exploits. This especially becomes an issue for things like Fedora Alternatives, Fedora Extras, and Fedora Legacy. Along with maintainers outside of Red Hat doing Fedora Core packages. I am a strong advocate of full disclosure. I think both lists should be open to the public for subscription. This is meant to be a community project and I think the whole community should be able to stay informed. I have heard others mention they are generally for full disclosure, but not in all cases. I don't see how you can exactly draw a line. The idea behind full disclosure is to motivate whoever is responsible to get it done ASAP. I also think in general full disclosure is less of an issue in most cases, because most exploits effect all distributions or operating systems that use a certain piece of software, not just a certain distribution. We will be more reacting to outside information than reacting to problems we discover ourselves. I think that informing all the the community about how we are reacting to outside information on the lists outweighs the risk posed by disclosing information we discover ourselves. Another idea I just had while writing this is for a security-audit team be created from members of the community to volunteer to review code for exploits. Also verify that patches for exploits were while not creating new exploits.

4 4

PowerPC support
by W. Michael Petullo 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

Is there any plans to add a PowerPC build of Fedora? I am a long time fan and user of Red Hat's Linux distribution. However, recently I was forced to move away from Red Hat when I replaced my computer with an Apple iBook. I am very interested in contributing to the new Fedora project and am hoping that this project will bring Red Hat to my iBook. I would like to help get Fedora working on PowerPC-based architectures. Perhaps the folks at Terra Soft Solutions would be interested as well? Are there any like-minded folks out there? -- Mike

3 2

Adding the new NTFS driver
by Richard Russon 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

Hi all, I know you won't enable NTFS support, but... If I supply a patch for the new NTFS driver, against Fedora's kernel, can I get it applied? Why? I maintain a set of NTFS driver rpms for various RedHat kernels. I'd like to add support for Fedora, but I would prefer to use the *new* NTFS driver. By making a few small changes outside the /fs/ntfs directory, I can create rpms containing the new NTFS driver. Cheers, FlatCap (Rich) fedora(a)flatcap.org WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net

4 4

mars-nwe without ipxutils ...
by Balint Cristian 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

Hi ! I just obseved that mars-nwe require ipxutils but no ipxutils package, or i am doing something wrong ? Is ipxutils provided by an other package wich i dont obseved ? Cristian

1 1

First date
by Behdad Esfahbod 30 Sep '03

30 Sep '03

Hi all, So here comes my impressions on my first date with this Core thing: * I decided not to install all packages, then I found that I cannot select individual ones. So I tried adding packages from the add/remove program. Then I selected my packages, and tried to install them, when found that: a) /dev/cdrom is pointed to /dev/hdc, this used to work on previous Red Hats, but this time I had to calibrate it to point to /dev/scd0. b) Even after that, the add/remove program cannot find the CD there, and keeps asking for CD. When I mount the CD, and press Ok in the dialog, I find it unmounted.. c) I even couldn't copy/paste the list of selected packages, so I wrote them down by hand, to feed them to up2date. * Then I proceeded with up2date, to install some new packages. Then I got the following weird error. Someone let me know if I'm getting faked packages? Testing package set / solving RPM inter-dependencies... ######################################## apel-10.6-1.noarch.rpm: ########################## Done. The package apel-10.6-1 is not signed with a GPG signature. Aborting... Package apel-10.6-1 does not have a GPG signature. Aborting... * Bitstream-vera fonts are installed, but are not default. It was really hard to read the other fonts, after two months with vera fonts from Ximian. I took me a while to findout that they are installed, and are available under name Bitstream Vera, not Vera. * Many many places here and there, there are still Red Hat's, that should be replaced by Fedora equivalents. One funny example is the Login Screen chooser which has the thumbnail from Red Hat 9. * Cool thing, DRI works! * Nothing more yet. behdad

5 6

1st Time!!!
by jayme ayres 29 Sep '03

29 Sep '03

Hello All, It would like to be able to contribute in the graphical environment of the Fedora project. I have some works published in the site www.kde-look.org ( www.kde-look.org (http://www.kde-look.org/usermanager/search.php?username=jaymejunior) I am not accustomed with projects, however I go to need aid. Still I am a pricipiante in Linux, but it would very like to be able to help. e all. Jayme Ayres Londrina - PR - Brazil!

9 16

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel September 2003