rawhide report: 20041230 changes
by Build System
Updated Packages:
coreutils-5.2.1-36
------------------
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 5.2.1-36
- Fix to only setdefaultfilecon if not overridden by command line
gimp-2:2.2.1-1
--------------
* Wed Dec 29 2004 Nils Philippsen <nphilipp(a)redhat.com>
- version 2.2.1
- pygimp-logo.png included in tarball again
libselinux-1.19.4-1
-------------------
* Wed Dec 29 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.19.4-1
- Update to latest from upstream
* Changed matchpathcon to return -1 with errno ENOENT for
<<none>> entries, and also for an empty file_contexts configuration.
policycoreutils-1.19.2-1
------------------------
* Wed Dec 29 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.19.2-1
- Update to latest from NSA
* Changed restorecon to ignore ENOENT errors from matchpathcon.
* Merged nonls patch from Chris PeBenito.
rpmdb-fedora-1:4-0.20041230
---------------------------
selinux-doc-1.15.2-1
--------------------
* Mon Dec 20 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.15-2
- Upgrade to match NSA
* Updated CREDITS.
* Updated README.
* Merged SGML fixes from Manoj Srivastava.
19 years, 3 months
RE: Installation HDD Capacity
by Atchley.Van＠inventec.com
1.6 Terabytes. Sorry I joined a few sections but I wasn't sure witch one
to post at. Sorry again.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Miller [mailto:mattdm@mattdm.org]
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:33 PM
To: Development discussions related to Fedora Core
Subject: Re: Installation HDD Capacity
On Wed, Dec 29, 2004 at 04:04:37PM -0600, Atchley.Van(a)inventec.com
wrote:
> Does anyone know how to install Fedora Core 2 on a whole 1,600 Gig HDD
> not just 1,000 Gig?
This isn't right for thie -devel mailing list -- try again on the
regular
one. (Also, when you post there -- is the "," a thousands separator or a
decimal point? That is, do you mean one point six terabytes, or one
point
six gigabytes?)
--
Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org
<http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------>
<http://linux.bu.edu/>
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
19 years, 4 months
storage status
by josh
What's the status of gnome storage?
Does redhat have anybody officially working on it?
19 years, 4 months
Re: stateless linux project status
by Peter Dedecker
Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 17:00 +0000, Peter Schobel wrote:
>> I have seen next to nothing on this list recently from stateless linux
>> developers
>>
>> What is the status of this project? Is it in active development?
>>
>
> It isn't in active development right now; the initial release was a
> prototype to gather data on what people thought of the idea.
>
> Now we are looking at the feedback and looking at overall Red Hat
> priorities and have to decide whether to create a project team to
> continue with stateless Linux (and related technology). If we do decide
> to continue then there will probably be a number of people working on
> it.
Do you know when you will take the decision? We really like the project
and its goals and we hope it will continu very soon.
--
Peter Dedecker
The Fedora Stateless @ UGent project
http://blog.eikke.com/index.php/fedorastateless
19 years, 4 months
Isson on relationship between .config and config-2.6.5-1.358
by Park Lee
Hi,
I'm using FC2.
In /usr/src/linux-2.6.5-1.358 there is a file
".config", while in /boot there is another file
"config-2.6.5-1.358".
Then, What's the relationship between these two
files? Why should there be two such files?
Thank you.
=====
Best Regards,
Park Lee
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
19 years, 4 months
Re: Differences between the kernel source in FC2 and the kernel source obtained from kernel.org?
by Park Lee
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 at 18:22, Stephen J. Smoogen
wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 22:46:47 -0800 (PST), Park Lee
wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Is there any difference between the kernel source
in
> > FC2(version 2.6.5-1.358) and the kernel source
> > (version 2.6.5)obtained from kernel.org?
>
> There are probably several 'differences' and patches
between the 2
> kernels. THe best way to look at it would be to get
the kernel.src.rpm
> from Fedora tree and then do a rpm -ivh of it. Look
at the spec file
> and the patches to see what the differences are.
I've downloaded the kernel-2.6.9-1.6_FC2.src.rpm. and
run
rpm -ivh kernel-2.6.9-1.6_FC2.src.rpm
In /usr/src/redhat/SOURCE, I see a linux-2.6.9.tar.bz2
file as well as lots of *.patch files and other files.
I think that this linux-2.6.9.tar.bz2 file is
identical to the linux kernel source with the same
version form kernel.org, and those patches show the
differences between the kernel source in FC2 and the
kernel source obtained from kernel.org. Am I right?
Thank you.
=====
Best Regards,
Park Lee
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more.
http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
19 years, 4 months
rpmbuild of dovecot fails on my machine
by Willem Riede
I'm trying to rebuild a dovecot rpm here from dovecot-0.99.11-7.devel.src.rpm
(don't want to get into "why" as that would only be a distraction at this
time), and it fails:
+ rm -f ./configure
+ aclocal
configure.in:279: warning: underquoted definition of AC_TYPEOF
run info '(automake)Extending aclocal'
or see http://sources.redhat.com/automake/automake.html#Extending-aclocal
configure.in:504: warning: underquoted definition of AC_CHECKTYPE2
aclocal:configure.in:15: warning: macro `AM_ICONV' not found in library
configure.in:13: warning: AC_ARG_PROGRAM invoked multiple times
+ automake -a
configure.in:13: warning: AC_ARG_PROGRAM invoked multiple times
src/auth/Makefile.am: installing `./depcomp'
+ autoconf
configure.in:13: warning: AC_ARG_PROGRAM invoked multiple times
configure.in:15: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_ICONV
If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
See the Autoconf documentation.
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.78046 (%build)
So something isn't quite right (read not the same as in the fc build
environment) with my autoconfig setup, I guess. This is on a FC3 system.
Rebuilding the FC3 dovecot rpm fails in the same way. Is anyone with autoconf
experience able to suggest a course of action for me?
Thanks, Willem Riede.
19 years, 4 months
apt question
by Patricio Bruna V
will be apt include in any version of fedora?
and if so, there will be metapackages?
--
Patricio Bruna http://www.linuxcenterla.com
Ingeniero de Proyectos Mariano Sánchez Fontecilla 310, piso 2
Red Hat Certified Engineer Las Condes, Santiago - CHILE
Linux Center Latinoamerica Fono: +56 2 2745000, Fax : +56 22747075
19 years, 4 months
rawhide report: 20041229 changes
by Build System
Updated Packages:
firefox-0:1.0-8
---------------
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Christopher Aillon <caillon(a)redhat.com> 0:1.0-8
- Add upstream langpacks
gaim-1:1.1.1-1
--------------
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Warren Togami <wtogami(a)redhat.com> 1.1.1-1
- 1.1.1 (minor bugfixes)
gcc-3.4.3-11
------------
* Mon Dec 27 2004 Jakub Jelinek <jakub(a)redhat.com> 3.4.3-11
- update from gcc-3_4-branch
- PRs c++/17972, c++/18962, c++/18975, java/14104, libobjc/12035,
middle-end/17930, middle-end/18424, middle-end/18493,
middle-end/18590, middle-end/18730, middle-end/18882,
middle-end/19068, other/18508, other/18665, other/19093,
preprocessor/15167, rtl-optimization/16968, target/16819,
target/17990, target/18002, target/18153, target/19005,
target/19010, target/19028, target/19102, target/19147
- fix ICE in dwarf2out (Devang Patel, Eric Botcazou, #143719,
PR debug/16261)
- fix ICE in reshape_init_array (#143034, PRs c++/18384, c++/18327)
* Mon Dec 13 2004 Jakub Jelinek <jakub(a)redhat.com> 3.4.3-10
- update from gcc-3_4-branch
- PRs target/18932, target/17025, c++/18731
- fix _Jv_{Start,End}OfInterpreter computation (Andrew Haley, #142611,
PRs java/18036, java/13468)
- avoid multiple evaluation of sqrt and other math builtins when
not -ffast-math (#142603, PR middle-end/18951)
- remove leading underscore from /usr/libexec/getconf/default
symlink target
* Thu Dec 09 2004 Jakub Jelinek <jakub(a)redhat.com> 3.4.3-9
- update from gcc-3_4-branch
- PRs target/18443, c++/18100, java/14853, c++/16681
- fix creation of /usr/libexec/getconf/default symlink
gcc4-4.0.0-0.16
---------------
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Jakub Jelinek <jakub(a)redhat.com> 4.0.0-0.16
- update from trunk
- include also gcc4-java, libgcj4 and libgcj4-devel subpackages
libselinux-1.19.3-3
-------------------
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.19.3-3
- Fix link devel libraries
rpmdb-fedora-1:4-0.20041229
---------------------------
selinux-policy-strict-1.19.15-10
--------------------------------
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.19-15-10
- Fix transition rules for initrc->unconfined_t
selinux-policy-targeted-1.19.15-11
----------------------------------
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.19-15-11
- Change sshd, xdm, crond, sendmail to run under different context
- in targeted policy
* Tue Dec 28 2004 Dan Walsh <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> 1.19-15-10
- Fix transition rules for initrc->unconfined_t
19 years, 4 months
Me stupid: lost password for gpg
by Hans de Goede
Hi,
Some time ago I've done attempts of packages for svgalib on yodl, before
this I didn't really have a need for pgp, so I didn't use gpg. I've done
a few (signed) test releases of packages for svgalib and yodl, but those
got stuck in the QA queue. After this I turned my attention to some
other projects (xmame mainly).
Then some time ago I decided that I wanted to try again to get those
package through the QA queue, and ... oops I forgot my gpg password :|
See I thought, hmm this is going to be an important password letts think
up a new one (mistake!), used it a couple of times then didn't use it
for a few months and now BUMMER!
Seeing how Fedora-Extras is really shaping up now I really would like to
become an active community member (not a good start this) and do some
packaging.
Now I've already submitted my gpg key to: pgp.mit.edu.
I could ofcourse just nuke my current .gpg dir and start from scratch
since not many people have my public key already, but then my old key
would still be registered at pgp.mit.edu .
The faq at pgp.mit.edu also doesn't make me happy (at all) anything I
can do?
I'm already quite embaressed about this as it is, so no that is SO
stupid replies please.
Thanks & Regards,
Hans
19 years, 4 months
