Re: Include cheese-2.24.1-2.fc10 in to F-10 final ?
by Jesse Keating
On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 09:21 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 19:47 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> I've just fixed a small bug in cheese:
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470698
> >>
> >> This bugs makes cheese unusable with webcam's which support only one
> >> resolution, the bugfix is very simple and safe (replace > with >= in one if).
> >>
> >> As cheese is part of the livecd (AFAIK) I think it would be nice to get the
> >> fixed build into F-10 gold, OTOH this does not affect many users as there are
> >> not many webcams who expose this issue. So we could make this a 0 day update too.
> >>
> >> So what will it be ?
> >
> > I'd say try to get it in f10-final. The less 0-day updates we have, the
> > better. I guess that means you need to file a rel-eng trac ticket. Yay
> > for using two different tracking systems for this...
You actually forgot to cc the list.
I'm +1 for the change.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
15 years, 6 months
#1006: update audit package in F-10 build root
by Fedora Release Engineering
#1006: update audit package in F-10 build root
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
Reporter: anonymous | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: koji
Keywords: |
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
I would like to have the audit package in the F-10 build root updated to
1.7.9. /usr/include/libaudit.h has some event defines that will be needed
by other packages to use. I am planning to push 1.7.9 as a release day
update to the audit system, but it does not need to be in F-10 GA. Thanks!
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1006>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
15 years, 6 months
#1015: gnome-packagekit-0.3.9-8.fc10
by Fedora Release Engineering
#1015: gnome-packagekit-0.3.9-8.fc10
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Reporter: wtogami | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 10 Final | Component: koji
Keywords: |
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
gnome-packagekit-0.3.9-8.fc10
Only change is hiding a scary error pop-up message that happens on every
thin client login. +1 from me.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1015>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
15 years, 6 months
#1014: sip-redirect and clamav should get tagged into F-10 final
by Fedora Release Engineering
#1014: sip-redirect and clamav should get tagged into F-10 final
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Reporter: robert | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 10 Final | Component: koji
Keywords: |
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
The following packages should make it into Fedora 10 even if we're now in
the final freeze:
- sip-redirect-0.1.2-2.fc10 (new Fedora package, currently nothing
depends on it. The package itself works for me for more than 2.5 years
now, but the Fedora review happend recently)
- clamav-0.94.1-1.fc10 (the update from 0.94 contains several bug fixes
and a minor security fix as per upstream. If not updated, clamav will
shout "OUTDATED" to the users of F-10 immediately. Tested by a few people
using clamav + 3rd party applications/gui, but not by myself, shouldn't
cause any breakage - I'm more an EPEL guy when using clamav)
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1014>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
15 years, 6 months
#1013: gdb-6.8-29.fc10 push for F10
by Fedora Release Engineering
#1013: gdb-6.8-29.fc10 push for F10
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Reporter: jkratoch | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 10 Final | Component: other
Keywords: |
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
gdb-6.8-29.fc10 fixes primarily Bug 468266 which updates the old version
of a Fedora specific patch to implement VLA (variable-length-arrays) and
Fortran dynamic structures support.
Another notable fix is for Bug 466901 fixing an upstream bug on a
compatibility with prelink - which used by default in Fedora and probably
not on other distros(?) as `bt full' common for the bugreports was broken
due to it. This fix has no regression risks.
The VLA problem was present in whole F9 although neither in F8 nor
upstream. The fix was now also pushed for F9.
Not accepting the change case:
Some (IMO rare - only those containing code using variables length arrays
array[some_variable] - and only some cases of the backtrace) backtraces
which work with non-Fedora GDBs and F8 and earlier GDBs will crash GDB.
The changes pass the full GDB testsuite and sure show no regressions. The
new packages also has more testcases to avoid such regression(s) in the
future. The new patch is really more safe on many places than the older
variant.
gdb-6.8-29.fc10 formal %changelog:
{{{
* Sun Nov 09 2008 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com> - 6.8-29
- Fix more the variable-length-arrays support (BZ 468266, feature BZ
377541).
- Integrate the `bt full' protection (for BZ 466901) into the VLA patch.
* Thu Nov 06 2008 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com> - 6.8-28
- Fix the "never terminate `bt full'" patch false GCC warning / build
error.
* Thu Nov 06 2008 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com> - 6.8-27
- Fix resolving of variables at locations lists in prelinked libs (BZ
466901),
bugreported by Michal Babej.
- Never terminate `bt full' on a problem of variable resolving (for BZ
466901).
* Thu Nov 06 2008 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com> - 6.8-26
- Fix more the variable-length-arrays support (BZ 468266, feature BZ
377541).
- Fix the watchpoints conditionals.
- Fix on PPC spurious SIGTRAPs on active watchpoints.
- Fix occasional stepping lockup on many threads, seen on ia64.
* Mon Nov 03 2008 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com> - 6.8-25
- Fix the variable-length-arrays support (BZ 468266, feature BZ 377541).
- Fix the debuginfo-install suggestions for missing base packages (BZ
467901),
also update the rpm/yum code to no longer require _RPM_4_4_COMPAT.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1013>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
15 years, 6 months
#1007: fedora-release-10-1 and fedora-release-notes-10.0.0-0.2 for F10
by Fedora Release Engineering
#1007: fedora-release-10-1 and fedora-release-notes-10.0.0-0.2 for F10
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Reporter: jkeating | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 10 Final | Component: koji
Keywords: |
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
fedora-release puts the name at Cambridge, and sets up the repos correctly
(relying upon mirrormanager redirect).
fedora-release-notes is the first cut at the final F10 release notes.
Need to have version 10 to match the fedora-release requires. Please to
be tagging these. I've done a test compose with them, nothing seems
broken.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1007>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
15 years, 6 months
#1003: F-10: openoffice.org-3.0.0-9.10.fc10
by Fedora Release Engineering
#1003: F-10: openoffice.org-3.0.0-9.10.fc10
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Reporter: caolanm | Owner: rel-eng(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 10 Final | Component: koji
Keywords: |
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
I'd like to bring openoffice.org-3.0.0-9.10.fc10 into F-10.
Rationale:[[BR]]
1. Fixes first time print to file to actually go to file and not to
default printer, i.e. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468935
[[BR]]
2. Avoids the problem that under compiz that using various floating
windows causes the entire application to disappear behind some other
window, i.e. due to upstream workaround for
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=559729 [[BR]]
3. Tightens up Requires for extensions that avoids getting into a confused
inconsistent state wrt extensions partially installed during manual
installing.[[BR]]
4. Remove debugging spew from some extensions that appear during an
update[[BR]]
5. Some html files can crash on export to .doc if they have certain table
structure in them[[BR]]
Not doing so problems:[[BR]]
a) occasional weird print destinations[[BR]]
b) weird compiz behaviour with styles, navigator, table-contest
toolbars/utility windows[[BR]]
Doing so possible problems:[[BR]]
a) other weird behaviour with styles, navigator, table-contest
toolbars/utility windows under unknown circumstances on non-compiz and
non-metacity window managers[[BR]]
testing done:[[BR]]
Confirmed that everything works as expected under metacity and compiz in
GNOME.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1003>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
15 years, 6 months
Re: F11 naming election?
by Josh Boyer
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 08:41:01PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
>Josh, regarding the F11 naming election... We're running 4 people
>elections all in December, as proposed on f-a-b. But I don't know how
>the election for F10 (and earlier) were really run, or if December
>7-20 is a good time to have an actual election for such.
>
>The last election happened in July, so it's not too "off" schedule,
>but that was 8+ weeks after F9 launch, instead of 2 after F10...
>
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections
>has the F11 naming election penciled in, but if that doesn't mesh with
>the overall schedule, it can be run separately later if necessary.
>
>Please advise.
I don't think that is going to work. Generally, we have the following
steps for Naming:
1) Announce and collect names (2 weeks)
2) Legal review of list (2 weeks)
3) Voting (1 week)
If we were to use that, and start today, we'd be a month out and just
barely make it in time. However, this time around I want to do the
following:
1) Announce and collect (2 weeks)
2) Initial list culling by Board (1 week)
3) Legal review of culled list (2 weeks)
4) Voting (1 week)
The addition of step 2 in the second list of steps is a result of
doing the naming for F10. We got a _lot_ of suggestions (which is
good) but quantity does not equate to quality. The Board wanted time
to do some basic culling of the list to remove things that would be
obviously rejected by legal (trademarks, etc) and things that just plain
didn't make sense.
I plan on doing a bit of that in the initial list creation as submissions
come in, but I can't do it all myself. So I think the added week is needed.
That would put us past a Dec start.
We could trim the collection time to one week instead of two. Most of the
submissions come in during the first week anyway. That might help some.
Pure scheduling aside, I think we need to get a feel from rel-eng, FESCo,
the Board on when the right time to start is. I don't want to steal thunder
from the F10 release by having the F11 naming contest on-going before the
release date.
So here is my roughly proposed schedule:
1) Announce and collect names: Dec 1 (1 week)
2) Send list to Board for culling: Dec 8 (1 week)
3) Send list to legal for review: Dec 15 (3 weeks *)
4) Hold vote: Jan 5 (1 week)
* Realistically with the holidays in the middle of the legal review
window, we might as well ignore doing anything of importance during
the weeks of Christmas and New Years. So I padded the legal timeframe
to push the vote out until Jan 5.
I've CC'd the interested parties, so feedback is more than welcome.
josh
15 years, 6 months