triage January 2013

triage@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
136 discussions

[Bug 253630] Clash of short-cut in search dialog
by Red Hat Bugzilla 09 Jun '25

09 Jun '25

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253630 lexual <lex.lists(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|lex.lists(a)gmail.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

6 6

needinfo canceled: [Bug 619461] [abrt] crash in qbittorrent-1:2.2.8-2.fc12: message: Process /usr/bin/qbittorrent was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 May '25

06 May '25

Product: Fedora Version: 12 Component: qbittorrent Karel Klíč <kklic(a)redhat.com> has canceled Bug Zapper <fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com>'s request for needinfo: Bug 619461: [abrt] crash in qbittorrent-1:2.2.8-2.fc12: message: Process /usr/bin/qbittorrent was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619461

2 1

needinfo canceled: [Bug 633653] [abrt] lekhonee-gnome-0.9-1.fc12: wordpress_get_categories: Process /usr/bin/lekhonee-gnome was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 May '25

06 May '25

Product: Fedora Version: 12 Component: lekhonee-gnome Karel Klíč <kklic(a)redhat.com> has canceled Bug Zapper <fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com>'s request for needinfo: Bug 633653: [abrt] lekhonee-gnome-0.9-1.fc12: wordpress_get_categories: Process /usr/bin/lekhonee-gnome was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=633653

2 1

[Bug 781341] New: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Jun '13

02 Jun '13

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781341 Summary: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: high Priority: unspecified Component: fail2ban AssignedTo: axel.thimm(a)atrpms.net ReportedBy: vogel(a)folz.de QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: herrold(a)owlriver.com, mattdm(a)mattdm.org, axel.thimm(a)atrpms.net, tim(a)niemueller.de, vogel(a)folz.de, jonathan.underwood(a)gmail.com, ruben(a)rubenkerkhof.com, wdierkes(a)rackspace.com, triage(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, maxamillion(a)fedoraproject.org, voronin.andrey(a)gmail.com, bugzilla.redhat.com(a)ewood.users.cementhorizon.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Clone Of: 244275 Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #244275 +++ Description of problem (copied from Bug #244275): fail2ban doesn't require shorewall to function, and in fact, as we ship it, it makes use of the Fedora firewall - installing an extra firewall which is the not used in the default configuration is a bit gratuitous and confusing to the user. Also, the Requires: tcpwrappers isn't needed unless the user decides to enable the tcpwrapper action (disabled by default) Additional information: Bug #244275 contains suggestions and possible patches for a fix, but was closed with NOTABUG as noted in the comment from the EPEL maintainer: --- Additional comment from maxamillion(a)fedoraproject.org on 2012-01-12 22:46:49 EST --- Since this is just the EPEL package and I don't maintain fail2ban for Fedora, I will be keeping it in line with Fedora proper. Please feel free to discuss this with the Fedora package maintainer. As I wrote in some comments in Bug #244275, I'm interested in a fix for Fedora, which is why I file this bug now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 9

[Bug 204448] RPM verify not functional: "file's dependencies has changed since prelinking"
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jan '13

27 Jan '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=204448 Kayvan Sylvan <kayvansylvan(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kayvansylvan(a)gmail.com --- Comment #27 from Kayvan Sylvan <kayvansylvan(a)gmail.com> --- I see this in F18 too. $ rpm -Va udisks prelink: /lib/udev/udisks-part-id: at least one of file's dependencies has changed since prelinking S.?...... /lib/udev/udisks-part-id prelink: /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-create-partition: at least one of file's dependencies has changed since prelinking S.?...... /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-create-partition prelink: /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-create-partition-table: at least one of file's dependencies has changed since prelinking S.?...... /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-create-partition-table prelink: /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-delete-partition: at least one of file's dependencies has changed since prelinking S.?...... /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-delete-partition prelink: /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-modify-partition: at least one of file's dependencies has changed since prelinking S.?...... /usr/libexec/udisks-helper-modify-partition -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ncxlMCSF82&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 832853] Review Request: java3d - Java 3D
by Red Hat Bugzilla 23 Jan '13

23 Jan '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832853 --- Comment #13 from Xavier Bachelot <xavier(a)bachelot.org> --- Indeed, if Java3D goes to RPM Fusion, everything depending on it goes to RPM Fusion too. They could be moved back to Fedora once Java3D moves back to Fedora too (providing there are no other issue with them for Fedora, of course). I think it's better to have the packages in RPM Fusion rather than not having them at all, but you might have a different opinion :-) Imho, the first step on the way to try and resolve this issue is to file a bug upstream. That's why I first checked upstream bugtracker, then commented in this ticket after failing to find a corresponding bug. I'm a bit surprised this package is in Debian, as the license should probably be considered non-free for Debian too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=W7bsmvNg1c&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 832853] Review Request: java3d - Java 3D
by Red Hat Bugzilla 23 Jan '13

23 Jan '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832853 --- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo <puntogil(a)libero.it> --- hi Xavier, I understand the problem but I do not need to have a package that is used only in RPM Fusion. for me it is necessary to import http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf-java/ and its deps (http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/~billh/visad.html) regards p.s. i know the difference between fedora and debian about the problems related to licensing. but in the debian package exists ... http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-java/trunk/java3d/debian/copyright -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7vFUbeegsH&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 832853] Review Request: java3d - Java 3D
by Red Hat Bugzilla 23 Jan '13

23 Jan '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832853 --- Comment #11 from Xavier Bachelot <xavier(a)bachelot.org> --- The problem with the "nuclear facility" clause is it makes the license non-free, and thus voids the possibility to have the package in Fedora. Has anyone filled a bug upstream to try and resolve the license issue ? If yes, what the ticket number, I can't find it. Eric, Gil, would you be willing to take this package to RPM Fusion ? It can still be brought back to Fedora if the license issue is resolved someday. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=s9D9NDrQ2H&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 204446] Xclients.d files not sourced by Xclients script
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jan '13

22 Jan '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=204446 Juha Tuomala <tuju(a)iki.fi> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tuju(a)iki.fi --- Comment #20 from Juha Tuomala <tuju(a)iki.fi> --- This is still broken. Xclients runs Xclients.$1.sh from its .d drop dir but nothing provides that $1 argument. /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc has a line that runs Xclients but doesn't provide any argument to it and thus nothing gets executed from that dir. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rkVVN1e1q3&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 296921] Could not set DRM device bus ID. DRIScreenInit failed. Disabling DRI.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Jan '13

21 Jan '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=296921 Maurizio <rutadeevacuacion(a)msn.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rutadeevacuacion(a)msn.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HZ77HSTwgZ&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

triage January 2013