Now that systemd is used by default, I think it is time to deprecate
For those unfamiliar with it, portreserve is a small utility which binds
specific network ports early on during the boot process, so that
services using those ports can claim them when they start. The point is
to avoid accidental clashes when services use random unbound privileged
Currently portreserve has a SysV initscript. It doesn't make a lot of
sense to migrate it to a systemd service unit because of the fact that
systemd avoids the problem.
Any objections to this?
Relevant bug report:
as far as I remember the versions of firefox and thunderbird have
allways been sinchronuos at their latest stable version. So I'd like to
know for personal interest if there are reasons that would deny updating
thunderbird packages to version 5.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Regards
I'm a Linux/Unix sysadmin who has been using all sorts of linux/unix
variants since about 1998 now. I have previously made or tried to make
some small contributions to the Banshee, Jokosher and KNode projects.
These did not go very far, but I was glad to be able to help.
I have been using Fedora for the past few years on the desktop (mainly
CentOS on server side). A few months ago I re-packaged BIND for our
company which was not easy so I decided I need to learn more about
packaging stuff properly. I asked Máirín Duffy on twitter what I could
do to contribute for packages and she suggested fonts as an easy place
to start so here I am :-)
She has suggested some fonts I could package so I'm working through the
first one, League Gothic. I'm having some trouble understanding what
foundries are and how font packaging works in Fedora in general so any
help along those lines is much appreciated.
I'm going to replace the report library with the new libreport. Today I
plan to replace it in rawhide and if it goes smoothly I'd like to
replace it in F15 as well.
- libreport is written in C (report is in python), so it's easier to
write bindings for other languages
- it's API compatible with report (it has python bindings)
- it shares configuration with ABRT, so users just need to write their
credentials and defaults only once
- shares the UI with ABRT (the reporting wizard), so users are presented
with the same UI despite of from where they are reporting a problem
- it has a bit different UI
- account information (e.g: bz loging+password) is forgotten and needs
to be entered again
- some minor breakage expected (hopefully not...)
affected packages (according to repoquery):
- report + subpackages (being obsoleted)
As I said, libreport should be API compatible with report, so no changes
should needed, but of course can't be 100% sure if it's bugfree ;)
Could someone also tell me how to make it look in the correct places?
> [root@ankur ~]# repoquery -l mono-nunit | egrep "nunit\.core\.dll"
and mock fails with the following error:
> DEBUG: + mdtool build --buildfile:OpenDental5_6.sln LINUX DISABLE_MICROSOFT_OFFICE
> DEBUG: WARNING: [MonoDevelop.NUnit,2.4] Could not load some add-in assemblies: File '/usr/lib/monodevelop/AddIns/NUnit/nunit.core.dll' not found.
> DEBUG: ERROR: Errors found in add-in '/usr/lib/monodevelop/AddIns/NUnit/MonoDevelop.NUnit.dll:
> DEBUG: ERROR: The file '/usr/lib/monodevelop/AddIns/NUnit/nunit.core.dll' referenced in the manifest could not be found.
> DEBUG: ERROR: The file '/usr/lib/monodevelop/AddIns/NUnit/nunit.core.interfaces.dll' referenced in the manifest could not be found.
> DEBUG: ERROR: The file '/usr/lib/monodevelop/AddIns/NUnit/nunit.framework.dll' referenced in the manifest could not be found.
> DEBUG: ERROR: The file '/usr/lib/monodevelop/AddIns/NUnit/nunit.util.dll' referenced in the manifest could not be found.
> DEBUG: WARNING: The add-in 'MonoDevelop.MonoDeveloperExtensions,2.4' is trying to extend '/MonoDevelop/NUnit/TestProviders', but there isn't any add-
> in defining this extension point
> DEBUG: WARNING: The add-in 'MonoDevelop.MonoDeveloperExtensions,2.4' is trying to extend '/MonoDevelop/NUnit/TestProviders/MonoTestProvider', but the
> re isn't any add-in defining this extension point
I've already looked at the wiki, but couldn't find much here.
Thanks again :)
as far as i can see fedora is built with "-fstack-protector" and not
"-fstack-protector-all" - is there a specific reason for not using
the "all" variant or is it safe to rebuild server-packages with it?
> The GCC options for SSP are -fstack-protector, -fstack-protector-all, and
> -Wstack-protector. The -fstack-protector option only protects functions with
> character arrays, and is generally not recomended. The -fstack-protector-all
> option protects all functions. The -Wstack-protector option will produce a
> warning about any functions which are not protected. This warning can occure
> in functions with buffers smaller than 8 bytes.
[CC-ed to Matej Cepl, marked in PkgDB as a co-maintainer.]
I've just orphaned scribes. Its related package, scribes-templates, is
already orphaned from previously. I no longer use them and have no
interest in maintaining them.
If you'd like to take them, please note that the 0.3 series, currently
packaged in Fedora, are considered unmaintained by upstream. You'll need
to base any future packages on a BZR snapshot of the 0.4 series until a
formal release tarball is created. Matej Cepl has made such snapshot
RPMs from early May that could probably be used as a basis for further
packaging work, available at his FedoraPeople webspace:
Aside from a few ABRT-created bugs from the F12 timeframe, there are
currently two minor but outstanding issues that need to be resolved:
* #465557 (Modify gnome-python2 requirement), and
* #652867 (Scribes fails to start).
Peter Gordon (codergeek42) <peter(a)thecodergeek.com>
Who am I? :: http://thecodergeek.com/about-me