apitrace 5.0 bundles libbacktrace, which looks like is living within the
gcc sources. libbacktrace is not build as a shared library from the gcc
sources, and not packaged.
Is it feasible to build libbacktrace as a shared library and ship it in
a corresponding package? Or should I rather go for a bundling exception
Some time back there was discussion of being able to rollback yum updates via
btrfs snapshotting. As I recall, it turned out that the default btrfs install
was not setup correctly to make this feasible (I had briefly tested it on my
machine). I haven't heard anything since - this seems like a great idea.
-- Those who don't understand recursion are doomed to repeat it
currently default error policy for printers in Fedora is "Stop printer" on
any error which is a really bad default. I have run across this issue LOTS
of times with regular Fedora desktop users who don't get why has their
printer stopped working, there is no UI queue to warn users, there is no
easy way to "Start printer" with one click after it has been stopped. It is
just a big mess.
Even worse, previous versions of Gnome control panel (if I remember
correctly) had option to change default error policy, now that option is
removed and you can get to it only by installing system-config-printers
tool, something regular users have no idea about even exists, and it is not
installed by default.
There are too many examples which are simple user errors but result in
priner going offline (stopped) and this is really bad, because after any
small error users can't print any more.
For example: user trying to print while he/she is not at home so his/hers
printer is not available, user trying to print but has forgot to connect
usb priner cable, user trying to print but haven't turned it on, user
printing to wifi printer but while connected to different wifi network...
Any of these actions is simple uses error but results in permanently
disabling of priner (Stops printer) and users can't print even when they
resolve issue that was stopping them from accessing the printer.
Now Fedora is what is stopping them from printing.
Who is responsible for user experience of Fedora desktop? To whom should I
point this issue to?
I'm sure those that need to know, know, but for those that haven't heard
Mozilla's official Firefox build will enforce addons to contain a Mozilla signature
without any runtime option to disable the check.
Initially this prevents Fedora packaged addons since they are unsigned. The Mozilla
signing process takes time and can't be part of a package building process.
Is Fedora going to get authorization to build Firefox with a runtime disable option?
I opened https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1221923
about this too but thought it would be good to ask here.
F22 currently has llvm-3.5.0 (F23 is now on 3.6.0):
I believe there is a newer 3.5.2 bugfix release -
would it make sense to make a F22 update for that?
Is there any expected risk with doing that?
Anyway for F23 I probably have to make a llvm35 package
again for building ghc-7.10 on armv7 (and ideally aarch64).
3.5.0 has a critical bug that breaks ghc, so it would
be based on 3.5.2 anyway.
I would like to build lilypond for EPEL-7, but unfortunately it
requires texlive-metapost which we don't have in the RHEL-7
texlive. Now, the question is how to build just one subpackage
(or any required other subpackages) from the monstrosity which
the current texlive? Anybody any suggestions?
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/, Jabber: mcepl<at>ceplovi.cz
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
Ty zlý dávaj’ ty hodný pryč. // Those evil ones put away those good ones.
-- Magda Ceplová
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Netizen Spin =
Change owner(s): Corey Leong <cleong at fedoraproject dot org>
A Fedora Spin for promoting and supporting internet citizenship and citizen engagement.
== Detailed Description ==
Fedora Netizen is an open source operating system for enabling internet citizens to engage with online services and communities. The goal for Netizen is to pattern the operating system's features after Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs which was published in his 1943 paper, "A Theory of Human Motivation". As a professor of pyschology, Abraham Maslow theorized that individuals attempt to experience five stages of needs starting with physiological, safety, social, esteem, and then ending with self-actualization. Beginning with the first level of physiological needs, individuals' motivational needs ascend upwards to higher levels of needs in order, however, only after establishing lower levels of needs first before ascending to the next level.
The philosophy for Netizen closely relates to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs by establishing three primary software package levels in a hierarchical model. The first and lowest software package level addresses the need for Netizen Privacy in the areas of personal privacy, informational privacy, and communication privacy. After Netizen Privacy, the second software package level addresses the need for Netizen Security in the areas of data security, local security, and network security. After Netizen Security, the third software package level addresses the need for Netizen Engagement in the areas of publishing, education, and social engagement.
Future Netizen software package levels will address analytics, awareness, design, develop, and others.
== Scope ==
A Netizen theme is the final requirement to be developed per marketing department support of a look and feel in order to replace the current default theme. This is an isolated change.
* Other developers: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
* Release engineering: Add spin to spin-kickstarts, ensure spin has been tested, and release with rest of spins
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
devel-announce mailing list
I'm encountering a few problems with GCC 5 due to code that fails to
work with GCC major releases above 4. In particular, there are at least
problems with the kernel and with Coverity.
Unfortunately, downgrading to Fedora 21's GCC 4.9 is very hard in Fedora
22, unless you only care about the C compiler. This is because the C++
compiler wants a matching libstdc++, and most C++ packages need the GCC
5 libstdc++ (maybe because of the ABI changes, I don't know).
Is it outrageous to ask for a "compatibility" GCC package that declares
itself as 4.10? This is similar to how kernel 3.0 was initially
packaged as 2.6.40. Or perhaps there is another possibility that I
haven't thought of?