A year ago, I started working on a new storage library for low-level
operations with various types of block devices -- *libblockdev*. Today,
I'm happy to announce that the library reached the **1.0** milestone
which means that it covers all the functionality that has been stated
in the initial goals and it's going to keep the API stable.
Read the blog post I wrote for more information:
Anaconda Rider | Red Hat, Inc. | Brno - Czech Republic
[Previous discussion here:
Unison is a fairly widely used file synchronization package. Think of
it as a more efficient, multi-directional 'rsync'.
Unison has the unfortunate property that versions of Unison are not
compatible with each other unless they have the exact same major.minor
release. eg. Unison 2.40.128 is compatible with Unison 2.40.102, but
incompatible with Unison 2.48.3 (the latest upstream).
The reason that matters is you might be running Unison across multiple
machines, running different Linux distros, which have different
versions of Unison.
For this reason, Fedora packages three different Unison branches in
- unison213 (currently Unison 2.13.16)
- unison227 (currently Unison 2.27.57)
- unison240 (currently Unison 2.40.128)
- There was a "unison" package, but it is retired
We don't package the latest upstream (Unison 2.48.3) at all.
For comparison, Debian packages:
- unison (which contains 2.40.x)
- unison-all, a meta-package, which pulls in all of the above
AFAICT Debian also does not package the latest upstream version.
So you can see that someone who needed to synchronize across Fedora
and Debian machines would have two compatible choices:
- Fedora unison227 <-> Debian unison2.27.57
- Fedora unison240 <-> Debian unison
Anyway, I think this situation is crazy. One reason is that in order
to add the latest upstream Unison (2.48) I'm going to have to submit a
new unison248 package. And then if there's another version, I'll
have to submit a new package for that.
I think Fedora should have a single "unison" source package, and it
should contain the multiple upstream branch sources and build
different binary subpackages. The binary subpackages would have the
same names as now (unison227 etc), making this a compatible update for
existing Fedora Unison users.
This way I only need to submit a single new package review, we can
delete the unison2xx source packages, and there'll be a single place
for unison in Fedora for ever more.
 BTW there is a COPR build of unison248 if you search for it.
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting,
bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org
i am not sure for which package file a bug
Waiting for Bodhi for a list of packages in updates-testing (F21)...
InsecurePlatformWarning: A true SSLContext object is not available. This
prevents urllib3 from configuring SSL appropriately and may cause
certain SSL connections to fail. For more information, see
Quite a few people are going to be installing Fedora 22 in the coming
days, searching for things in the software center and not finding
their esoteric GUI tool. This is because some applications still don’t
ship AppData files, which have become compulsory in the workstation
spin for this release. Luckily, the vast majority of applications that
don't include AppData are not popular and most have little-to-no
If you want to check an application without installing F22 you can use
this link http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/screenshots/f22/matrix.html
-- if you fix an application I'll be regenerating that status page
every 48 hours and shipping new a metadata release in a couple of
is there any mechanism how to speed up release of critical security
fixes by Fedora update system?
For instance Firefox packages are released *week* after official Mozilla
release which is really bad.
Any idea here?
Fedora infrastructure is trying to reach the FAS user vicodan. The email address
listed in FAS for this user does not correspond to a bugzilla account, while
this user is a packager.
We have been trying to contact him via the hotmail address set in FAS, but
Does someone know how to contact viciodan?
If so, could you ask him to check his emails or basically do either of:
a) change the email of his bugzilla account to use the same email as in FAS
b) change the email of his FAS account to use the same email as his bugzilla
c) create a new bugzilla account corresponding to this FAS email
Thanks in advance for your help,