similar to: Fwd: [Bug 478429] Review Request: tinc - A virtual private network daemon

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce at centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request at centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner at centos.org When

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2013:0948 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-0948.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: 8f59b77252fe73060e43645a25c76e48a72c4ae101fa28bc3acef1caca467cf8 rpmlint-0.94-3.1.el6.noarch.rpm x86_64:

rpmlint complains that guestfsd has no man page. I think its a good idea to provide one also for guestfsd. Olaf

Adjust license headers to use the current FSF postal address. Spotted by Rpmlint. --- launch-virt-p2v | 2 +- p2v.ks.in | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/launch-virt-p2v b/launch-virt-p2v index 925aa6d..5e46f42 100755 --- a/launch-virt-p2v +++ b/launch-virt-p2v @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ # # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License #

Is there somewhere a succinct guide to just how much extra crud we need to install on RHEL to make use of EPEL packages? [root at troll-1 noarch]# rpm -ivh R2spec-4.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm error: Failed dependencies: fedora-packager is needed by R2spec-4.1.0-1.el6.noarch [root at troll-1 noarch]# wget http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/fedora-packager-0.5.9.4-1.el6.noarch.rpm

Edwin Just what I was searching for. Thanks for sending it to me. Kataniya -------Original Message------- From: Maire [mailto:ob at qx.com] Sent: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:56:08 +0100 To: Tommy Subject: Eulah Purchase your health aids for less money here. Good Day Treva, Express transport service makes sure that you get your supplements shipped to you in the smallest amount of time necessary.

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1345 Bug ID: 1345 Summary: There is no milestone named '---' in the 'libnetfilter_conntrac' product. Product: bugzilla Version: other Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5

# HG changeset patch # User Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de> # Date 1341839122 -7200 # Node ID 2dd50c201ca0d3542f3589942ae9e51d33ec7509 # Parent 42f76d536b116d2ebad1b6705ae51ecd171d2581 stubdom: fix errors in newlib rpmlint found a few code bugs in newlib, and marks them as errors after rpm build. Add another newlib patch and apply it during stubdom build. I: A function uses a

Hi, rpmlint complains that various blktap files are installed with unnecessary execute permissions: E: xen-devel spurious-executable-perm (Badness: 100) /usr/lib64/libblktap.a E: xen-devel spurious-executable-perm (Badness: 100) /usr/include/blktaplib.h The patch below fixes the problem. It applies against xen-unstable. Thank you. Signed-off-by: Charles Coffing <ccoffing@novell.com>

# HG changeset patch # User Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de> # Date 1336153082 -7200 # Node ID 9a430b7e2df2893f7f4f75d10e66d52bdffa7efa # Parent 113fd57259b91af06a5352404dd94b484a98d2bc tools/hotplug: remove 4 from default runlevel in xen-watchdog, xend and xendomains Similar to what changeset 24847:0900b1c905f1 does in xencommons, remove runlevel 4 from the other runlevel scripts. LSB defines

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30975 Summary: A Question about the linux-2.6 kernel-modules for nouveau Product: xorg Version: git Platform: x86 (IA32) OS/Version: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: trivial Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau AssignedTo:

Eric Christopher wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Owen Anderson<resistor at mac.com> wrote: >> I have to agree with Alp here. I’ve seen a number of review threads that either seem to be missing emails or in which the emails arrive days in unintelligible orders. > > Weird. I've only seen the one occasion earlier. > >> I don’t know that we need to cut

"Duncan P. N. Exon Smith" <dexonsmith at apple.com> writes: >> On 2014-Jun-25, at 12:32, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com> wrote: >> >> As I understand, some people legitimately use Phabricator for >> internal review, > > Is this is a use case we need to support on <http://reviews.llvm.org>? > >> while others *think* they're

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote: > > From: Manuel Klimek [mailto:klimek at google.com] > > Sent: 26 June 2014 10:40 > > To: Daniel Sanders > > Cc: Alp Toker; Eli Bendersky; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Phabricator and private reviews > > > > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:34

On 04/28/2016 08:45 AM, Sergio Belkin wrote: > I've found some issues upgrading mysql, some people recommends run > mysql_upgrade. I wonder why such a script is not run from scriptlet of > mysql-server rpm. Back in the Dark Ages of the PostgreSQL RPMset (PostgreSQL 6.5), early in my time as RPM maintainer for the community PostgreSQL.org RPMset, I asked a very similar question of

On 25/06/2014 21:03, Eli Bendersky wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com > <mailto:alp at nuanti.com>> wrote: > > For whatever reason, patches posted to the Phabricator website > still aren't being sent to the mailing list, making it difficult > for us to review them. > > I've raised this issue a couple

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 3:30 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> wrote: > On 6/25/14, 5:15 PM, Vadim Chugunov wrote: > > In a recent review via Phabricator, I was receiving bounce notifications for > mail being sent to llvm-commits because of "Too many recipients to the > message", even though I am a subscriber. I wonder how common is that. > > >

On 28.04.2016 17:58, Lamar Owen wrote: > On 04/28/2016 08:45 AM, Sergio Belkin wrote: >> I've found some issues upgrading mysql, some people recommends run >> mysql_upgrade. I wonder why such a script is not run from scriptlet of >> mysql-server rpm. > Back in the Dark Ages of the PostgreSQL RPMset (PostgreSQL 6.5), early > in my time as RPM maintainer for the

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote: > > As I understand, some people legitimately use Phabricator for internal > > review, ... > > MIPS currently do this for patches that only touch the MIPS backend > (details can be found at > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140602/220385.html). >

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com> wrote: > Happened to me twice, it would be really nice if Phab would require > confirmation of patches created without CCing one of the two lists, > something like: > > "You have not CCed llvm-commits or cfe-commits, are you creating a private > patch?" > I filed