devel November 2010

devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

268 participants
210 discussions

upgrading RH 9 system->Fedora with iso files and apt only
by Didier Casse 17 Jan '22

17 Jan '22

I have the yarrow's iso files on my HD in a RH9 system. Let's say I want to upgrade selected packages using an "apt-get install" pointing to my iso-mounted files, how do I do it? i.e I mount the iso into some /mnt/yarrow1, /mnt/yarrow 2 etc.. Then what is the complete procedure to make my apt look into my own HD to upgrade packages. Can anybody redirect me to the correct resource or some literature hanging on the web? Thanks. Assume also that I do not wish to burn CDs! I do not want to use apt-cdrom. Thanks. With kind regards, Didier. --- PhD student Singapore Synchrotron Light Source (SSLS) 5 Research Link, Singapore 117603 Email: slsbdfc at nus dot edu dot sg \or\ didierbe at sps dot nus dot edu dot sg Website: http://ssls.nus.edu.sg

6 9

orphan most of my packages
by Andy Shevchenko 16 Sep '12

16 Sep '12

Hello, I have no more time to support the following packages in the Fedora. jack-audio-connection-kit -- The Jack Audio Connection Kit klamav -- Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop man-pages-uk -- Ukrainian man pages from the Linux Documentation Project python-alsa -- Python binding for the ALSA library qstat -- Real-time Game Server Status for FPS game servers uniconvertor -- Universal vector graphics translator -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko

6 10

bugzilla bugzappers?
by Bert Desmet 07 Sep '11

07 Sep '11

hi! This is something I got in my mail box today. As I don't have a valid answer for this, maybe someone else can answer for me? cheers, Bert the url of the blog of the guy: http://www.krisbuytaert.be/blog/ == the mail == Dear Fedoracommunity, Over the course of the day I recieved 22^3 mails from your friendly Bug Zapper. Most of those bugs where bugs I had reported upon crashes using bug-buddy. Bugs on different desktop tools such as .. synergy, evolution, gwibber , gnome-settings and probably some others I do understand that I development goes on and on .. and your fancy devs don't care anymore about bugs I reported on Fedora 12 as they are all hacking on Fedora 15. But what I don't get is that non of these bugs was ever touched, they've been automatically created , and automatically closed <a href="http://tieguy.org/blog/2004/09/">Luis</a> already told us ages ago .. that every project needs a bugmaster apparently Fedora replaced that bugmaster with a Bug Zapper. So can someone please explain my why I should continue to try to improve Fedora by reporting bugs ?

38 137

[ANNOUNCE] bfq disk I/O scheduler
by Paolo Valente 18 Apr '11

18 Apr '11

Hi, I have been working for a few years (with Fabio Checconi) on a disk scheduler providing definitely lower latencies than cfq, as well as a higher throughput with most of the test workloads we used (or the same throughput as cfq with the other workloads). We named this scheduler bfq (budget fair queueing). I hope this is the right list for announcing this work. One of the things we measured in our tests is the cold-cache execution time of a command as, e.g., "bash -c exit", "xterm /bin/true" or "konsole -e /bin/true", while the disk was also accessed by different combinations of sequential, or random, readers and/or writers. Depending on which of these background workloads was used, these execution times were five to nine times lower with bfq under 2.6.32. Under 2.6.35 they were instead from six to fourteen times lower. The highest price paid for these lower latencies was a 20% loss of aggregated disk throughput for konsole in case of background workloads made only of sequential requests (due to the fact that bfq of course privileges, more than cfq, the seeky IO needed to load konsole and its dependencies). In contrast, with shorter commands, as bash or xterm, bfq also provided up to 30% higher aggregated throughput. We saw from 15% to 30% higher aggregated throughput also in our only-aggregated-throughput tests. You can find in [1] all the details on our tests and on other nice features of bfq, such as the fact that it perfectly distributes the disk throughput as desired, independently of disk physical parameters like, e.g., ZBR. in [1] you can also find a detailed description of bfq and a short report on the maturity level of the code (TODO list), plus all the scripts used for the tests. The results I mentioned so far have been achieved with the last version of bfq, released about two months ago as patchsets for 2.6.33 or 2.6.34. From a few days a patchset for 2.6.35 is available too, as well as a backport to 2.6.32. The latter has been prepared by Mauro Andreolini, who also helped me a lot with debugging. All these patches can be found here [2]. Mauro also built a binary kernel package for current lucid, and hosted it into a PPA, which can be found here [3]. A few days after being released, this version of bfq has been introduced as the default disk scheduler in the Zen Kernel. It has been adopted as the default disk scheduler in Gentoo Linux too. I also recorded downloads from users with other distributions, as, e.g., Ubuntu and ArchLinux. As of now we received only positive feedbacks from the users. Paolo [1] http://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/disk_sched/ [2] http://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/disk_sched/sources.php [3] Ubuntu PPA: ppa:mauro-andreolini/ubuntu-kernel-bfq

3 2

Re: Non-responsive maintainer - Chris Ricker
by Jaroslav Skarvada 11 Apr '11

11 Apr '11

> > I have to second someone taking over rrdtool. I handed it off to > > Chris > > a while back, but have still done far more work on it since then > than > > he has, and I've not seen him touch an rrdtool bz in ages. :( > > > > (And no, I don't want maintainership back.) > > I am ready to take it (I already own it in RHEL). I think all steps in > non-responsive maintainer process have been fulfilled Please could any FESCo member approve the takeover of rrdtool (according to nonresponsive package maintainers policy)? Or should I open ticket for this? Thanks Jaroslav

4 5

Re: Testing zsh completion for fedpkg
by Ben Boeckel 06 Apr '11

06 Apr '11

Christopher Aillon <caillon(a)redhat.com> wrote: > I missed the first notice of this go by, but I use zsh so can play with > it in the next few days. Can you post the updates so I don't hit the > same bugs you did? Sure. Attached. The bugs were mainly with zsh conventions and getting the sed command for the branch selection corrected. --Ben

3 5

how to speed up mock?
by Farkas Levente 03 Apr '11

03 Apr '11

hi, we use mock for local package build, but it's very slow. now we install a new host just for mock with 8core, ram disks etc. it seems it still slow. first of all most of the time mock use only one 1 core of the cpu. is there any way to speed up different part of the mock build process? thanks in advance. ps. anyway is there any better place to discuss it? -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"

10 19

HEADS UP! Ohloh Fedora repositories
by Peter Lemenkov 11 Jan '11

11 Jan '11

Hello All! I'm currently in process of automatic enlisting of all ~10K Fedora Git repos at Ohloh. Right now roughly 7% of repositories were added and overall process will be finished in a 20-30 hours (it takes me about 5-10 seconds to properly add repository, and I don't want to speedup this process - to prevent Ohloh from accidental DoS). Just FYI. -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.

6 9

F15 Feature - convert as many service init files as possible to the native SystemD services
by Michał Piotrowski 24 Dec '10

24 Dec '10

Hi, I would like to help with scripts conversion. IMO the conversion action should be coordinated. Comments, thoughts? Kind regards, Michal

22 68

Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2010-10-26) NEW TIME!
by Kevin Fenzi 22 Dec '10

22 Dec '10

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting tomorrow at 18:30UTC (2:30pm EDT) in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net. = Followups = #topic Updates policy #351 Create a policy for updates - status report on implementation https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/351 #382 Implementing Stable Release Vision https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/382 * Need work on stats to see trends with new policy. * Need to investigate a 'new features' repo setup. * Need to look at enforcement = New business = #416 Set EOL Date For Fedora 12 https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/416 * Since F14 was pushed out a week, should we move EOL for F12 as well? Elections coming up. * Note that FESCo (and FAMSCo and Board) elections are coming up. = Fedora Engineering Services tickets = https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-engineering-services/report/6 = Open Floor = For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The report of the agenda items can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9 If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco, e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting. kevin

24 49

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel November 2010