triage March 2015

triage@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
17 discussions

[Bug 126342] Meta bug: custom built kernels
by Red Hat Bugzilla 30 Mar '15

30 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=126342 123 <iorlov89(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|iorlov89(a)gmail.com | Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |michael.tremer(a)ipfire.org --- Comment #75 from Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)redhat.com> --- *** Bug 1207282 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=haHIoBHefB&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 204448] RPM verify not functional: "file's dependencies has changed since prelinking"
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Mar '15

26 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=204448 Berend De Schouwer <berend.de.schouwer(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |berend.de.schouwer(a)gmail.co | |m --- Comment #38 from Berend De Schouwer <berend.de.schouwer(a)gmail.com> --- Fedora 21 no longer installs prelink by default. See also: #1190810 #1184712 and https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1183 If prelink is not installed, rpm --verify should be ok. Note that Fedora 21 does still include prelink, it's just not installed by default anymore. It's not removed on upgrade. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IjSHn3f056&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 202210] Errorneously detected perl provides
by Red Hat Bugzilla 20 Mar '15

20 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=202210 Florian Festi <ffesti(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED CC| |ffesti(a)redhat.com Resolution|--- |DEFERRED Last Closed|2006-08-11 13:39:47 |2015-03-20 06:35:05 --- Comment #15 from Florian Festi <ffesti(a)redhat.com> --- Oh dear! This is ancient. Guess the overall situation has not improved that much. But without a concreate, contemporary case nothing is going to happen. Closing now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=a5Wc5YPONs&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

needinfo canceled: [Bug 562614] xcursorgen not found
by Red Hat Bugzilla 18 Mar '15

18 Mar '15

Product: Fedora Version: 19 Component: icon-slicer Sascha Silbe <sascha-web-bugzilla.redhat.com(a)silbe.org> has canceled Bug Zapper <triage(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>'s request for Sascha Silbe <sascha-web-bugzilla.redhat.com(a)silbe.org>'s needinfo: Bug 562614: xcursorgen not found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562614 --- Comment #6 from Sascha Silbe <sascha-web-bugzilla.redhat.com(a)silbe.org> --- I don't have have any Fedora VM running anymore, so I'd need to install Fedora first before I could verify the bug is still present. The bug is easy enough to reproduce, so anyone who cares about it can verify it.

1 0

[Bug 320971] scriptlet failed
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Mar '15

16 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=320971 Colin Walters <walters(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(walters(a)redhat.co | |m) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RGn0hOWVkO&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 115909] Do the right thing with the numlock state
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Mar '15

10 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=115909 --- Comment #43 from Robert Mason <nullpost-redhat(a)yahoo.co.uk> --- Yes that looks like the same bug, thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HSFYH0U67U&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 115909] Do the right thing with the numlock state
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Mar '15

10 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=115909 --- Comment #42 from Fred New <fred.new2911(a)gmail.com> --- I believe that the numlock light turning off during login is bug 1083642, even though that bug is against RHEL 7. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=oexVk4trDB&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 115909] Do the right thing with the numlock state
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Mar '15

10 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=115909 --- Comment #41 from Robert Mason <nullpost-redhat(a)yahoo.co.uk> --- I've managed to narrow down the exact behaviour: 1. Computer boots, numlock and the light is on. 2. On the login screen, numlock and the light is on. 3. Type my password, which includes a capital letter. After pressing shift the numlock light goes off! But it is actually still on. 4. Press the numlock key twice to get it on with the light also on. 5. Now pressing shift doesn't affect it. I do not think that pressing shift should cause the numlock light to turn off. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=f3l8NUdO4V&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 134638] RFE: Installer support for creating new LVs with non-linear segment types
by Red Hat Bugzilla 09 Mar '15

09 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=134638 David Lehman <dlehman(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(dlehman(a)redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #41 from David Lehman <dlehman(a)redhat.com> --- There has been no progress on this due to other work having higher priority. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UdTqVd1AFg&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 832853] Review Request: java3d - Java 3D
by Red Hat Bugzilla 09 Mar '15

09 Mar '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832853 --- Comment #29 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com> --- FWIW, even Sun/Oracle agrees that the "nuclear clause" makes that license non-free, as do the lawyers who've reviewed it in the past. In the not-too-distant past, Sun and Oracle were willing to relicense works containing the "nuclear clause" to omit that clause. It might be worth filing a bug with the relevant upstream to request relicensing there. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=lVxmoneEh7&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

triage March 2015