Re: Fedora linux 7

Thusitha Fernando <thusitha535@xxxxxxxxx> · Tue, 1 Sep 2009 10:13:02 +0530

why old linux system now available Fedora12 alpha version Download and try it 

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:08 AM, liuliu1103 <liuliu1103@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

I want to buy fedora linux 7  system .But I  can't bought is recently
Please tell me who have fedroa linux7 system,
I am from China 
tel:13771201604

 > -----原始邮件-----
> 发件人: fedora-devel-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx
> 发送时间: 2009年9月1日 星期二
> 收件人: fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> 抄送: 
> 主题: fedora-devel-list Digest, Vol 66, Issue 126
> 
> Send fedora-devel-list mailing list submissions to
> 	fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	fedora-devel-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	fedora-devel-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of fedora-devel-list digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages (Jindrich Novy)
>    2. Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages (Patrice Dumas)
>    3. Re: #! /usr/bin/perl preferred (P?draig Brady)
>    4. Re: maven2 broken deps? (Re: rawhide report: 20090830
>       changes) (Andrew Overholt)
>    5. fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
>       (Maz The Northener)
>    6. Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
>       (Jakub Jelinek)
>    7. Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
>       (Maz The Northener)
>    8. Correction: #! /usr/bin/perl NOT preferred (Stepan Kasal)
>    9. Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
>       (Maz The Northener)
>   10. Re: how to determain those no longer required packages
>       (James Antill)
>   11. Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
>       (Ulrich Drepper)
>   12. Re: how to determain those no longer required packages
>       (Seth Vidal)
>   13. Re: Dragonfly Mail Agent (Casey Dahlin)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:32:01 +0200
> From: Jindrich Novy <jnovy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <20090831113201.GC3138@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:14:33PM +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
> > Package texlive-dvips is obsoleted by texlive, trying to install
> > texlive-2009-0.3.20090827.fc11.i586 instead
> > 
> > This is obviously wrong obsolete, as dvips is actually provided by
> > texlive-dvips, but for some reason unless I tell yum to specifically
> > install the noarch package (by running yum install
> > texlive-dvips.noarch), it insists on obsoleting it by texlive (i.e. when
> > doing yum install texlive-dvips)... Otherwise the installation as well
> > as short testing went smooth.
> > 
> 
> Indeed. It will be fixed in the next build.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jindrich
> 
> > Martin
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > -- 
> > fedora-devel-list mailing list
> > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jindrich Novy <jnovy@xxxxxxxxxx>   http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:48:51 +0200
> From: Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: another spin of TeX Live 2009 packages
> To: fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Message-ID: <20090831114851.GA20794@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I haven't followed closely the new packaging of texlive, so you should 
> take my comments with caution...
> 
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 01:15:21PM +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> > 
> > The new packages obsolete the ancient tetex stuff:
> > tetex-tex4ht
> 
> I think that the stand-alone tex4ht could be better than the texlive one.
> It was updated many time a year in the past (but it may change).
> 
> > tetex-elvevier
> 
> In the past, the version in CTAN of this package used to lag a lot. I'd
> still advise taking the files from the web, especially since there is also
> the old style in the stand-alone package.
> 
> > and these utilities:
> > dvipdfm
> > dvipdfmx
> > dvipng
> > xdvi
> > xdvipdfmx
> 
> Haven't some of those an upstream different from texlive?
> 
> --
> Pat
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:39:48 +0100
> From: P?draig Brady <P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: #! /usr/bin/perl preferred
> To: Fedora development <fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>,	Fedora perl
> 	development team <fedora-perl-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <4A9BC494.2040004@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
> 
> Stepan Kasal wrote:
> > Hello,
> >    at certain periods of time, it was recommended to use #!/usr/bin/env .
> > 
> > Some people consider it ugly.  (The humble opinion of the author of
> > this mail is the same.)
> > 
> > Currently there is popular mood to remove "/usr/bin/env python", see
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SystemPythonExecutablesUseSystemPython
> 
> That page says there "Should be no user-visible change for non-Python experts."
> However I notice that the output from `ps` lists the actual script name, rather
> than just "python". The same is true for perl. This is a worth mentioning both
> for the benefit it provides and the minimal chance for breaking stuff.
> 
> cheers,
> Pádraig.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:20:15 -0400
> From: Andrew Overholt <overholt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: maven2 broken deps? (Re: rawhide report: 20090830
> 	changes)
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <20090831132010.GA2773@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> * Alex Lancaster <alexl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-08-31 04:21]:
> > >>>>> Rawhide Report  writes:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > A whole slew of broken deps caused by a new maven2 have been sitting
> > in rawhide for about the last week with no attempted rebuilds to fix
> > it.  Anybody know what's going on?
> 
> This was my fault.  Sorry.  I mistakenly added some versioned
> dependencies on things that I have yet to have a chance to rebuild.  I
> didn't notice it with my local builds and was progressing on the rest of
> the work hoping to finish very soon.  It will be done this week but I 
> can untag the latest build if it's bothering people.
> 
> Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:45:17 +0300
> From: Maz The Northener <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> 	<f5100bbb0908310645k362a2824jaf754e955d7a8bf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> Hi dee Ho peeps.
> 
> I found out that after I updated my F11 a few days ago, fscanf started
> missbehaving.
> 
> I filed a bug report in bugzilla. (bug 520414)
> 
> but since I have not heard anyone else yelling about this, I thought
> that maybe this is my fault after all... Any suggestions how to verify
> this?
> 
> (I do not need any help overcoming it, workaround is quite
> straightforward for me - remove GNU extension usage. I just would like
> to know if the bug is on my side.)
> 
> -Matti
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:10:10 +0200
> From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <20090831141010.GC2884@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 04:45:17PM +0300, Maz The Northener wrote:
> > I found out that after I updated my F11 a few days ago, fscanf started
> > missbehaving.
> > 
> > I filed a bug report in bugzilla. (bug 520414)
> > 
> > but since I have not heard anyone else yelling about this, I thought
> > that maybe this is my fault after all... Any suggestions how to verify
> > this?
> > 
> > (I do not need any help overcoming it, workaround is quite
> > straightforward for me - remove GNU extension usage. I just would like
> > to know if the bug is on my side.)
> 
> This is just a user error.  You are not using any feature test macros
> (see
> info libc 'Feature Test Macros'
> ), and with that glibc headers when not using strict ISO C modes (-ansi,
> -std=c89, -std=c99) default to _POSIX_C_SOURCE=200809L in recent glibcs,
> which among other things mean XPG6 compliant *scanf.  As %a is a POSIX
> floating point in hex specifier, it conflicts with the GNU extension
> where a if followed by s, S or [ is treated as allocatable modifier.
> So, to make your code work either compile with -D_GNU_SOURCE, or, better,
> just use POSIX 2008 way, %m[a-z].
> 
> 	Jakub
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:26:05 +0300
> From: Maz The Northener <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
> To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx>, Development discussions related
> 	to Fedora	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> 	<f5100bbb0908310726v14dd8b6chdfe0dddbfb399e8d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> Thanks for quick answer :) I was just puzzled because this seemed to
> work without extra defines with older glibc.
> 
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Jakub Jelinek<jakub@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 04:45:17PM +0300, Maz The Northener wrote:
> >> I found out that after I updated my F11 a few days ago, fscanf started
> >> missbehaving.
> >>
> >> I filed a bug report in bugzilla. (bug 520414)
> >>
> >> but since I have not heard anyone else yelling about this, I thought
> >> that maybe this is my fault after all... Any suggestions how to verify
> >> this?
> >>
> >> (I do not need any help overcoming it, workaround is quite
> >> straightforward for me - remove GNU extension usage. I just would like
> >> to know if the bug is on my side.)
> >
> > This is just a user error.  You are not using any feature test macros
> > (see
> > info libc 'Feature Test Macros'
> > ), and with that glibc headers when not using strict ISO C modes (-ansi,
> > -std=c89, -std=c99) default to _POSIX_C_SOURCE=200809L in recent glibcs,
> > which among other things mean XPG6 compliant *scanf.  As %a is a POSIX
> > floating point in hex specifier, it conflicts with the GNU extension
> > where a if followed by s, S or [ is treated as allocatable modifier.
> > So, to make your code work either compile with -D_GNU_SOURCE, or, better,
> > just use POSIX 2008 way, %m[a-z].
> >
> >        Jakub
> >
> > --
> > fedora-devel-list mailing list
> > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> -Matti "Maz" Vaittinen
> CWF coding team leader
> http://www.curlysworldoffreeware.com/
> 
> BrakesAreForCowards!!!
> When you feel blue, no one sees your tears... When your down, no one
> understands your struggle...
> When you feel happy, no one notices your smile...
> But fart just once...
> I would love to create a freeware game with C - unless I was working at NSN.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:27:55 +0200
> From: Stepan Kasal <skasal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Correction: #! /usr/bin/perl NOT preferred
> To: fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Fedora perl development team <fedora-perl-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <20090831142755.GA3935@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> Hello all.
> 
> In short:  "#!/usr/bin/env perl" is OK in Fedora.
> 
> In my previous mail, I asked you to delete the (/usr)?/bin/env calls
> from #! lines of Fedora scripts.
> 
> I would like to withdraw that request.
> 
> A discussion followed that post on fedora-perl-devel-list, which
> actually proved that "/usr/bin/env perl" is the preferred
> alternative, not the deprecated one.
> 
> But the most important bit of information has been pointed out by
> Ralf Corsepius:
> Fedora Packaging Committee considered a proposal to forbid
> /usr/bin/env on 2009-08-19, but it did not agreed upon it.
> 
> (For details, see
> http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-08-19/fedora-meeting.2009-08-19-16.01.log.html#l-38
> )
> 
> Both alternatives are OK, follow your own preferrence.
> 
> Have a nice day,
> 	Stepan
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:31:38 +0300
> From: Maz The Northener <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
> To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx>, Development discussions related
> 	to Fedora	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> 	<f5100bbb0908310731x53d699d4tcb9e834b21148b8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> And just a öast nail in coffin: I tried with -D_GNU_SOURCE and it
> worked like you told.
> 
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Maz The
> Northener<mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Thanks for quick answer :) I was just puzzled because this seemed to
> > work without extra defines with older glibc.
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Jakub Jelinek<jakub@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 04:45:17PM +0300, Maz The Northener wrote:
> >>> I found out that after I updated my F11 a few days ago, fscanf started
> >>> missbehaving.
> >>>
> >>> I filed a bug report in bugzilla. (bug 520414)
> >>>
> >>> but since I have not heard anyone else yelling about this, I thought
> >>> that maybe this is my fault after all... Any suggestions how to verify
> >>> this?
> >>>
> >>> (I do not need any help overcoming it, workaround is quite
> >>> straightforward for me - remove GNU extension usage. I just would like
> >>> to know if the bug is on my side.)
> >>
> >> This is just a user error.  You are not using any feature test macros
> >> (see
> >> info libc 'Feature Test Macros'
> >> ), and with that glibc headers when not using strict ISO C modes (-ansi,
> >> -std=c89, -std=c99) default to _POSIX_C_SOURCE=200809L in recent glibcs,
> >> which among other things mean XPG6 compliant *scanf.  As %a is a POSIX
> >> floating point in hex specifier, it conflicts with the GNU extension
> >> where a if followed by s, S or [ is treated as allocatable modifier.
> >> So, to make your code work either compile with -D_GNU_SOURCE, or, better,
> >> just use POSIX 2008 way, %m[a-z].
> >>
> >>        Jakub
> >>
> >> --
> >> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> >> fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > -Matti "Maz" Vaittinen
> > CWF coding team leader
> > http://www.curlysworldoffreeware.com/
> >
> > BrakesAreForCowards!!!
> > When you feel blue, no one sees your tears... When your down, no one
> > understands your struggle...
> > When you feel happy, no one notices your smile...
> > But fart just once...
> > I would love to create a freeware game with C - unless I was working at NSN.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> -Matti "Maz" Vaittinen
> CWF coding team leader
> http://www.curlysworldoffreeware.com/
> 
> BrakesAreForCowards!!!
> When you feel blue, no one sees your tears... When your down, no one
> understands your struggle...
> When you feel happy, no one notices your smile...
> But fart just once...
> I would love to create a freeware game with C - unless I was working at NSN.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:42:12 -0400
> From: James Antill <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: how to determain those no longer required packages
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <1251729732.22005.35.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> 
> On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 19:06 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > >>>>> "AT" == Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > 
> > AT> I don't think apt traces whether a packages was a pulled in manually
> > AT> or automatically, does it?
> > 
> > yum does keep track of many things in the yumdb and I think the "reason"
> > key is supposed to track this, but for me it seems reason is always
> > "user".  I think the intent is to track packages which were installed
> > because the user requested them directly separately from packages which
> > were pulled in purely because of dependencies.
> 
>  Yes, the reason attribute in yumdb is there primarily to start on
> "solving" this "problem".
>  yumdb hasn't been around an entire release yet, which makes it's data
> somewhat problematic (and the testing somewhat limited). Also atm. we
> don't carry reason=dep across updates, so if you do "yum update" with a
> new version of a package you got as a dep. that would be considered a
> user install of the new package. Both of which should explain why almost
> nothing has reason=depÂ¹.
>  Atm. I have:
> 
> % yumdb search reason dep
> Loaded plugins: presto
> fipscheck-1.2.0-1a.fc11.x86_64
>      reason = dep
> 
> ...so it does work, at what it does atm.
> 
>  Probably the sanest request here is that if you do:
> 
> 1. yum install blah
> 2. <try out blah, don't like it>
> 3. yum remove blah
> 
> ...you don't get rid of any extra stuff you got with blah, hopefully
> "yum history undo" will solve that in a better way by recording what
> happened at #1 and undoing it instead of trying to piece together what
> might have happened at #1 after the fact.
> 
> 
> Â¹ It's also true that saving 1 cent of disk space isn't at the top of my
> list of things to do.
> 
> -- 
> James Antill <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Fedora
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 11
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 07:43:13 -0700
> From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: fscanf problem in glibc shipped with latest F11 updates.
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <4A9BE181.2020201@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
> 
> On 08/31/2009 07:26 AM, Maz The Northener wrote:
> > Thanks for quick answer :) I was just puzzled because this seemed to
> > work without extra defines with older glibc.
> 
> Only by accident.  We had no C99-compatibility version of *scanf in 
> those older versions.  We have now.
> 
> -- 
> âž§ Ulrich Drepper âž§ Red Hat, Inc. âž§ 444 Castro St âž§ Mountain View, CA â –
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 12
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:47:07 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Seth Vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: how to determain those no longer required packages
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> 	<alpine.LFD.2.00.0908311046170.16127@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, James Antill wrote:
> 
> > ...you don't get rid of any extra stuff you got with blah, hopefully
> > "yum history undo" will solve that in a better way by recording what
> > happened at #1 and undoing it instead of trying to piece together what
> > might have happened at #1 after the fact.
> >
> >
> 
> let's not go promising things like yum history undo which are not 
> committed, not tested and, in the case of large update/install 
> transactions, unlikely to do what the user wants.
> 
> -sv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 13
> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 11:05:21 -0400
> From: Casey Dahlin <cdahlin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Dragonfly Mail Agent
> To: Development discussions related to Fedora
> 	<fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <4A9BE6B1.9010202@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> On 08/30/2009 12:11 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > 2009/8/30 Christoph Höger <choeger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> is dma packaged by someone? That would be the first step and I would
> >> happily test that thing (having postfix installed after Paul Frields
> >> advice which works well).
> >>
> > I think I'll do the packaging -- it's in Dragonfly's Git, and the one
> > thing I regret about Git vis-a-vis Subversion is that you cannot just
> > grab a subdirectory, so our source verification might get a bit
> > tricky.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> 
> Maybe if you ask nicely they will submodule it.
> 
> --CJD
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
> 
> End of fedora-devel-list Digest, Vol 66, Issue 126
> **************************************************

--

fedora-devel-list mailing list

fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx

https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

-- 
thusitha535@xxxxxxxxx

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list