November 2016 - rpmfusion-developers

by Sérgio Basto

use include configuration in .cfg , if we use include all .cfg will be more clean, less code and much more pratic. I'd like see if anyone have an explanation about why we replace basearch and releasever ? any thing that I'm missing ? Sérgio M. Basto (2): Use include include statement Do not replace basearch and releasever el-round.sh | 8 ++++---- round.sh | 8 ++++---- template_init | 3 +++ 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) create mode 100644 template_init -- 2.5.5

7 years, 5 months

1
3
0 / 0

[Bug 3887] Review request: display-dhammapada - Displays a verse from the Dhammapada

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3887 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |EXPIRED --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> --- No news, please re-open when updated. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

7 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 30] New: Tracker : Sponsorship Request

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30 Summary: Tracker : Sponsorship Request Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: lxtnow(a)gmail.com CC: lxtnow(a)gmail.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 This is a tracker bug for sponsorship requests in RPM Fusion. All new RPM Fusion contributors who need to be sponsored should block this bug. SPONSORS: When you accept the responsibility of sponsoring, please take it off of this list. Note: All members who already contribute to the Fedora Project (Packaging Side) no need to request for sponsorship. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.

7 years, 5 months

1
87
0 / 0

Plan for RPM Fusion f25 GA

by Nicolas Chauvet

Hi, As we are nearing the f25 release (Go/NoGo meeting is this Thusday in Fedora). Here is the plan for RPM Fusion. I plan to make the very last push of packages for f25 GA repo this Thursday, and the move to release layout on Sunday at last. I won't be available on Friday/Saturday, so please do not make untested content after Thursday. (specially if Fedora is Gold). I will probably move build into updates at that time. About x265 late update, I expect it to be done as updates as an exception (even if there is an ABI break). Given the limited number of packages to rebuild. And if it goes smooth, maybe update ffmpeg-3.2 along. So this can be done after the release. Please remember that if you have something in mind as a blocker, use https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4313 Thx -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

7 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

x265 updates ?

by Sérgio Basto

Hello, we got new version 2.1 [1] dnf repoquery --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rpmfusion-{non,}free-rawhide \ --whatrequires x265-libs --alldeps --srpm | sort | \ grep src$ | sed 's/$-[^-]\+$\{2\}$//' | uniq avidemux ffmpeg gstreamer1-plugins-bad-freeworld vlc x265 Also bug [2] is opened almost 3 months ago , may we update F25 with 2.1 ? I will perform some tests now, while is not decided ... Thanks, [1] https://ftp.videolan.org/pub/videolan/x265/ [2] https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4199 -- Sérgio M. B.

7 years, 5 months

2
3
0 / 0

Updating ffmpeg to 3.2 in rawhide

by Julian Sikorski

Hi list, ffmpeg-3.2 was released two days ago. As mentioned by Nicolas, this update is only in scope for F26 currently. The good news is that it is looking better than I ever remember ffmpeg rebase to be: - there are currently 48 ffmpeg dependencies in rpmfusion git - 46 build fine against 3.2 with no changes required - kodi requires an upstream patch [1] - gpac fails due to what looks to be an openssl issue (undefined reference to `SSLeay_add_all_algorithms'), likely caused by the openssl-1.0.2j → openssl-1.1.0b bump in Fedora. build.log attached. Given the above, I would be looking at updating ffmpeg and rebuilding its dependencies next weekend at the latest. Should anyone disagree, please speak up. Best regards, Julian [1] https://github.com/xbmc/xbmc/commit/2e2e7a5e7ff18dcf3ba3fae2d2ea6d0d9b42b7ea

7 years, 5 months

4
8
0 / 0

[Bug 2444] Review request: mp3fs - A dynamic MP encoding fuse file-system

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2444 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #29 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> --- (testing using fedora-review flag) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

7 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2444] Review request: mp3fs - A dynamic MP encoding fuse file-system

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2444 --- Comment #28 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> --- Please note that we cannot create el7 branches yet. Please create a pkgdb request, thoses will be proceeded once possible. Thx -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

7 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2444] Review request: mp3fs - A dynamic MP encoding fuse file-system

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2444 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|33 | Referenced Bugs: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33 [Bug 33] Tracker: Packages awaitting CVS Administration -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

7 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 351] New: Review request: vmware-requirements - Installs packages needed for VMware's virtualization programs to run

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=351 Summary: Review request: vmware-requirements - Installs packages needed for VMware's virtualization programs to run Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: dtimms(a)iinet.net.au CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec URL: http://members.iinet.net.au/~timmsy/vmware-requirements/vmware-requiremen... SRPM URL: http://members.iinet.net.au/~timmsy/vmware-requirements/vmware-requiremen... Description: Use this package to install the packages required to run vmware locally. This package does not include the free vmware-server or vmware-server-console package itself. They can be obtained from the vmware website. Can't be in Fedora: - it's a meta package - it enables use of non fedora software - the proper packaging should really be done by the upstream author. - the upstream is not open source - the upstream do not support the fedora distribution - FESCO discussed it recently, and voted that helper packages for third party apps shall be blocked from Fedora: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478007#c17 The original Fedora review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478007 FESCO item tracking: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/35 FESCO discussion should show up soon for 2009-01-30: http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/fesco/ ===== rpmlint: vmware-requirements.src:34: E: hardcoded-library-path in /lib/security/pam_unix.so vmware-requirements.src:51: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 vmware-requirements.src:53: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 vmware-requirements.src:55: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/libXtst.so.6 vmware-requirements.src:57: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/libXt.so.6 vmware-requirements.i386: W: no-documentation vmware-requirements.i386: E: no-binary vmware-requirements-server.i386: W: no-documentation vmware-requirements-server.i386: E: devel-dependency kernel-devel 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 2 warnings. ===== So, do we want to allow helper packages like this in RPM Fusion ? Note it does not Require: any packages external to Fedora/RPM Fusion, nor does it attempt to download them. Others have mentioned that other external no source apps might include skype etc, that could receive similar RPM Fusion packaging assistance ? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

7 years, 5 months

1
9
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers November 2016