6:52 a.m.
I'm just trying to install kqemu-1.3.0-0.8.pre11.fc8.noarch but it
requires qemu >= 0.9.1 whereas the one available in fedora 8 is
qemu-0.9.0-7.fc8.
Eric
10:22 a.m.
Thorsten Leemhuis a écrit :
On 05.10.2008 08:52, Tanguy Eric wrote:
> I'm just trying to install kqemu-1.3.0-0.8.pre11.fc8.noarch but it
> requires qemu >= 0.9.1 whereas the one available in fedora 8 is
> qemu-0.9.0-7.fc8.
Should be fixed now.
CU
knurd
Perfect.
Now the least package i need livna is nvidia driver all other packages
are updated from rpmfusion-updates-testing.
Eric
10:38 a.m.
2008/10/5 Tanguy Eric <eric.tanguy(a)univ-nantes.fr>:
Thorsten Leemhuis a écrit :
>
> On 05.10.2008 08:52, Tanguy Eric wrote:
>>
>> I'm just trying to install kqemu-1.3.0-0.8.pre11.fc8.noarch but it
>> requires qemu >= 0.9.1 whereas the one available in fedora 8 is
>> qemu-0.9.0-7.fc8.
>
> Should be fixed now.
>
> CU
> knurd
Perfect.
Now the least package i need livna is nvidia driver all other packages are
updated from rpmfusion-updates-testing.
It seems safe to use the livna nvidia
drivers for now.
(actually I have livna and rpmfusion installed on my own workstations).
For the nvidia drivers, I have personnaly requested more time to have
some modifications done.(eventually)
So they will be available from rpmfusion in a week.
Nicolas (kwizart)
Eric
10:45 a.m.
On 05.10.2008 12:22, Tanguy Eric wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis a écrit :
> On 05.10.2008 08:52, Tanguy Eric wrote:
>> I'm just trying to install kqemu-1.3.0-0.8.pre11.fc8.noarch but it
>> requires qemu >= 0.9.1 whereas the one available in fedora 8 is
>> qemu-0.9.0-7.fc8.
> Should be fixed now.
Perfect.
Now the least package i need livna is nvidia driver all other packages
are updated from rpmfusion-updates-testing.
I talked to Stewart about it yesterday and we agreed that importing the
livna packages (inluding livna-config-display) in there current form is
the best and easiest for all, thus I plan to work on that over the next
few hours.
Note that Stewart and Kwizart are working on improved packages -- they
will be parallel installable, some are renamed and/or have other
improvements. Thus we'll likely see some changes in that area soon.
Having those changes in RPM Fusion right from the start would be nice,
but would slow down the RPM Fusion start down, which I#d say most if not
all us us want to avoid.
CU
knurd
11:46 a.m.
2008/10/5 Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info>:
I still doesn't agree. We can still have the parallele installable
scheme disabled
and the xorg-x11-drv-nvidia* packages modified. Thus the
livna-config-display modification to support this will be light.
The "eventually" means : we can also deceide to import the livna package as is.
that's what need to be deceided this week.
Note that Stewart and Kwizart are working on improved packages --
they will
be parallel installable, some are renamed and/or have other improvements.
Thus we'll likely see some changes in that area soon. Having those changes
in RPM Fusion right from the start would be nice, but would slow down the
RPM Fusion start down, which I#d say most if not all us us want to avoid.
But no
freshrpms packages have been imported yet. Are we really sure
we can leave the testing phase ?
I have some experiences with cinelerra and that's not the case, so
what to do with freshrpms packages ?
Maybe we need to have a date for rpmfusion launched. (once most packages get QA)
Nicolas (kwizart)
CU
knurd
6:01 p.m.
On 05.10.2008 13:46, KH KH wrote:
2008/10/5 Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info>:
I still doesn't agree.
Well, you and Stewart are maintaining the amd and nvidia graphics
drivers together. So you two have to sort it out. But I consider Stewart
the main maintainer and I just did what he told me when we discussed the
issue on IRC.
BTW a general note: I only imported those graphics drivers to F9 and
rawhide (and their kmods) that are known to work yet -- e.g. only the
main nvidia package. But everything is in F8
We can still have the parallele installable
scheme disabled and the xorg-x11-drv-nvidia* packages modified.
That afaics would might delay us for weeks and confuse people. Even now
people on IRC ask "where are the graphics drivers in RPM Fusion?"
And in general: we can realize what you are working on at any time; no
harm is done by importing the current stuff. Or, IOW: There is no need
that we have to do it together with the repo merger. It#s a totally
seperate issue
And in general: At least I'd much prefer to leave everything for F8 and
F9 as it is and do all that changes to make the drivers parallel
installable in devel only.
[...]
> Note that Stewart and Kwizart are working on improved packages -- they will
> be parallel installable, some are renamed and/or have other improvements.
> Thus we'll likely see some changes in that area soon. Having those changes
> in RPM Fusion right from the start would be nice, but would slow down the
> RPM Fusion start down, which I#d say most if not all us us want to avoid.
But no freshrpms packages have been imported yet. Are we really sure
we can leave the testing phase ?
I'd actually say we haven't really started the testing phase yet, as we
didn't announce one yet ;-) But nevertheless should work towards
bringing the repo in good shape as quickly as possible. Waiting for
packages foo or bar will kjust dalay things more in the ned and make
life more complicated for those that have to maintain their packages in
boths repos.
I have some experiences with cinelerra and that's not the case,
so
what to do with freshrpms packages ?
Maybe we need to have a date for rpmfusion launched. (once most packages get QA)
Yes, a target date would be nice. But I fear to set one right now -- we
haven't heard anything from thias for weeks and a lot of things are
blocked right now due to that. That is not nice now, but it will be a
really big problem if we have serious trouble during the start phase
that only thias can fix...
CU
knurd
5693
days inactive
5694
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
6 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Nicolas Chauvet -
Tanguy Eric -
Thorsten Leemhuis