Am 08.08.2013 23:41, schrieb David:
> On 8/8/2013 5:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> who cares in context of the official release?
>
>> these are *completly* different binaries with completly different
>> shared libraries and a different compiler, they have *nothing*
>> common with distribution pa
Am 08.08.2013 23:12, schrieb David:
> I can not say anything about "extensions installed with yum". I use
> the official extensions from Mozilla. And they work regardless what
> Fedora does.
well, so don't complainif you can't say anything
>> "long before* is laughable in case of FF23
> I was u
Am 08.08.2013 23:04, schrieb David:
> On 8/8/2013 4:47 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
>> On 08/08/2013 01:34 PM, David wrote:
>>> I can certainly agree with not following the Daily/Nightly, Alphas and
>>> Betas but the official(s) IMHO should arrive more quickly.
>>
>> The people doing the packaging and test
Am 08.08.2013 22:56, schrieb David:
> On 8/8/2013 4:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> Am 08.08.2013 22:34, schrieb David:
>>> On 8/8/2013 4:26 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> I was wondering if there was some problem here with Fedora
>>>
mostly bad timing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show
Am 08.08.2013 22:34, schrieb David:
> On 8/8/2013 4:26 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> I was wondering if there was some problem here with Fedora
>
>> mostly bad timing
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977325
>
> Not to insult anyone but... This same situation happens with each
> off
Am 08.08.2013 21:50, schrieb David:
> On 8/8/2013 3:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> * patience * koji * yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update
>> firefox\* xulrunner\* thunderbird\*
>
>> choose one of them :-)
>
>> the 'regular user' implicitly chooses option 1
>
> True. But they are not yet '
Am 08.08.2013 20:48, schrieb David:
> Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and Thunderbird
> 17.08?
[harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ rpm -q thunderbird
thunderbird-17.0.8-1.fc18.x86_64
[harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ rpm -q firefox
firefox-23.0-1.fc18.x86_64
[harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ rpm -q xulrunner
Am 08.08.2013 21:34, schrieb David:
> On 8/8/2013 2:50 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> Am 08.08.2013 20:48, schrieb David:
>>> Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and
>>> Thunderbird 17.08?
>
>> [harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ rpm -q thunderbird
>> thunderbird-17.0.8-1.fc18.x86_64
>
>>
On 09.08.2013, David wrote:
> Joe did you not read where I said that I was asking for the 'regular
> Fedora Community users', sucjh as you, and not for myself? And that I
> was asking because so many other Linux distributions already have them.
> I already have the latest releases.
Updates usual
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 05:04:56PM -0400, David wrote:
> On 8/8/2013 4:47 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> > On 08/08/2013 01:34 PM, David wrote:
> >> I can certainly agree with not following the Daily/Nightly, Alphas and
> >> Betas but the official(s) IMHO should arrive more quickly.
> >
> > The people doin
On 08/08/2013 03:26 PM, David wrote:
What little 'programing skills' I have, or had, was Dos Basic, IBM OS/2
Warp Rexx, and copying Commodore 64 programs from magazines. Long lost
ancient skills. :-)
I certainly did not intend to hurt your feelings. Or those of anyone else.
Don't worry, yo
On 8/8/2013 6:01 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/08/2013 02:44 PM, David wrote:
>> Gee. That I did not know. So you help here then? As a maintainer or
>> something?
>
> No. My programming skills are several decades out of date. I help (or
> try to) by sharing my computer and Linux knowledge and by t
On 8/8/2013 6:09 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:18 PM, David wrote:
>> Thank you for that. So tell me wwy the Xulrunner dependency for Firefox
>> came out right away, it alwyas does, and Firefox was delayed? As it
>> always is.
>
> It looks like the maintainer made a mis
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:18 PM, David wrote:
> Thank you for that. So tell me wwy the Xulrunner dependency for Firefox
> came out right away, it alwyas does, and Firefox was delayed? As it
> always is.
It looks like the maintainer made a mistake and accidentally bumped
the version in the RPM wron
On 08/08/2013 02:44 PM, David wrote:
Gee. That I did not know. So you help here then? As a maintainer or
something?
No. My programming skills are several decades out of date. I help (or
try to) by sharing my computer and Linux knowledge and by trying to find
answers to questions. Or, to pu
On 8/8/2013 5:37 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/08/2013 02:08 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
>> Otherwise, it takes a couple days for us to test updates and get them
>> into the stable repository. A two-day turnaround on something that
>> updates as often as Firefox is perfectly reasonable.
>
> And,
On 8/8/2013 5:35 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/08/2013 02:04 PM, David wrote:
>> Joe did you not read where I said that I was asking for the 'regular
>> Fedora Community users', sucjh as you, and not for myself? And that I
>> was asking because so many other Linux distributions already have them.
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/2013 5:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 08.08.2013 23:12, schrieb David:
>> I can not say anything about "extensions installed with yum". I
>> use the official extensions from Mozilla. And they work
>> regardless what Fedora does.
>
> wel
On 08/08/2013 02:08 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
Otherwise, it takes a couple days for us to test updates and get them
into the stable repository. A two-day turnaround on something that
updates as often as Firefox is perfectly reasonable.
And, if you don't have the skills to do the packaging,
On 08/08/2013 02:04 PM, David wrote:
Joe did you not read where I said that I was asking for the 'regular
Fedora Community users', sucjh as you, and not for myself? And that I
was asking because so many other Linux distributions already have them.
I already have the latest releases.
What makes
On 8/8/2013 5:08 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:34 PM, David wrote:
>> Not to insult anyone but... This same situation happens with each
>> official Mozilla release.
>>
>> I can certainly agree with not following the Daily/Nightly, Alphas and
>> Betas but the official(s)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/2013 5:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 08.08.2013 23:04, schrieb David:
>> On 8/8/2013 4:47 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
>>> On 08/08/2013 01:34 PM, David wrote:
I can certainly agree with not following the Daily/Nightly,
Alphas and Betas b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/2013 5:07 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 08.08.2013 22:56, schrieb David:
>> On 8/8/2013 4:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>> Am 08.08.2013 22:34, schrieb David:
On 8/8/2013 4:26 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> I was wondering if there w
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:34 PM, David wrote:
> Not to insult anyone but... This same situation happens with each
> official Mozilla release.
>
> I can certainly agree with not following the Daily/Nightly, Alphas and
> Betas but the official(s) IMHO should arrive more quickly.
*All* Fedora updates
On 8/8/2013 4:47 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/08/2013 01:34 PM, David wrote:
>> I can certainly agree with not following the Daily/Nightly, Alphas and
>> Betas but the official(s) IMHO should arrive more quickly.
>
> The people doing the packaging and testing aren't exactly getting paid
> for their
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/2013 4:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 08.08.2013 22:34, schrieb David:
>> On 8/8/2013 4:26 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
I was wondering if there was some problem here with Fedora
>>
>>> mostly bad timing
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/s
On 08/08/2013 01:34 PM, David wrote:
I can certainly agree with not following the Daily/Nightly, Alphas and
Betas but the official(s) IMHO should arrive more quickly.
The people doing the packaging and testing aren't exactly getting paid
for their work. If you want the new releases available
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/2013 4:26 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 08.08.2013 21:50, schrieb David:
>> On 8/8/2013 3:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> * patience * koji * yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update
>>> firefox\* xulrunner\* thunderbird\*
>>
>>> choose one
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/2013 3:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 08.08.2013 21:34, schrieb David:
>> On 8/8/2013 2:50 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>> Am 08.08.2013 20:48, schrieb David:
Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and
Thunde
On 8/8/2013 2:53 PM, Lawrence Graves wrote:
> Yes, I have already installed it. click on the update testings and you
> will find itand it works fine. Hope that help.
> On 08/08/2013 12:48 PM, David wrote:
>> Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and Thunderbird
>> 17.08?
>>
>
> -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/8/2013 2:50 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 08.08.2013 20:48, schrieb David:
>> Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and
>> Thunderbird 17.08?
>
> [harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ rpm -q thunderbird
> thunderbird-17.0.8-1.fc18.x86_64
>
On 08/08/2013 03:48 PM, David wrote:
Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and Thunderbird
17.08?
They are in updates-testing, at least for F19 :)
--
Germán A. Racca
Fedora Package Maintainer
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Skytux
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedora
Yes, I have already installed it. click on the update testings and you
will find itand it works fine. Hope that help.
On 08/08/2013 12:48 PM, David wrote:
Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and Thunderbird
17.08?
--
All things are workable but don't all things work. Prov.
Does anyone have any idea when we can expect Firefox 23 and Thunderbird
17.08?
--
David
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/co
34 matches
Mail list logo
