On 03. 12. 21 18:41, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 05:41:31PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 12. 21 16:06, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 12. 21 15:59, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 12. 21 15:49, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 03. 12. 21 15:45, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Friday, December 3, 2021 2:58:24 PM CET Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
It seems that libarchive still requires libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit)
But on x86_64, opae-devel provides that with:
ExclusiveArch: x86_64
I'll report that.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2028852
The problem is now fixed. The bundled openssl in opae worries me still, but
that's not causing issues in dependency resolution any more.
Bundling pre-built openssl is a serious problem, because Fedora
is required to strip various functionality from openssl at the
source level. We cannot ship these binaries in the RPM, nor can
we even have them in the source tarball AFAIK.
IOW, stripping the dependancies from the RPM here is not sufficient.
IIUC, the tarball needs to be unpacked, the openssl binaries removed,
and a new tarball created for import into Fedora dist-git lookside
archive storage.
I agree. I applied the smallest possible bandaid to unblock other packagers,
but the original cause of this problem remains to be solved by the package
maintainers. Thta is why https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2028852 remains open.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
