Re: Testing request: AMD chipset kernel issue

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

On 19/08/16 08:11 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 18:53 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
>> On 19/08/16 12:58 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
 Possibly as I boot the livemedia from the plain old burned DVD for
 testing purpose. Perhaps doing the verification
 check detect the problem.
>>> Just to make sure - have you just tried to boot the LiveCD, or have you 
>>> installed it and booted the installed system?
>>>
>> I just booted the LiveCD which went to Gnome Session aside SELinux
>> permission issue.
> Kamil found the bug only occurs when booting the installed system, not
> just booting the live CD. So you have to run an install to fully test
> this. I did write that in the initial mail :)
>
I realize that.  I was able to fully reproduce the bug by installing
Fedora 25 on Gnome Boxes.
It also affect rawhide version as well. It seems this bug impacted non
AMD system too.

Broker URL: qemu+unix:///session
Domain: boxes-unknown-3
UUID: de8fb221-fc8a-456f-ab7d-6234b931d2c2
Persistent: yes
Cpu time: 19789000
Memory: 4173824 KiB
Max memory: 15346692 KiB
CPUs: 4
State: GVIR_DOMAIN_STATE_RUNNING
URI: (null)
Auto clipboard sync: yes
Spice-gtk version 0.32
Mouse mode: server
Agent: disconnected

-- 
Luya Tshimbalanga
Graphic & Web Designer
E: l...@fedoraproject.org
W: http://www.coolest-storm.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora 25-20160819.n.1 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Cloud_base raw-xz x86_64
Cloud_base raw-xz i386
Atomic raw-xz x86_64

Failed openQA tests: 11/89 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm)

ID: 28633   Test: x86_64 Atomic-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28633
ID: 28655   Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28655
ID: 28658   Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28658
ID: 28679   Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28679
ID: 28680   Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28680
ID: 28702   Test: x86_64 universal install_iscsi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28702
ID: 28703   Test: x86_64 universal install_package_set_kde
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28703
ID: 28725   Test: i386 universal upgrade_2_desktop_32bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28725
ID: 28726   Test: i386 universal install_package_set_kde
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28726
ID: 28727   Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28727
ID: 28734   Test: i386 KDE-live-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28734
ID: 28736   Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28736
ID: 28737   Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28737
ID: 28739   Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28739
ID: 28748   Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28748
ID: 28749   Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/28749

Passed openQA tests: 70/89 (x86_64), 13/17 (i386)

Skipped openQA tests: 7 of 108
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/fedora-qa.git/tree/check-compose
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Testing request: AMD chipset kernel issue

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 18:53 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
> On 19/08/16 12:58 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Possibly as I boot the livemedia from the plain old burned DVD for
> > > testing purpose. Perhaps doing the verification
> > > check detect the problem.

> > Just to make sure - have you just tried to boot the LiveCD, or have you 
> > installed it and booted the installed system?
> > 
> I just booted the LiveCD which went to Gnome Session aside SELinux
> permission issue.

Kamil found the bug only occurs when booting the installed system, not
just booting the live CD. So you have to run an install to fully test
this. I did write that in the initial mail :)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
 408  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7031   
python-virtualenv-12.0.7-1.el6
 402  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7168   
rubygem-crack-0.3.2-2.el6
 334  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-8156   
nagios-4.0.8-1.el6
 292  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-e2b4b5b2fb   
mcollective-2.8.4-1.el6
 264  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-35e240edd9   
thttpd-2.25b-24.el6
 150  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-30a8346813   
vtun-3.0.1-10.el6
  55  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-db7e78fac7   
php-PHPMailer-5.2.16-2.el6
  48  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-d0e444c5f2   
pypy-5.0.1-4.el6
  47  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-7a25f65890   
nginx-1.10.1-1.el6
  15  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-bee6c8b3c9   
mongodb-2.4.14-3.el6
  14  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-07f4f7dcd7   
drupal7-entity_translation-1.0-0.9.beta5.el6
  11  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-3ff1f4485b   
tomcat-7.0.70-2.el6
  11  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-3e016cb353   
drupal7-theme-zen-5.6-1.el6
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-a1450d7fe0   
knot-1.6.8-1.el6
   1  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-5c15ca6d8d   
lcms2-2.8-2.el6


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 6 updates-testing

Lmod-6.5.1-2.el6
cmake-fedora-2.7.1-1.el6
davix-0.6.4-1.el6

Details about builds:



 Lmod-6.5.1-2.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-a04322bf05)
 Environmental Modules System in Lua

Update Information:

Update to 6.5.1  Do not add Tcl environment-modules specific path to MODULEPATH
(bug #1243030)

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1243030 - incompatibility with environment-modules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1243030




 cmake-fedora-2.7.1-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-c15a0a2951)
 CMake helper modules for fedora developers

Update Information:

- Bugs:   + cmake-fedora-fedpkg: fix when git change is at staging, but not
committed yet.

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1367656 - cmake-fedora-fedpkg: failed when commit is clean
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367656




 davix-0.6.4-1.el6 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-3cb09bf0e0)
 Toolkit for Http-based file management

Update Information:

New Davix release 0.6.4

___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
 530  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-1087   
dokuwiki-0-0.24.20140929c.el7
 292  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-dac7ed832f   
mcollective-2.8.4-1.el7
  55  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-e0c08a1414   
php-PHPMailer-5.2.16-2.el7
  11  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-23fa04bf1c   
redis-3.2.3-1.el7
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2c0e0e64b2   
python34-3.4.3-7.el7
   9  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-4b8dd3488d   
knot-1.6.8-1.el7


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing

Lmod-6.5.1-2.el7
cmake-fedora-2.7.1-1.el7
davix-0.6.4-1.el7
python-attrs-16.0.0-6.el7

Details about builds:



 Lmod-6.5.1-2.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-fd561c2b35)
 Environmental Modules System in Lua

Update Information:

Update to 6.5.1  Do not add Tcl environment-modules specific path to MODULEPATH
(bug #1243030)




 cmake-fedora-2.7.1-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-32b63c651f)
 CMake helper modules for fedora developers

Update Information:

- Bugs:   + cmake-fedora-fedpkg: fix when git change is at staging, but not
committed yet.

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1367656 - cmake-fedora-fedpkg: failed when commit is clean
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367656




 davix-0.6.4-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-363035bd26)
 Toolkit for Http-based file management

Update Information:

New Davix release 0.6.4




 python-attrs-16.0.0-6.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-f2d9bbaef6)
 Python attributes without boilerplate

Update Information:

New package.

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1366878 - Review Request: python-attrs - Python attributes without 
boilerplate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366878

___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 5 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
 800  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2014-1626   
puppet-2.7.26-1.el5
 649  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2014-3849   
sblim-sfcb-1.3.8-2.el5
 292  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-edbea40516   
mcollective-2.8.4-1.el5
 264  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-582c8075e6   
thttpd-2.25b-24.el5
  47  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-c03e77f531   
nginx-1.10.1-1.el5
  14  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-8bfb37ff3f   
drupal7-entity_translation-1.0-0.9.beta5.el5
  11  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-31411254eb   
drupal7-theme-zen-5.6-1.el5
   1  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-5475bf961d   
lcms2-2.8-2.el5


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 5 updates-testing

davix-0.6.4-1.el5

Details about builds:



 davix-0.6.4-1.el5 (FEDORA-EPEL-2016-b1c653f0ec)
 Toolkit for Http-based file management

Update Information:

New Davix release 0.6.4

___
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Broken dependencies: perl-Alien-ROOT

[buildsys]

perl-Alien-ROOT has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.3.1-12.fc25.noarch requires root-core
On i386:
perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.3.1-12.fc25.noarch requires root-core
On armhfp:
perl-Alien-ROOT-5.34.3.1-12.fc25.noarch requires root-core
Please resolve this as soon as possible.

--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Broken dependencies: perl-Data-Alias

[buildsys]

perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires libperl.so.5.22()(64bit)
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On i386:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On armhfp:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.

--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Test-Announce] Fedora 25 Branched 20160819.n.1 nightly compose nominated for testing

[rawhide]

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 25 Branched 20160819.n.1. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan

Notable package version changes:
lorax - 20160807.n.0: lorax-25.12-1.fc25.src, 20160819.n.1: 
lorax-25.13-1.fc25.src

Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at:
https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/25

You can see all results, find testing instructions and image download
locations, and enter results on the Summary page:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Branched_20160819.n.1_Summary

The individual test result pages are:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Branched_20160819.n.1_Installation
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Branched_20160819.n.1_Base
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Branched_20160819.n.1_Server
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Branched_20160819.n.1_Cloud
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Branched_20160819.n.1_Desktop
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Branched_20160819.n.1_Security_Lab

Thank you for testing!
-- 
Mail generated by relval: https://www.happyassassin.net/relval/
___
test-announce mailing list
test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Please Mark bz#1164414 for EPEL7

[Christopher]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:41 PM Chris Murphy 
wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
>  wrote:
> > On Saturday, 20 August 2016 at 01:30, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Christopher
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Can somebody please reopen and appropriately mark the following bug
> for
> >> > EPEL7, so it doesn't get auto-closed on new Fedora releases? Thanks.
> >> >
> >> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414
> >>
> >> When product is changed to Fedora EPEL, there is no gnome-desktop
> >> component option. Only gnome-desktop-sharp. There's also gnome-common.
> >
> > As mentioned in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414#c2 ,
> > gnome-desktop exists in RHEL7/CentOS7 as gnome-desktop3. The report is
> > invalid and should be closed as such.
>
> Ahh OK, so notabug? Invalid is not an option.
>
>
Ah, my mistake. I was under the impression that it was missing, because
related to gnome-python2-desktop (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177390) which
contains gnome-python2-gnomekeyring. Maybe gnome-python2-desktop can be
built with gnome-desktop3? Not sure I understand GNOME packaging
interdependencies yet, but I miss my old python keyring library.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Testing request: AMD chipset kernel issue

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

On 19/08/16 12:58 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
>>
>> Possibly as I boot the livemedia from the plain old burned DVD for
>> testing purpose. Perhaps doing the verification
>> check detect the problem.
> Just to make sure - have you just tried to boot the LiveCD, or have you 
> installed it and booted the installed system?
>
>
I just booted the LiveCD which went to Gnome Session aside SELinux
permission issue.


-- 
Luya Tshimbalanga
Graphic & Web Designer
E: l...@fedoraproject.org
W: http://www.coolest-storm.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Test-Announce] 2016-08-22 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora 25 Blocker Review

[Adam Williamson]

# F25 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2016-08-22  
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net

Hi folks! We currently have 2 proposed Alpha blockers, 1 proposed
Beta blocker and 6 proposed Final blockers to review. There are also
2 proposed Alpha freeze exceptions and 2 accepted blockers to check
in on.

If you have time this weekend, you can take a look at the proposed or
accepted blockers before the meeting -  the full lists can be found
here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ .

We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the 
Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not 
fixed. Information on the release criteria for F25 can be found on the 
wiki [0].

For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, 
check out these links:
 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process
 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process

And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting 
works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out 
the SOP on the wiki:
 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting

Have a good weekend and see you Monday!

[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria
___
test-announce mailing list
test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Test-Announce] 2016-08-22 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

[Adam Williamson]

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2016-08-22
# Time: 15:00 UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net

Greetings testers!

It's meeting time again on Monday! cmurf would like to discuss the
Wayland-by-default change, and we can look at Fedora 25 status and
check in on how the onboarding meeting on Saturday went.

If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this
email and suggest them! Thanks.

== Proposed Agenda Topics ==

1. Previous meeting follow-up
2. Fedora 25 Alpha/Test Days status
3. Wayland status and possible requirements
4. Onboarding meeting retrospective
5. Open floor
___
test-announce mailing list
test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Please Mark bz#1164414 for EPEL7

[Chris Murphy]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
 wrote:
> On Saturday, 20 August 2016 at 01:30, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Christopher
>>  wrote:
>> > Can somebody please reopen and appropriately mark the following bug for
>> > EPEL7, so it doesn't get auto-closed on new Fedora releases? Thanks.
>> >
>> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414
>>
>> When product is changed to Fedora EPEL, there is no gnome-desktop
>> component option. Only gnome-desktop-sharp. There's also gnome-common.
>
> As mentioned in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414#c2 ,
> gnome-desktop exists in RHEL7/CentOS7 as gnome-desktop3. The report is
> invalid and should be closed as such.

Ahh OK, so notabug? Invalid is not an option.


Chris Murphy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Please Mark bz#1164414 for EPEL7

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Saturday, 20 August 2016 at 01:30, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Christopher
>  wrote:
> > Can somebody please reopen and appropriately mark the following bug for
> > EPEL7, so it doesn't get auto-closed on new Fedora releases? Thanks.
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414
> 
> When product is changed to Fedora EPEL, there is no gnome-desktop
> component option. Only gnome-desktop-sharp. There's also gnome-common.

As mentioned in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414#c2 ,
gnome-desktop exists in RHEL7/CentOS7 as gnome-desktop3. The report is
invalid and should be closed as such.

Regards,
Dominik
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Please Mark bz#1164414 for EPEL7

[Chris Murphy]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Christopher
 wrote:
> Can somebody please reopen and appropriately mark the following bug for
> EPEL7, so it doesn't get auto-closed on new Fedora releases? Thanks.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414

When product is changed to Fedora EPEL, there is no gnome-desktop
component option. Only gnome-desktop-sharp. There's also gnome-common.

-- 
Chris Murphy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Test-Announce] Fedora QA Onboarding Call 2016-08-20 1700-1900 UTC

[Adam Williamson]

Hey All,

This is a gentle reminder that we have a Fedora QA onboarding call on
Sat 2016-08-20 at 1700-1900 UTC.  We will focus on helping the new
contributors to start contributing right away. The meeting will be a
video call, with a 'piratepad'[1] for text notes and chat. The agenda is
already on the piratepad and is designed to ensure that newcomers can
follow along and make the most of the call without any pre-requisites.

To join the call, just open the piratepad. The call URL will be
posted there 10 minutes before the meeting starts. Piratepad is a
collaborative text editor with a chat system. You can enter your
nickname at top-right and choose a color. Then you can chat by typing
in the 'Chat:' box at bottom-right, and make edits to the text on the
left hand side - please be polite about editing other people's text and
not typing too much!

Let's make the most of tomorrow's session and make Fedora better!

[1] http://piratepad.nl/kCKiX7RN1H
___
test-announce mailing list
test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Broken dependencies: perl-Data-Alias

[buildsys]

perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires libperl.so.5.22()(64bit)
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On i386:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On armhfp:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.

--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1360425] CVE-2016-1238 perl: loading of modules from current directory [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1360425



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-5.22.2-354.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1360425] CVE-2016-1238 perl: loading of modules from current directory [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1360425

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-5.24.0-377.fc26|perl-5.24.0-377.fc26
   |perl-5.24.0-377.fc25|perl-5.24.0-377.fc25
   |perl-5.22.2-362.fc24|perl-5.22.2-362.fc24
   ||perl-5.22.2-354.fc23
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed|2016-08-04 16:52:33 |2016-08-19 18:21:33



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1365071] perl-Class-Virtual-0.08 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1365071



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Class-Virtual-0.08-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1365071] perl-Class-Virtual-0.08 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1365071

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Class-Virtual-0.08-1.f |perl-Class-Virtual-0.08-1.f
   |c24 |c24
   ||perl-Class-Virtual-0.08-1.f
   ||c23



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1365071] perl-Class-Virtual-0.08 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1365071

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Class-Virtual-0.08-1.f
   ||c24
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2016-08-19 15:53:49



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1365071] perl-Class-Virtual-0.08 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1365071



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Class-Virtual-0.08-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Please bump bz#1017603 to F24

[Christopher]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:31 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 18:25:49 +
> Christopher  wrote:
>
> > Can somebody please re-open and bump
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017603 to F24. The bug
> > was auto-closed because it was marked for F22. I've taken the package
> > for newer Fedora versions, but cannot update bugs marked for older
> > Fedora versions which were auto-closed, because I don't have
> > permission. (Permission can't even be granted for F22, because it's
> > EOL, so I can't ask an admin on the older branches.)
>
> Done, but any packager should be able to change the status and version,
> so not sure why it wouldn't let you.
>
>
Thanks.

Interesting... it still won't give me the drop-down box to be able to
change it.
It's weird, because I can change
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308662
I had assumed it was because of the lack of admin on the older branch, but
if all packagers should be able to do this, then I'm not sure why it
doesn't work for me. Another one I can't bump is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289919 but I'm not a
maintainer or reporter on that one, so I expected that.

Is the rule perhaps something like "assignee OR reporter"?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Please bump bz#1017603 to F24

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 18:25:49 +
Christopher  wrote:

> Can somebody please re-open and bump
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017603 to F24. The bug
> was auto-closed because it was marked for F22. I've taken the package
> for newer Fedora versions, but cannot update bugs marked for older
> Fedora versions which were auto-closed, because I don't have
> permission. (Permission can't even be granted for F22, because it's
> EOL, so I can't ask an admin on the older branches.)

Done, but any packager should be able to change the status and version,
so not sure why it wouldn't let you. 

kevin


pgppvCEzLmnDY.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Please bump bz#1017603 to F24

[Christopher]

Can somebody please re-open and bump
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017603 to F24. The bug was
auto-closed because it was marked for F22. I've taken the package for newer
Fedora versions, but cannot update bugs marked for older Fedora versions
which were auto-closed, because I don't have permission. (Permission can't
even be granted for F22, because it's EOL, so I can't ask an admin on the
older branches.)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Please Mark bz#1164414 for EPEL7

[Christopher]

Can somebody please reopen and appropriately mark the following bug for
EPEL7, so it doesn't get auto-closed on new Fedora releases? Thanks.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1164414
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Meeting Minutes for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-08-19)

[Adam Miller]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Adam Miller
 wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
> FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
> To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
>   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
>
> or run:
>   date -d '2016-08-12 16:00 UTC'
>
>
> Links to all tickets below can be found at:
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
>
> = Followups =
>
> #topic #1605 finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages
> .fesco 1605
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1605
>
> #topic #1606 F25 approved Changes not in MODIFIED status
> .fesco 1606
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1606
>
> #topic #1609 Fedora 26 schedule proposal
> .fesco 1609
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1609
>
> #topic #1611 Continued lack of support for RPM weak deps in distro tooling
> .fesco 1611
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1611
>
> = New business =
>
> #topic #1613 Deletion of EOL AMIs
> .fesco 1613
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1613
>
> #topic #1614 FHS exception for /snap
> .fesco 1614
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1614
>
>
> = Open Floor =
>
> For more complete details, please visit each individual
> ticket.  The report of the agenda items can be found at
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
>
> If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can
> reply to this e-mail, file a new ticket at
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco, e-mail me directly, or bring it
> up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note
> that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting.

===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2016-08-19)
===


Meeting started by maxamillion at 16:00:29 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2016-08-19/fesco.2016-08-19-16.00.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* init process  (maxamillion, 16:00:40)

* Follow Ups  (maxamillion, 16:03:01)

* #1605 finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages  (maxamillion,
  16:03:14)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1605   (maxamillion,
16:03:35)

* #1606 F25 approved Changes not in MODIFIED status  (maxamillion,
  16:07:23)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1606   (maxamillion,
16:07:23)
  * AGREED: defer KillUserProcess to Fedora 26 (+1: 8, -1: 0, +0: 0)
(maxamillion, 16:20:50)
  * AGREED: maxamillion to take the review of cargo to move the rust
change through (+1: 8, -1: 0, +0: 0)  (maxamillion, 16:23:51)
  * AGREED: defer Koji Generates Installation Media change until Fedora
26 (+1: 8, -1: 0, +0: 0)  (maxamillion, 16:28:41)
  * AGREED: Approve Release Engineering Automation Workflow Engine
Change (+1: 8, -1: 0, +0: 0)  (maxamillion, 16:32:11)

* #1609 Fedora 26 schedule proposal  (maxamillion, 16:32:22)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1609   (maxamillion,
16:32:22)
  * AGREED: more in ticket discussion needed for schedule, will revisit
later  (maxamillion, 16:45:36)

* #1611 Continued lack of support for RPM weak deps in distro tooling
  (maxamillion, 16:45:44)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1611   (maxamillion,
16:45:49)
  * AGREED: releng will try and move all compose tools to support weak
deps, but in the mean time issues with composes and weak deps will
need to be handled on a case by case basis. (+1: 9, -1: 0, +0: 0)
(maxamillion, 16:56:28)

* New Business  (maxamillion, 16:57:28)

* #1613 Deletion of EOL AMIs  (maxamillion, 16:57:34)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1613   (maxamillion,
16:57:34)
  * AGREED: defer decision on Deletion of EOL AMIs until the AWS billing
issue is sorted (+1: 7, -1: 0, +0: 1)  (maxamillion, 17:15:17)

* #1614 FHS exception for /snap  (maxamillion, 17:15:25)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1614   (maxamillion,
17:15:26)
  * LINK:

https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/system:snappy/golang-github-snapcore-snapd
(Pharaoh_Atem, 17:23:24)
  * ACTION: maxamillion to reach out to openSUSE, arch, and debian
contacts on /snap topic to aid in cross-distro agreement on approach
(maxamillion, 17:31:15)
  * AGREED: defer FHS exception for /snap until next week's meeting (+1:
8, -1: 0, +0: 0)  (maxamillion, 17:36:08)

* #1615 Consider Wayland by default for F25  (maxamillion, 17:38:11)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1615   (maxamillion,
17:38:19)
  * AGREED: FESCo agrees to go ahead with Wayland by default provided
that release notes and common bugs are clear about how to switch
back to X11 if needed. (+1: 7, -1: 0, +0: 0)  (maxamillion,
17:46:26)

* #1612 Provenpackager request jforbes  (maxamillion, 17:47:54)
  * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1612   (maxamillion,
17:48:05)
  * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Provenpackager_policy 

Re: Orphaning/handing over my system-config tools and other packages

[Jon Ciesla]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Nils Philippsen  wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> extremetuxracer
>
> taken.

-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/

in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Orphaning/handing over my system-config tools and other packages

[Nils Philippsen]

Hi there,

because I haven't actually developed or used them in a long time, I've
orphaned a couple of packages, or handed them over to other active
package admins or co-maintainers. I've copied co-admins, co-maintainers 
if there are any (and the list isn't too long, looking at you, glade2)
so they can pick them up if they wish.

For those orphaned packages that haven't found a new maintainer by
then, I plan to retire them in F-25 and Rawhide not earlier than
Monday, September 5th.

Orphaned


System-Config-Tools, largely obsoleted by cockpit, and their
documentation (orphaned only from F25 on):

system-config-date
system-config-date-docs
system-config-network
system-config-nfs
system-config-nfs-docs
system-config-samba
system-config-samba-docs
system-config-services
system-config-services-docs
system-config-users
system-config-users-docs

If someone wants to take these, ping me so we can arrange a transfer of
the upstream repos (probably best if they're migrated to some forge
like github, gitlab or pagure).

Other packages (orphaned on all branches):

extremetuxracer
python-meld3 - only needed by supervisor below
rss-glx
supervisor - systemd units fit me better nowadays

Handed over
---

...to other (active) package admins or co-maintainers:

bzflag
glade2 - only needed it for s-c-tools above
python-augeas - never used it for the s-c-tools above ;)
rss-glx

Nils
-- 
Nils Philippsen  "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to
Red Hat           purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither
n...@redhat.com   Liberty nor Safety."  --  Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Broken dependencies: perl-Data-Alias

[buildsys]

perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires libperl.so.5.22()(64bit)
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On i386:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On armhfp:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.

--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-08-19)

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:58:06AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Adam Miller
>  wrote:
> > Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
> > FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
> > irc.freenode.net.
> We should handle https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1612 too.

Given the timing/schedule issue, would it be improper to ask about
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1615 in this meeting?  (I know
the meeting's underway already and apologize for not seeing this
thread in time.)

-- 
Paul W. Frieldshttp://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: recent rawhide/branched compose issues

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 09:37:39 -0600,
 Kevin Fenzi  wrote:


* The failing composes still always send the broken deps emails, which
 means when we run several composes a day to try and fix things people
 will get a bunch of duplicate emails. There's a proposed fix for
 this, hopefully landing after alpha so only successfull composes will
 send emails.


That one was confusing me for a bit and then was annoying. But eventually 
a compose succeeded and the spurious messages for a package I had fixed, 
stopped. It didn't help that it wasn't really obvious that composes were 
failing. I eventually figured out to check the date on the latest link to 
see when the latest success was.

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora 24: Call for testing: ca-legacy disable

[Kai Engert]

Hello, I'm the maintainer of the ca-certificates package.

Could you please help to confirm that the following system configuration change
doesn't cause any regressions for your use of the Internet?

  ca-legacy disable
  # (needs to be executed with root permission)


If you see any issues with SSL/TLS connections after this change, please try to
go back to the default configuration, by executing
  ca-legacy default
then restart the software you were using, and try your connection again.

If "ca-legacy default" makes it work again, then please let me how I can
reproduce the connection that fails for you in "ca-legacy disabled" mode.

(... either by sending an email, or by commenting in the following tracker bug:
 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368522 )


Background: I'd like to disable the legacy CAs by default in Fedora 25, which I
believe is safe. Your testing will help to confirm that. In the past, the
special configuration was introduced because of limitations in older software
versions. In the meantime, all known limitations have already been fixed in the
software we ship with Fedora 24. The change will increase security, because it
will allow us to remove trust for older root CA certificates with weaker key
sizes.

If you'd like to know more what the ca-legacy tool does:
- man ca-legacy
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CA-Certificates

Thanks for your help!
Kai


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

recent rawhide/branched compose issues

[Kevin Fenzi]

Greetings. 

Astute followers of rawhide/branched composes will note that we haven't
had to many of them recently that finished successfully. ;( 

As of this email the last rawhide one was 2016-08-12 (7 days ago) and
the last branched one was 2016-08-16 ( 3 days ago). 

This has various anoying and ill effects: 

* The next branched that actually finishes will be 100% signed, but the
  one thats on mirrors now from the 16th is not.

* The failing composes still always send the broken deps emails, which
  means when we run several composes a day to try and fix things people
  will get a bunch of duplicate emails. There's a proposed fix for
  this, hopefully landing after alpha so only successfull composes will
  send emails. 

* Testing out proposed fixes takes a really long time. ;( 

The causes for this are several. ;( 

* pungi now has the ability to tell when release blocking artifacts are
  not successfully composed and fail the entire compose. This means
  that in the past we would have had a partial mostly compose, now we
  would not get anything. 

* The bug where sometimes, seemingly randomly live composes fail has
  become more common, and when it hits KDE or Workstation the compose
  fails (see above). https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315541

* There is some issue with the arm composers or rawhide that causes
  them to get stuck in I/O wait and never finish composing images. We
  have been trying to isolate if this is a kernel issue, userspace on
  the builders or rawhide in the chroot. (no bug yet as we aren't sure
  where to file it yet). 

* On branched the cloud images are/were failing to compose with little
  in the way of logs. Since they are release blocking, see first point.
  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1365661

Anyhow, thats where we are... we are working on all these issues and
hopefully we can get things rolling again. 

kevin


pgp_8lAdE5iTr.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] please review: Ticket 48832 - Fix more CI test failures

[Mark Reynolds]

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48832

https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48832/0001-Ticket-48832-Fix-more-CI-test-failures.patch
--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:18 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 15:20 +0200, Kai Engert wrote:
> > 
> > It won't break software that uses NSS / OpenSSl / GnuTLS / glib-
> > networking.
> 
> I have only one concern: what about Qt stuff? Do you know?

I've just used f24 qupzilla to access a site with a relevant configuration.
I'm using the suggested configuration on my system, and the site loads fine.

So apparently QT uses one of the fixed underlying libraries.


> Anyway, I agree that you should prepare an F25 update for this. Just do
> not request a freeze exception, then it will be pushed to testing
> immediately after the alpha release.
> 
> I'm not sure I agree with pushing it to F23/F24 due to the risk of
> unexpected breakage -- you were CCed in [1] which was our chance to do
> that for F24 -- but it will probably work out fine
> 
> [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@lists.fedoraproject.or
> g/thread/FTYLBKE5MU5E2OGD43G5HA7AXAZIKM7Q/#FTYLBKE5MU5E2OGD43G5HA7AXAZIKM7Q

I'm very sorry, but I had missed that thread. I blame bad folter filtering and
the large amount of emails. I've improved my filtering, to make sure I'll see
all emails I'm cc'ed on.

Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Broken dependencies: perl-Data-Alias

[buildsys]

perl-Data-Alias has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires libperl.so.5.22()(64bit)
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On i386:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
On armhfp:
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires libperl.so.5.22
perl-Data-Alias-1.20-2.fc24.armv7hl requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.22.1)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.

--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-08-19)

[Josh Boyer]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Adam Miller
 wrote:
> Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
> FESCo meeting Friday at 16:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on
> irc.freenode.net.
>
> To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
>   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
>
> or run:
>   date -d '2016-08-12 16:00 UTC'
>
>
> Links to all tickets below can be found at:
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
>
> = Followups =
>
> #topic #1605 finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages
> .fesco 1605
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1605
>
> #topic #1606 F25 approved Changes not in MODIFIED status
> .fesco 1606
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1606
>
> #topic #1609 Fedora 26 schedule proposal
> .fesco 1609
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1609
>
> #topic #1611 Continued lack of support for RPM weak deps in distro tooling
> .fesco 1611
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1611
>
> = New business =
>
> #topic #1613 Deletion of EOL AMIs
> .fesco 1613
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1613
>
> #topic #1614 FHS exception for /snap
> .fesco 1614
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1614
>
>
> = Open Floor =
>
> For more complete details, please visit each individual
> ticket.  The report of the agenda items can be found at
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9
>
> If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can
> reply to this e-mail, file a new ticket at
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco, e-mail me directly, or bring it
> up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note
> that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting.

We should handle https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1612 too.

josh
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 15:20 +0200, Kai Engert wrote:
> It won't break software that uses NSS / OpenSSl / GnuTLS / glib-
> networking.

I have only one concern: what about Qt stuff? Do you know?

Anyway, I agree that you should prepare an F25 update for this. Just do
not request a freeze exception, then it will be pushed to testing
immediately after the alpha release.

I'm not sure I agree with pushing it to F23/F24 due to the risk of
unexpected breakage -- you were CCed in [1] which was our chance to do
that for F24 -- but it will probably work out fine

Michael

[1] 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/FTYLBKE5MU5E2OGD43G5HA7AXAZIKM7Q/#FTYLBKE5MU5E2OGD43G5HA7AXAZIKM7Q
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Tomas Mraz]

On Pá, 2016-08-19 at 15:54 +0200, Kai Engert wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:45 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > 
> > However, pre-release Fedora is different from released Fedoras in
> > that the
> > updates-testing repo is enabled by default on them. This means that
> > if you
> > push
> > the ca-certificates package to updates-testing before next week's
> > Go/No-Go
> > meeting, it is guaranteed that it will already be available to
> > anyone doing a
> > dnf update from the moment they install the Alpha media. This makes
> > it exactly
> > one update from inclusion on Alpha systems. It does not need to
> > wait for a
> > stable push to get there.
> Thank you for this detail.
> 
> In other words:
> - exclude this change from alpha to avoid all risks
> - create the alpha release, and after it's done:
> - build this change into f25 updates-testing
> - all F25 alpha users doing updates will get this change
>   immediately and will participate in testing it.

+1 to this plan, except for one thing - you do not have to wait for
alpha to be released before you build and create the testing update. It
will not be inadvertently included into the alpha anyway. 

-- 
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
  Turkish proverb
(You'll never know whether the road is wrong though.)


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Test-CleanNamespaces (perl-Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22-1.fc25). "Update to 0.22 (..more)"

[notifications]

From 6ec21f83c9ec87f24e56f92365cd8870701ac2fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth 
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:42:11 +0100
Subject: Update to 0.22

- New upstream release 0.22
  - Properly find the list of modules to test (regression since 0.19)
---
 perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec | 7 ++-
 sources| 2 +-
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec b/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
index f6b4147..b93e990 100644
--- a/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
+++ b/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Name:  perl-Test-CleanNamespaces
 Summary:   Check for uncleaned imports
-Version:   0.21
+Version:   0.22
 Release:   1%{?dist}
 License:   GPL+ or Artistic
 URL:   https://metacpan.org/release/Test-CleanNamespaces
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ BuildRequires:perl(Role::Tiny) >= 1.003000
 BuildRequires: perl(constant)
 BuildRequires: perl(CPAN::Meta) >= 2.120900
 BuildRequires: perl(CPAN::Meta::Prereqs)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::pushd)
 BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec::Functions)
 BuildRequires: perl(if)
 BuildRequires: perl(lib)
@@ -93,6 +94,10 @@ make test %{!?perl_bootstrap:AUTOMATED_TESTING=1}
 %{_mandir}/man3/Test::CleanNamespaces.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Aug 19 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.22-1
+- Update to 0.22
+  - Properly find the list of modules to test (regression since 0.19)
+
 * Tue Aug 16 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.21-1
 - Update to 0.21
   - Switch to plain old Exporter, removing build_* subs from the API
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index e769a83..7bb94bc 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-6dce5addcec3b546ef17691d59074475  Test-CleanNamespaces-0.21.tar.gz
+8c48bb0427f2077edce57c50491468ec  Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22.tar.gz
-- 
cgit v0.12



http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.git/commit/?h=perl-Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22-1.fc25=6ec21f83c9ec87f24e56f92365cd8870701ac2fc
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:05 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Applying this to older releases would be a violation of the Stable Updates
> Policy[1] (though arguably it could be considered to fall under "The update
> fixes a security issue that would affect a large number of users.".

Although I currently assume the change is safe for stable Fedoras, 
getting it into future stable releases such as Fedora 25 has a higher priority.

Instead of a fixed schedule for updating to F23/F24, here's a more conservative
suggestion:

We start a new thread on this devel list, and ask all developers who use F23/F24
in a stable environment, to perform the configuration that is equivalent to the
suggested package change (which is, to run the "ca-legacy disable" command), and
ask them to report any regressions they notice.

We could adjust our plans based on the feedback (or lack thereof) we'll get.

If everything seems to work fine, in a second step, we could broaden our call
for testing, by sending an equivalent message to a fedora users mailing list.

> That said, I'm not saying "don't allow this in F25", personally. I'm saying
> "don't try to land it in the middle of an already-slipped Freeze". That's a
> different situation. I don't want this to potentially cause us to slip another
> week.

Understood, thanks.

Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Test-CleanNamespaces (perl-Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22-1.fc26). "Update to 0.22 (..more)"

[notifications]

This commit already existed in another branch.

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.git/commit/?h=perl-Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22-1.fc26=6ec21f83c9ec87f24e56f92365cd8870701ac2fc
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:45 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> However, pre-release Fedora is different from released Fedoras in that the
> updates-testing repo is enabled by default on them. This means that if you
> push
> the ca-certificates package to updates-testing before next week's Go/No-Go
> meeting, it is guaranteed that it will already be available to anyone doing a
> dnf update from the moment they install the Alpha media. This makes it exactly
> one update from inclusion on Alpha systems. It does not need to wait for a
> stable push to get there.

Thank you for this detail.

In other words:
- exclude this change from alpha to avoid all risks
- create the alpha release, and after it's done:
- build this change into f25 updates-testing
- all F25 alpha users doing updates will get this change
  immediately and will participate in testing it.

That sounds good to me.

Thanks
Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Test-CleanNamespaces (f25). "Update to 0.22 (..more)"

[notifications]

From 6ec21f83c9ec87f24e56f92365cd8870701ac2fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth 
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:42:11 +0100
Subject: Update to 0.22

- New upstream release 0.22
  - Properly find the list of modules to test (regression since 0.19)
---
 perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec | 7 ++-
 sources| 2 +-
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec b/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
index f6b4147..b93e990 100644
--- a/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
+++ b/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Name:  perl-Test-CleanNamespaces
 Summary:   Check for uncleaned imports
-Version:   0.21
+Version:   0.22
 Release:   1%{?dist}
 License:   GPL+ or Artistic
 URL:   https://metacpan.org/release/Test-CleanNamespaces
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ BuildRequires:perl(Role::Tiny) >= 1.003000
 BuildRequires: perl(constant)
 BuildRequires: perl(CPAN::Meta) >= 2.120900
 BuildRequires: perl(CPAN::Meta::Prereqs)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::pushd)
 BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec::Functions)
 BuildRequires: perl(if)
 BuildRequires: perl(lib)
@@ -93,6 +94,10 @@ make test %{!?perl_bootstrap:AUTOMATED_TESTING=1}
 %{_mandir}/man3/Test::CleanNamespaces.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Aug 19 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.22-1
+- Update to 0.22
+  - Properly find the list of modules to test (regression since 0.19)
+
 * Tue Aug 16 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.21-1
 - Update to 0.21
   - Switch to plain old Exporter, removing build_* subs from the API
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index e769a83..7bb94bc 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-6dce5addcec3b546ef17691d59074475  Test-CleanNamespaces-0.21.tar.gz
+8c48bb0427f2077edce57c50491468ec  Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22.tar.gz
-- 
cgit v0.12



http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.git/commit/?h=f25=6ec21f83c9ec87f24e56f92365cd8870701ac2fc
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Stephen Gallagher]

On 08/19/2016 09:20 AM, Kai Engert wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:01 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> With my FESCo hat on, I'd be in favor of landing this in updates-testing
>> immediately. Then folks who install the Alpha will get it in their first
>> update
>> and we'd have ample time to work out the issues prior to Beta.
> 
> If we agree to try to include it with Fedora 25, then both before Alpha and
> after Alpha are fine with me.
> 

So, I forgot to include some useful information about Fedora pre-releases. (I
have a bad habit of forgetting that not everyone knows all the little details).

What I am concerned about is *specifically* the frozen set of packages that
becomes part of the Alpha release. As we are already late for shipping that, I'm
opposed to increasing the set of things that *might* go wrong (even if the risk
is remote).

However, pre-release Fedora is different from released Fedoras in that the
updates-testing repo is enabled by default on them. This means that if you push
the ca-certificates package to updates-testing before next week's Go/No-Go
meeting, it is guaranteed that it will already be available to anyone doing a
dnf update from the moment they install the Alpha media. This makes it exactly
one update from inclusion on Alpha systems. It does not need to wait for a
stable push to get there.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Test-CleanNamespaces (master). "Update to 0.22 (..more)"

[notifications]

From 6ec21f83c9ec87f24e56f92365cd8870701ac2fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth 
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:42:11 +0100
Subject: Update to 0.22

- New upstream release 0.22
  - Properly find the list of modules to test (regression since 0.19)
---
 perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec | 7 ++-
 sources| 2 +-
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec b/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
index f6b4147..b93e990 100644
--- a/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
+++ b/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Name:  perl-Test-CleanNamespaces
 Summary:   Check for uncleaned imports
-Version:   0.21
+Version:   0.22
 Release:   1%{?dist}
 License:   GPL+ or Artistic
 URL:   https://metacpan.org/release/Test-CleanNamespaces
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ BuildRequires:perl(Role::Tiny) >= 1.003000
 BuildRequires: perl(constant)
 BuildRequires: perl(CPAN::Meta) >= 2.120900
 BuildRequires: perl(CPAN::Meta::Prereqs)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::pushd)
 BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec::Functions)
 BuildRequires: perl(if)
 BuildRequires: perl(lib)
@@ -93,6 +94,10 @@ make test %{!?perl_bootstrap:AUTOMATED_TESTING=1}
 %{_mandir}/man3/Test::CleanNamespaces.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Aug 19 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.22-1
+- Update to 0.22
+  - Properly find the list of modules to test (regression since 0.19)
+
 * Tue Aug 16 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.21-1
 - Update to 0.21
   - Switch to plain old Exporter, removing build_* subs from the API
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index e769a83..7bb94bc 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-6dce5addcec3b546ef17691d59074475  Test-CleanNamespaces-0.21.tar.gz
+8c48bb0427f2077edce57c50491468ec  Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22.tar.gz
-- 
cgit v0.12



http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces.git/commit/?h=master=6ec21f83c9ec87f24e56f92365cd8870701ac2fc
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc uploaded Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22.tar.gz for perl-Test-CleanNamespaces

[notifications]

8c48bb0427f2077edce57c50491468ec  Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22.tar.gz

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Test-CleanNamespaces/Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22.tar.gz/md5/8c48bb0427f2077edce57c50491468ec/Test-CleanNamespaces-0.22.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 15:20 +0200, Kai Engert wrote:
> It's not as simple as that. The suggested change doesn't mean that our
> software
> will block any CAs with 1024 bit.

This sentence wasn't sufficiently precise.

Although for some server certificates, it's possible to find a chain of trust to
one of the old 1024 bit roots, that doesn't mean that these server certificates
will be blocked.

Instead, our software has already been fixed to find the alternative chain of
trust to the replacement root CAs.

That means, despite no longer trusting these 1024 bit root CAs, all issued
certificates that are still intended to be valid, will be treated as valid by
our software, because it can find the path to the alternative, stronger root
CAs.
                        
server          intermediate                         / old 1024-bit root CA
certificate ->  CA certificate -> points to either  -
                                                     \ new stronger root CA

Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Sub-Name (perl-Sub-Name-0.19-1.fc26). "Update to 0.19 (..more)"

[notifications]

This commit already existed in another branch.

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Sub-Name.git/commit/?h=perl-Sub-Name-0.19-1.fc26=a1ea8ef3305318aaf317b2b130b2979c62b9625e
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Sub-Name (perl-Sub-Name-0.19-1.fc25). "Update to 0.19 (..more)"

[notifications]

From a1ea8ef3305318aaf317b2b130b2979c62b9625e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth 
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:06:17 +0100
Subject: Update to 0.19

- New upstream release 0.19
  - Fix checking of SvUTF8 flag
- Simplify find commands using -empty and -delete
---
 perl-Sub-Name.spec | 11 ---
 sources|  2 +-
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/perl-Sub-Name.spec b/perl-Sub-Name.spec
index 90654b6..e2070d5 100644
--- a/perl-Sub-Name.spec
+++ b/perl-Sub-Name.spec
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 # TODO: BR: perl(B::C) when available
 
 Name:  perl-Sub-Name
-Version:   0.18
+Version:   0.19
 Release:   1%{?dist}
 Summary:   Name - or rename - a sub
 License:   GPL+ or Artistic
@@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ make %{?_smp_mflags}
 
 %install
 make pure_install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
-find %{buildroot} -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} \;
-find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -size 0 -exec rm -f {} \;
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name .packlist -delete
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -empty -delete
 %{_fixperms} %{buildroot}
 
 %check
@@ -74,6 +74,11 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Sub::Name.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Aug 19 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.19-1
+- Update to 0.19
+  - Fix checking of SvUTF8 flag
+- Simplify find commands using -empty and -delete
+
 * Tue Aug 16 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.18-1
 - Update to 0.18
   - Support binary and unicode symbol names (PR#8)
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 2cf472d..83db411 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-26da1476d699a61967e866b6309605b8  Sub-Name-0.18.tar.gz
+855afebe2144247bf5f6282b648d5c3d  Sub-Name-0.19.tar.gz
-- 
cgit v0.12



http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Sub-Name.git/commit/?h=perl-Sub-Name-0.19-1.fc25=a1ea8ef3305318aaf317b2b130b2979c62b9625e
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:01 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > I'm having a hard time following the argument of scale and risk here
> > when it pertains to schedule slip.  The package itself is fairly
> > self-contained and isn't likely to cause issues against the actual
> > Alpha test criteria.  Can you elaborate why you think doing this as an
> > FE would cause a slip?
> > 
> 
> Essentially, it means that anything in Fedora using 1024 RSA root CAs would
> suddenly fail.

It's not as simple as that. The suggested change doesn't mean that our software
will block any CAs with 1024 bit.

I've explained the technical background in detail in the link to the openssl
ticket that can be found in my initial message of this thread.

The issue here is that whenever a server certificate needs to be verified, there
may be more than one potential chain of certificates to find a trusted root CA.

The CA organizations had planned to phase out their roots, and had implemented
mitigations already, when this project started two years ago.

In order to still work, software must be able to find alternative chains of
trust, to the newer replacement root CAs, which we already ship in our CA list.

Two years ago, OpenSSL and GnuTLS and glib-networking weren't able to find these
alternative trust chains, which was the only reason why we had decided to keep
trusting the old root CAs.

Meanwhile our software has been fixed, and those library now can find the
required alternative trust chains, and things work.

>  I don't have a clear picture of what exact tests are run, but I'd
> not be surprised to discover some of the Workstation browser tests to suddenly
> start failing as a result of this. That's not even including anyone who just
> starts poking around with it and filing bugs because their favorite website is
> no longer available.

Based on the work we've done, I don't think this will happen.

Our group has scanned a very large number of the most popular sites (Alexa). We
identified that there are still a very small number of sites that still use the
legacy configuration that was problematic with the older software versions, but
couldn't find issues with the SSL/TLS libraries I mentioned.

We have been preparing this, and have waited for quite a bit of time, before
this is now being suggested as a reasonable thing to do.


> Put another way: with my Blocker/FE reviewer hat on, I'd be inclined to vote
> this as too risky to grant an FE to, simply because we have no real way of
> knowing what it would break. I'd rather not jeopardize the already-slipped
> alpha for a late change with an unknown risk level.

It won't break software that uses NSS / OpenSSl / GnuTLS / glib-networking.

Sites that are trusted in a fresh Firefox profile will work with these other
software libraries, too.

Only sites that aren't trusted by Firefox might fail to be verified, but that's
exactly what we want to achieve, for security reasons, following the trust
decisions that have been made by the Mozilla CA maintainers, and which we want
to follow.


> With my FESCo hat on, I'd be in favor of landing this in updates-testing
> immediately. Then folks who install the Alpha will get it in their first
> update
> and we'd have ample time to work out the issues prior to Beta.

If we agree to try to include it with Fedora 25, then both before Alpha and
after Alpha are fine with me.

Thanks
Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Sub-Name (f25). "Update to 0.19 (..more)"

[notifications]

From a1ea8ef3305318aaf317b2b130b2979c62b9625e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth 
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:06:17 +0100
Subject: Update to 0.19

- New upstream release 0.19
  - Fix checking of SvUTF8 flag
- Simplify find commands using -empty and -delete
---
 perl-Sub-Name.spec | 11 ---
 sources|  2 +-
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/perl-Sub-Name.spec b/perl-Sub-Name.spec
index 90654b6..e2070d5 100644
--- a/perl-Sub-Name.spec
+++ b/perl-Sub-Name.spec
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 # TODO: BR: perl(B::C) when available
 
 Name:  perl-Sub-Name
-Version:   0.18
+Version:   0.19
 Release:   1%{?dist}
 Summary:   Name - or rename - a sub
 License:   GPL+ or Artistic
@@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ make %{?_smp_mflags}
 
 %install
 make pure_install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
-find %{buildroot} -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} \;
-find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -size 0 -exec rm -f {} \;
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name .packlist -delete
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -empty -delete
 %{_fixperms} %{buildroot}
 
 %check
@@ -74,6 +74,11 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Sub::Name.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Aug 19 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.19-1
+- Update to 0.19
+  - Fix checking of SvUTF8 flag
+- Simplify find commands using -empty and -delete
+
 * Tue Aug 16 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.18-1
 - Update to 0.18
   - Support binary and unicode symbol names (PR#8)
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 2cf472d..83db411 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-26da1476d699a61967e866b6309605b8  Sub-Name-0.18.tar.gz
+855afebe2144247bf5f6282b648d5c3d  Sub-Name-0.19.tar.gz
-- 
cgit v0.12



http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Sub-Name.git/commit/?h=f25=a1ea8ef3305318aaf317b2b130b2979c62b9625e
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc pushed to perl-Sub-Name (master). "Update to 0.19 (..more)"

[notifications]

From a1ea8ef3305318aaf317b2b130b2979c62b9625e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Howarth 
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:06:17 +0100
Subject: Update to 0.19

- New upstream release 0.19
  - Fix checking of SvUTF8 flag
- Simplify find commands using -empty and -delete
---
 perl-Sub-Name.spec | 11 ---
 sources|  2 +-
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/perl-Sub-Name.spec b/perl-Sub-Name.spec
index 90654b6..e2070d5 100644
--- a/perl-Sub-Name.spec
+++ b/perl-Sub-Name.spec
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 # TODO: BR: perl(B::C) when available
 
 Name:  perl-Sub-Name
-Version:   0.18
+Version:   0.19
 Release:   1%{?dist}
 Summary:   Name - or rename - a sub
 License:   GPL+ or Artistic
@@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ make %{?_smp_mflags}
 
 %install
 make pure_install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
-find %{buildroot} -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} \;
-find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -size 0 -exec rm -f {} \;
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name .packlist -delete
+find %{buildroot} -type f -name '*.bs' -empty -delete
 %{_fixperms} %{buildroot}
 
 %check
@@ -74,6 +74,11 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Sub::Name.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Aug 19 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.19-1
+- Update to 0.19
+  - Fix checking of SvUTF8 flag
+- Simplify find commands using -empty and -delete
+
 * Tue Aug 16 2016 Paul Howarth  - 0.18-1
 - Update to 0.18
   - Support binary and unicode symbol names (PR#8)
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 2cf472d..83db411 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-26da1476d699a61967e866b6309605b8  Sub-Name-0.18.tar.gz
+855afebe2144247bf5f6282b648d5c3d  Sub-Name-0.19.tar.gz
-- 
cgit v0.12



http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/perl-Sub-Name.git/commit/?h=master=a1ea8ef3305318aaf317b2b130b2979c62b9625e
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 14:54 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> The plan is to apply this change to past releases, too.
> 
> I find this discrepancy—okay for past releases, but not okay for 
> alpha—somewhat puzzling.  I don't know which direction this should go, 
> but let's be consistent, please.

Given that this:
- doesn't have the risk of breaking the operating system,
- but only the small risk that some unidentified software we ship 
  might no longer be able to connect to a very small amount of servers, 

the alpha release seems like a good opportunity to me to allow for feedback from
users in testing environments.

If we'll get any feedback of nonworking connections, I assume it will be limited
to more exotic software that does SSL/TLS connections
(because OpenSSL + GnuTLS + NSS + glib-networking are known to have been fixed).

If we get any such feedback prior to shipping stable updates for Fedora 23 + 24,
it will give us the chance to work on changes to potentially affected software
(which we currently don't know if any such software exists).

I agree with Florian, if nobody is concerned with the idea to make the change
for stable F23/F24 updates, then we should include it as part of the final F25,
too, and earlier testing is better.

If it cannot become part of F25, then this cleanup would have to be postponed
until after the release of F25, for consistency.

Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Stephen Gallagher]

On 08/19/2016 08:54 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 08/19/2016 02:38 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> On 08/19/2016 08:29 AM, Kai Engert wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 22:29 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
 Beta sounds a bit late to be introducing such a change unilaterally.
 Should this not be going through FESCo at this point?
>>>
>>> Then I suggest that we make the change immediately for Fedora 25, to allow 
>>> it to
>>> be included in the delayed alpha release.
>>>
>>
>> It will absolutely not be accepted as a Freeze Exception. Changes of this 
>> scale
>> are far too high-risk and will almost certainly result in another schedule 
>> slip.
> 
> The plan is to apply this change to past releases, too.
> 
> I find this discrepancy—okay for past releases, but not okay for 
> alpha—somewhat
> puzzling.  I don't know which direction this should go, but let's be 
> consistent,
> please.



Applying this to older releases would be a violation of the Stable Updates
Policy[1] (though arguably it could be considered to fall under "The update
fixes a security issue that would affect a large number of users.".

That said, I'm not saying "don't allow this in F25", personally. I'm saying
"don't try to land it in the middle of an already-slipped Freeze". That's a
different situation. I don't want this to potentially cause us to slip another 
week.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

pghmcfc uploaded Sub-Name-0.19.tar.gz for perl-Sub-Name

[notifications]

855afebe2144247bf5f6282b648d5c3d  Sub-Name-0.19.tar.gz

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/lookaside/pkgs/perl-Sub-Name/Sub-Name-0.19.tar.gz/md5/855afebe2144247bf5f6282b648d5c3d/Sub-Name-0.19.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Stephen Gallagher]

On 08/19/2016 08:46 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Stephen Gallagher  
> wrote:
>> On 08/19/2016 08:29 AM, Kai Engert wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 22:29 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
 Beta sounds a bit late to be introducing such a change unilaterally.
 Should this not be going through FESCo at this point?
>>>
>>> Then I suggest that we make the change immediately for Fedora 25, to allow 
>>> it to
>>> be included in the delayed alpha release.
>>>
>>
>> It will absolutely not be accepted as a Freeze Exception. Changes of this 
>> scale
>> are far too high-risk and will almost certainly result in another schedule 
>> slip.
> 
> I'm having a hard time following the argument of scale and risk here
> when it pertains to schedule slip.  The package itself is fairly
> self-contained and isn't likely to cause issues against the actual
> Alpha test criteria.  Can you elaborate why you think doing this as an
> FE would cause a slip?
> 

Essentially, it means that anything in Fedora using 1024 RSA root CAs would
suddenly fail. I don't have a clear picture of what exact tests are run, but I'd
not be surprised to discover some of the Workstation browser tests to suddenly
start failing as a result of this. That's not even including anyone who just
starts poking around with it and filing bugs because their favorite website is
no longer available.


Put another way: with my Blocker/FE reviewer hat on, I'd be inclined to vote
this as too risky to grant an FE to, simply because we have no real way of
knowing what it would break. I'd rather not jeopardize the already-slipped alpha
for a late change with an unknown risk level.

With my FESCo hat on, I'd be in favor of landing this in updates-testing
immediately. Then folks who install the Alpha will get it in their first update
and we'd have ample time to work out the issues prior to Beta.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 08:46 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Stephen Gallagher 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On 08/19/2016 08:29 AM, Kai Engert wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 22:29 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Beta sounds a bit late to be introducing such a change unilaterally.
> > > > Should this not be going through FESCo at this point?
> > > 
> > > Then I suggest that we make the change immediately for Fedora 25, to allow
> > > it to
> > > be included in the delayed alpha release.
> > > 
> > 
> > It will absolutely not be accepted as a Freeze Exception. Changes of this
> > scale
> > are far too high-risk and will almost certainly result in another schedule
> > slip.
> 
> I'm having a hard time following the argument of scale and risk here
> when it pertains to schedule slip.  The package itself is fairly
> self-contained and isn't likely to cause issues against the actual
> Alpha test criteria.  Can you elaborate why you think doing this as an
> FE would cause a slip?


I've filed a FESCo ticket, asking for approval for this change in Fedora:
https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1616

The suggested change is limited to modify static lists.
It will change two existing configuration choices to have identical effect.

The only risk is that potentially, we find software that can no longer connect
to a very small amount of Internet sites (because the site's certificates
requires one of the legacy CAs to be trusted).

That risk is very small, and doesn't affect the stability of the Fedora OS.

Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Florian Weimer]

On 08/19/2016 02:38 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:

On 08/19/2016 08:29 AM, Kai Engert wrote:

On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 22:29 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:

Beta sounds a bit late to be introducing such a change unilaterally.
Should this not be going through FESCo at this point?


Then I suggest that we make the change immediately for Fedora 25, to allow it to
be included in the delayed alpha release.



It will absolutely not be accepted as a Freeze Exception. Changes of this scale
are far too high-risk and will almost certainly result in another schedule slip.


The plan is to apply this change to past releases, too.

I find this discrepancy—okay for past releases, but not okay for 
alpha—somewhat puzzling.  I don't know which direction this should go, 
but let's be consistent, please.


Thanks,
Florian
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 25 Alpha Release Readiness Meeting, Thursday, August 18 @ 19:00 UTC

[Jan Kurik]

Hi,

during the meeting we were able to check status with most of the team
representatives. Most of the representatives of teams who were not
able to make the meeting did report me off-line, so we now have the
overall readiness status ready.

Except the NO-GO decision due to missing RC and present blockers we
are facing the following issues:

* Websites are not yet fully ready, however will be ready during the
next week, so the slipped Alpha release date is not jeopardized.
* Alpha banners are missing at the moment, however should be ready
during the next week, before the Alpha release
* Marketing needs a help: Information for talking points on F25 are
needed from all edition WGs and spin SIGs for Ambassadors and also for
Alpha release announcement
* Ambassadors are ready, however they would like to make people aware
of the Mentoring reorganization which is currently in progress. Check
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Reorganizing_Ambassador_Mentoring for
more info.

For more information please check the logs/minutes [1][2] from the meeting.

[1] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting.2016-08-18-19.00.log.html
[2] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting.2016-08-18-19.00.html

Regards,
Jan

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Jan Kurik  wrote:
> Join us on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting for the Fedora 25 Alpha
> Release Readiness Meeting meeting.
>
> The meeting is going to be held on Thursday, August 18, 2016 19:00
> UTC. Please check the [FedoCal] link for your time zone.
>
> We will meet to make sure we are coordinated and ready for the Alpha
> release of Fedora 25 on Tuesday, August 23nd, 2016. Please note that
> this meeting is going to be held even if the release is delayed at the
> Go/No-Go meeting on the same day two hours earlier.
>
> You may received this message several times, but it is by purpose to
> open this meeting to the teams and to raise awareness, so hopefully
> more team representatives will come to this meeting. This meeting
> works best when we have representatives from all of the teams.
>
> [FedoCal] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/4486/
>
> More information available at:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Release_Readiness_Meetings
>
> Thank you for your support and Regards, Jan
> --
> Jan Kuřík
> Platform & Fedora Program Manager
> Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic



-- 
Jan Kuřík
Platform & Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
___
devel-announce mailing list
devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Stephen Gallagher  wrote:
> On 08/19/2016 08:29 AM, Kai Engert wrote:
>> On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 22:29 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>>> Beta sounds a bit late to be introducing such a change unilaterally.
>>> Should this not be going through FESCo at this point?
>>
>> Then I suggest that we make the change immediately for Fedora 25, to allow 
>> it to
>> be included in the delayed alpha release.
>>
>
> It will absolutely not be accepted as a Freeze Exception. Changes of this 
> scale
> are far too high-risk and will almost certainly result in another schedule 
> slip.

I'm having a hard time following the argument of scale and risk here
when it pertains to schedule slip.  The package itself is fairly
self-contained and isn't likely to cause issues against the actual
Alpha test criteria.  Can you elaborate why you think doing this as an
FE would cause a slip?

josh
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 25 Alpha Release Readiness Meeting, Thursday, August 18 @ 19:00 UTC

[Jan Kurik]

Hi,

during the meeting we were able to check status with most of the team
representatives. Most of the representatives of teams who were not
able to make the meeting did report me off-line, so we now have the
overall readiness status ready.

Except the NO-GO decision due to missing RC and present blockers we
are facing the following issues:

* Websites are not yet fully ready, however will be ready during the
next week, so the slipped Alpha release date is not jeopardized.
* Alpha banners are missing at the moment, however should be ready
during the next week, before the Alpha release
* Marketing needs a help: Information for talking points on F25 are
needed from all edition WGs and spin SIGs for Ambassadors and also for
Alpha release announcement
* Ambassadors are ready, however they would like to make people aware
of the Mentoring reorganization which is currently in progress. Check
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Reorganizing_Ambassador_Mentoring for
more info.

For more information please check the logs/minutes [1][2] from the meeting.

[1] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting.2016-08-18-19.00.log.html
[2] 
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting/f25-alpha-readiness-meeting.2016-08-18-19.00.html

Regards,
Jan

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Jan Kurik  wrote:
> Join us on irc.freenode.net in #fedora-meeting for the Fedora 25 Alpha
> Release Readiness Meeting meeting.
>
> The meeting is going to be held on Thursday, August 18, 2016 19:00
> UTC. Please check the [FedoCal] link for your time zone.
>
> We will meet to make sure we are coordinated and ready for the Alpha
> release of Fedora 25 on Tuesday, August 23nd, 2016. Please note that
> this meeting is going to be held even if the release is delayed at the
> Go/No-Go meeting on the same day two hours earlier.
>
> You may received this message several times, but it is by purpose to
> open this meeting to the teams and to raise awareness, so hopefully
> more team representatives will come to this meeting. This meeting
> works best when we have representatives from all of the teams.
>
> [FedoCal] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/4486/
>
> More information available at:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Release_Readiness_Meetings
>
> Thank you for your support and Regards, Jan
> --
> Jan Kuřík
> Platform & Fedora Program Manager
> Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic



-- 
Jan Kuřík
Platform & Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Stephen Gallagher]

On 08/19/2016 08:29 AM, Kai Engert wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 22:29 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>> Beta sounds a bit late to be introducing such a change unilaterally.
>> Should this not be going through FESCo at this point?
> 
> Then I suggest that we make the change immediately for Fedora 25, to allow it 
> to
> be included in the delayed alpha release.
> 

It will absolutely not be accepted as a Freeze Exception. Changes of this scale
are far too high-risk and will almost certainly result in another schedule slip.

Please bring it to FESCo for consideration for it go into updates-testing and to
land once Alpha Freeze ends.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Suggestion to end support for legacy 1024-bit RSA root CAs in Fedora stable

[Kai Engert]

On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 22:29 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> Beta sounds a bit late to be introducing such a change unilaterally.
> Should this not be going through FESCo at this point?

Then I suggest that we make the change immediately for Fedora 25, to allow it to
be included in the delayed alpha release.

Kai
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution

[Germano Massullo]

2016-08-19 10:06 GMT+02:00 Charalampos Stratakis :
> Hi,
>
> It seems that the tests try to download from external sources (Pypi in this 
> case) however this is not possible when using koji. Not sure if it's clearly 
> documented somewhere but from a fast search I found this reference [0]
>
> You will need to either disable all the tests, or only the one that tries to 
> fetch packages from external sources, if possible.
>
> [0] 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_Mock_to_test_package_builds#Disable_domain_name_resolution

Yeah your solution worked, thank you very much!
___
python-devel mailing list
python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] Re: Please review: 48951 dsconf and dsadm foundations

[Ludwig Krispenz]

Hi William,

On 08/19/2016 02:22 AM, William Brown wrote:

On Wed, 2016-08-17 at 14:53 +1000, William Brown wrote:

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48951

https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48951/0001-Ticket-48951-dsadm-and-dsconf-base-files.patch
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48951/0002-Ticket-48951-dsadm-and-dsconf-refactor-installer-cod.patch
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48951/0003-Ticket-48951-dsadm-and-dsconf-Installer-options-mana.patch
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48951/0004-Ticket-48951-dsadm-and-dsconf-Ability-to-unit-test-t.patch
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48951/0005-Ticket-48951-dsadm-and-dsconf-Backend-management-and.patch



As a follow up, here is a design / example document

http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/dsadm-dsconf.html
thanks for this work, it is looking great and is something we were 
really missing.


But of course I have some comments  (and I know I am late).
- The naming dsadm and dsconf, and the split of tasks between them, is 
the same as in Sun/Oracle DSEE, and even if there is probably no legal 
restriction to use them; I'd prefer to have own names for our own tools.
- I'm not convinced of splitting the tasks into two utilities, you will 
have different actions and options for the different 
resources/subcommands anyway, so you could have one for all.
Also, I think, the goal should be to make all actions available local 
and remote, the start/stop/install should be possible remotely via rsh 
or another mechanism as long as the utilities are available on the 
target machine, so I propose one dsmanage or 389manage
- could this be made interactive ? run the command, providing some or 
none options and then have a shell like env

dsmanage
>>> help
.. connect
.. create-x
>>> connect -h 
... replica-enable 
?


More details to come.



--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org


--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham, Michael O'Neill, Eric 
Shander

--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

perl-Parse-CPAN-Meta merging into perl-CPAN-Meta

[Paul Howarth]

Upstream has merged Parse::CPAN::Meta into the CPAN-Meta dist. Normally, 
I'd just add appropriate obsoletes/provides, retire perl-Parse-CPAN-Meta 
and that would be that. However, the perl-Parse-CPAN-Meta package has an 
epoch, which the perl-CPAN-Meta package does not, so in order to avoid 
self-obsoletion, I would have to bump epoch in the perl-CPAN-Meta 
package too.


Alternatively, I could take up the hint here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_%E2%80%94_renaming_or_splitting_packages#Do_I_need_to_Provide_my_old_package_names.3F

and have the obsolete without the provide. This looks much cleaner, and 
there's only one package in Rawhide that requires perl-Parse-CPAN-Meta 
explicitly, which is perl-core. So if that dependency was dropped (the 
existing dependency on perl-CPAN-Meta will still be there to pull in the 
module), all would be well.


Any thoughts?

Should this go to F-25 as well?

Paul.
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution

[Charalampos Stratakis]

Hi,

It seems that the tests try to download from external sources (Pypi in this 
case) however this is not possible when using koji. Not sure if it's clearly 
documented somewhere but from a fast search I found this reference [0]

You will need to either disable all the tests, or only the one that tries to 
fetch packages from external sources, if possible.

[0] 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_Mock_to_test_package_builds#Disable_domain_name_resolution

Regards,

Charalampos Stratakis
Associate Software Engineer
Python Maintenance Team, Red Hat


- Original Message -
From: "Germano Massullo" 
To: python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 11:05:53 PM
Subject: [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution

Hi everybody!
I have just submitted to Fedora repositories, a new package called
python-gfm. I was running the first build on Koji, when I got some
errors related to python-markdown2, so I would like to ask you if you
have any idea about...

 I am getting error
>

python-gfm spec file:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python-gfm.git/tree/python-gfm.spec
Build error log:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/3969/15283969/build.log

Thank you very much!
Have a nice day
___
python-devel mailing list
python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
python-devel mailing list
python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Testing request: AMD chipset kernel issue

[Kamil Paral]

> On 18/08/16 02:45 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 14:19 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
> >> On 18/08/16 12:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>> Hi folks!
> >>>
> >>> There is a bug nominated as a Fedora 25 Alpha blocker:
> >>>
> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367321
> >> Interesting. My desktop system has an identical ASUS motherboard from
> >> the reporter. The only difference is the cpu, a AMD Phenom II X4 940
> >> Deneb and a Nvidia GTX460 v2 Fermi GPU running on kernel 4.8.0-0.rc1.
> > As I said, given the nature of the bug, we think the attached storage
> > devices may be significant too.
> > --
> >
> Possibly as I boot the livemedia from the plain old burned DVD for
> testing purpose. Perhaps doing the verification
> check detect the problem.

Just to make sure - have you just tried to boot the LiveCD, or have you 
installed it and booted the installed system?

Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org