New fedora project website https://languages.stg.fedoraproject.org/

[Jean-Baptiste Holcroft]

Dear Fedora contributors,

the localization change for Fedora 34 [1] is available in staging: 
https://languages.stg.fedoraproject.org
The goal: "Provide a public website for end users and contributors, containing 
Fedora Workstation translation progress and useful files for translators (as an 
example: translation memories)."

What we were able to process:
2 223 packages,
200 638 translation files containing 25 015 189 words to translate (for each 
language),
341 languages.

And we have more!
* darknao were able to process old fedora release, the oldest one we 
successfully computed was Fedora 7 <3 You'll see this in production.
* we'll have access statistics: 
https://languages.stg.fedoraproject.org/stats.html (all local based on log, no 
ip address, no sharing with any third parties)

Help needed:
* UI is to be rewritten
* javascript table sorting is broken

Now we have to discuss what comes next, I really think this tooling can help us 
to better understand and support the global open source translators community.

Have a nice day,

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LocalizationMeasurementAndTooling
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 17:39 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 08:42:51AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Can you do a Koji scratch build? This is easier for me to test in
> > openQA (I already have the tooling set up to schedule tests on scratch
> > builds, it cannot do it for COPR builds). Thanks!
> 
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64648010
> Should be done in about half an hour.

D'oh, sorry, should've been more specific - a scratch build for F34 (or
F33) would be better. I can't easily run tests on a Rawhide scratch
build (as we don't run the update tests on Rawhide).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: RFC: declaring estimated per-builder RAM usage in spec file

[Dennis Gilmore]

perhaps you should look at how ceph has dealt with a similar issue,
they set the max number of cpus based on the system ram.
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ceph/blob/rawhide/f/ceph.spec#_1246

Dennis

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 7:49 PM Michel Alexandre Salim
 wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> This idea came about when I'm debugging build issues with mcrouter,
> which turns out to be due to build jobs failing to allocate memory and
> getting terminated without aborting the entire compilation, causing
> link issues when empty or corrupted objects are encountered:
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mcrouter/blob/rawhide/f/mcrouter.spec#_4-8
>
> As a rough estimate it seems like each of the CPU core passed with
> %{_smp_build_ncpus} ended up consuming close to 8 GB of RAM. And that's
> with LTO disabled (yeah, it's not a good situation to be in).
>
> Right now I'm just overriding _smp_build_ncpus to 1, but there is a
> more elegant solution I'd like to propose:
>
> What if one can declaratively set the required RAM per build job --
> either with a single macro, or maybe two if the LTO usecase requires
> even more RAM. e.g. to declare each core might take up to 8 GB:
>
> %global _smp_build_ram_per_cpu 8192
>
> then in case this is run on our aarch64 builder with 40GB RAM,
> dynamically take the minimum of the existing _smp_build_ncpus (which
> AIUI is determined by the number of cores on the machine) and (amount
> of RAM / _smp_build_ram_per_cpu), in this case capping the actual
> number passed to -j to 5.
>
> Is there interest in having this be available? I could imagine it might
> be useful for other resource-intensive package builds e.g. for
> Chromium.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Michel Alexandre Salim
> profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-2414aff513 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-2414aff513`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-2414aff513

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1941319] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-0.19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941319



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-2414aff513 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-2414aff513`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-2414aff513

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943595] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943595

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-6483127319 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-6483127319`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-6483127319

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1941319] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-0.19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941319



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Gerard Ryan]

(resending through lists.fp.o, since I'm not actually subscribed atm, so it was 
rejected)

I was one of the people who experienced the problem with 246.12-1.fc33
on F33. With that version, I was able to resolve google.com and
fedoraproject.org just fine, but it seemed I wasn't able to resolve
most other domains that I tried (including duckduckgo.com and
redhat.com). Just highlighting that as it sounds like other folks had
issues with google.com but not other domains.

With 248~rc4.git20210326.b240c08-1.fc33 from your copr build on F33, my
wired ethernet (eno1) doesn't work, so it seems I've got other issues
with that one.

With 248~rc4.git20210326.b240c08-1.fc34 from your copr build on F34 on
that same machine (different ostree), I don't appear to have any
networking issues -- I'm able to connect to the network and resolve all
of the domains that I tried.

Let me know if you'd like me to try anything in particular in either of
those scenarios: I've got each one available as a pinned ostree
deployment in silverblue, so it's easy to get back to them.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1890795] EPEL8 Request: perl-PDL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890795

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-ec19eb6c90 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-ec19eb6c90

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1941319] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-0.19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941319



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1934824] CVE-2020-28591 slic3r: Out-of-bounds read in AMFParserContext::endElement() [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1934824

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc35|slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc35
   |slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc34|slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc34
   |slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc33|slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc33
   ||slic3r-1.3.0-14.fc32



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-1d72d8cea2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1934824] CVE-2020-28591 slic3r: Out-of-bounds read in AMFParserContext::endElement() [fedora-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1934824

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc35|slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc35
   |slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc34|slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc34
   ||slic3r-1.3.0-19.fc33



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-473e880567 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

RFC: declaring estimated per-builder RAM usage in spec file

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

Hi all,

This idea came about when I'm debugging build issues with mcrouter,
which turns out to be due to build jobs failing to allocate memory and
getting terminated without aborting the entire compilation, causing
link issues when empty or corrupted objects are encountered:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mcrouter/blob/rawhide/f/mcrouter.spec#_4-8

As a rough estimate it seems like each of the CPU core passed with
%{_smp_build_ncpus} ended up consuming close to 8 GB of RAM. And that's
with LTO disabled (yeah, it's not a good situation to be in).

Right now I'm just overriding _smp_build_ncpus to 1, but there is a
more elegant solution I'd like to propose:

What if one can declaratively set the required RAM per build job --
either with a single macro, or maybe two if the LTO usecase requires
even more RAM. e.g. to declare each core might take up to 8 GB:

%global _smp_build_ram_per_cpu 8192

then in case this is run on our aarch64 builder with 40GB RAM,
dynamically take the minimum of the existing _smp_build_ncpus (which
AIUI is determined by the number of cores on the machine) and (amount
of RAM / _smp_build_ram_per_cpu), in this case capping the actual
number passed to -j to 5.

Is there interest in having this be available? I could imagine it might
be useful for other resource-intensive package builds e.g. for
Chromium.

Best regards,

-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1941071] perl-DateTime-Format-Natural-1.12 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941071

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-DateTime-Format-Natura |perl-DateTime-Format-Natura
   |l-1.12-1.fc35   |l-1.12-1.fc35
   ||perl-DateTime-Format-Natura
   ||l-1.12-1.fc34
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-03-27 00:15:54



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-ab67df4c24 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Björn Persson]

Christopher wrote:
> * Unlike many other implementations, there is no backup code option
> (GitHub, Google, others, provide 10 one-time use backup codes you can
> use in case you don't have access to your authenticator app; these can
> be regenerated after a successful login).

It seems that the backup is to send an OpenPGP-signed email to an admin
address. That's acceptable as long as the admins take care to properly
verify the OpenPGP key – but since Noggin stores only key IDs (and
truncates them incorrectly), I'm left wondering what methods they'll try
if they need to look up my key. Will they try WKD? DNS? Is there a
specific key server that must have my key for me to be able to recover
my Fedora account if I lose my second factor?

> * In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order to
> log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
> really play nice with password managers.

Such kludges shouldn't be exposed in user interfaces if it can be
avoided. A web interface should be able to receive two strings in two
separate fields, and concatenate them if the backend requires that.

Björn Persson


pgpCioe8trQ5A.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Proposal to fail builds if RPATH is found in Fedora 35

[Alexander Bokovoy]

On pe, 26 maalis 2021, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:

Hi all.

Some time ago there was a discussion from the Fedora Packaging
Committee [0] about automatically disallowing the usage of RPATH in
Fedora to bring it in-line with the packaging guidelines[1].
Essentially a package MUST remove the RPATH entry from its binaries
and/or .so files if it is detected by the check-rpaths script [2]
coming from the rpm-build package.

However, the script was never run during rpmbuild so it was on the
discretion of the packager if they'd check for it or not. The intention
is to enable the check through redhat-rpm-config during the the
invocation of  %__os_install_post. An opt-out mechanism will be
provided for cases where it's absolutely necessary.

After an analysis of all the x86_64 packages, 92 fail to build due to
an RPATH issue detected by the check-rpaths script [3]. Full list is
provided bellow.

Everything will be implemented through a Fedora change and all the
packagers that their package has been affected by the preliminary
analysis will be contacted first.


The logic for banning RPATH in the packaging guidelines operates terms like
"usually smarter than" and "usually do not permit" but has very little
to describe why this should be done.

It also lacks clarity for the most common valid use of Rpath, namely, a
plugin support for an application.

For example, Samba has a number of internal libraries in
/usr/lib64/samba which have to be linked to by any plugin built for
Samba, even when it is provided by a different package. This situation
is not described in the packaging guidelines and practically ignored.
"Alternatives to Rpath" in this cases do not exist because adding custom
configuration file into a system-wide dynamic linker configuration is
the last thing you should do for this use case at all.

It is interesting that the behavior of check-rpaths script also isn't
really outlawing any plugin's Rpath use either so you don't see Samba or
similar plugin-based applications in the list of affected packages.

To me it looks like the packaging guidelines are incomplete and
misleading and better be clarified with regards to Rpath use.




Thoughts and feedback are welcome.

[0] https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/886
[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_beware_of_rpath
[2] 
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/6b21e736a3e47071b33ff7c34e5cfb5447997e18/scripts/check-rpaths-worker
[3] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/cstratak/rpath/builds/

List of packages affected so far:

Maintainers by package:
Io-language  limb
NLoptbesser82
SDL_imagejwrdegoede limb moezroy
WindowMaker  sham1
abc  brouhaha jjames somlo
audiofileajax alexl caillon caolanm limb rhughes rstrode ssp
binutils aoliva jakub jankratochvil law mcermak nickc
cfitsio  orion sergiopr
community-mysql  hhorak ljavorsk mmuzila mschorm
compat-guile18   jskarvad limb mlichvar tkorbar
condor   bbockelm bcotton eerlands matt matyas stevetraylen 
tstclair ttheisen valtri
conky-managermoceap
czmq denisarnaud jpo
eb   moceap petersen
esc  jmagne
ettercap limb
fcl  rmattes thofmann
fortune-mod  sheltren shlomif
freeradius   cipherboy nkondras rharwood
glib2alexl caillon caolanm mbarnes mclasen rhughes rstrode rtcm 
ssp
gnokii   limb robert snirkel
gpgmefkluknav ignatenkobrain isimluk rdieter
gpickluya
gupnp-dlna   kalev zeenix
hdf  orion sagitter
jq   hguemar lon
k3guitunedtimms
kdebase3 jreznik kkofler rdieter than
kdegames3kkofler rdieter than
kdepim3  jreznik ovasik rdieter than
kicadavigne coremodule lkundrak stevenfalco tnorth
koffice-kiviokkofler rdieter
komparator   nbecker
laszip   devrim neteler smani
levmar   aalvarez brouhaha
libXcm   cicku kwizart
libburn  cwickert fkluknav hhorak pcahyna robert
libcommuni   atim
libdkimppdfateyev
libdxfrw hobbes1069 spot
libeXosip2   nucleo
libisoburn   fkluknav hhorak robert
libkkc   ueno
libminc  ignatenkobrain
liboping fab lkundrak
libosip2 nucleo
libprelude   fab totol
librfid  kushal
lutokjmmv
mcpp kmatsui mef
mingw-qt5-qt3d   epienbro smani
mingw-qt5-qtbase epienbro smani
mingw-qt5-qtdeclarative epienbro smani
mingw-qt5-qttoolsepienbro smani
mod_wsgi jdornak jkaluza jorton lmacken mrunge
mongo-c-driver   remi
ncview   deji orion
nightviewlkundrak
openjade ovasik
openscap evgenyz isimluk jcerny matyc 

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 16:47, Kevin Fenzi  wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 09:34:49PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > Dnia Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 03:26:53PM -0500, Brandon Nielsen napisał(a):
> > > On 3/26/21 3:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:48:39PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > > [Snip]
> > > > > * In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order
> to
> > > > > log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
> > > > > really play nice with password managers.
> > > >
> > > > This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password
> managers
> > > > should support this pattern.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I can't say I have ever appended an OTP to a regular password, and I
> use 2FA
> > > everywhere I can.
> >
> >   I second that. I've only seen OTP appending on FreeIPA's
> > implementation of 2FA. Everywhere else it's first a normal password
> > prompt, then second for 2FA code (or push notification to phone, which
> > is way easier for user).
>
> Notification via sms is... not too secure. ;(
>
>
Not counting the insecurity.. it was also expensive to run. Each send cost
money and the software to do so was not opensource when we looked at it a
while ago.

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 09:34:49PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> Dnia Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 03:26:53PM -0500, Brandon Nielsen napisał(a):
> > On 3/26/21 3:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:48:39PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > [Snip]
> > > > * In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order to
> > > > log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
> > > > really play nice with password managers.
> > > 
> > > This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password managers
> > > should support this pattern.
> > > 
> > 
> > I can't say I have ever appended an OTP to a regular password, and I use 2FA
> > everywhere I can.
> 
>   I second that. I've only seen OTP appending on FreeIPA's
> implementation of 2FA. Everywhere else it's first a normal password
> prompt, then second for 2FA code (or push notification to phone, which
> is way easier for user).

Notification via sms is... not too secure. ;( 

https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3g8wb/hacker-got-my-texts-16-dollars-sakari-netnumber

IMHO, it would be nice for more things to move to webauthn / U2F /
whatever they call it today. (Basically just press the button on your
yubikey or whatever when required to prove you are the one who has it). 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Brandon Nielsen]

On 3/26/21 3:36 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 03:26:53PM -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote:

This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password managers
should support this pattern.


I can't say I have ever appended an OTP to a regular password, and I
use 2FA everywhere I can.


Maybe more so on the enterprise-login side than on websites which have added
it as a feature? I guess by "pretty common" I mean: both RH's single-sign-on
and the one for my previous university job worked this way. So, for my sample
size of two, it's very common. :)



Additionally, combining a password manager managed password with an OTP 
has always felt a little bit like working across purposes to me, 
essentially combining both factors behind a single primary password.

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 04:24:29PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:48:39PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> > The new accounts site is awesome. But, the 2FA system does seem to be
> > a bit annoying.
> 
> Can you file this as a ticket at
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues? I got bitten by basically
> all the same things, and I think we can improve all of this over time. We
> should make it easy for people to opt in to 2fa.

Actually, since these are noggin specific items, can you file them at: 
https://github.com/fedora-infra/noggin/issues/

I agree they would all be nice to address. 

Also, the additional hoops for getting a kerberos ticket when you have
otp could be nicer (and I think are in fact going to be fixed in newer
ipa versions). 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 16:27, Brandon Nielsen  wrote:

> On 3/26/21 3:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:48:39PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> [Snip]
> >> * In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order to
> >> log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
> >> really play nice with password managers.
> >
> > This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password managers
> > should support this pattern.
> >
>
> I can't say I have ever appended an OTP to a regular password, and I use
> 2FA everywhere I can.
>
>
OK it is very common for systems which only allow one prompt. The previous
OTP system for Fedora was also an appended version versus 2 prompt version


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 03:26:53PM -0500, Brandon Nielsen wrote:
> >This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password managers
> >should support this pattern.
> 
> I can't say I have ever appended an OTP to a regular password, and I
> use 2FA everywhere I can.

Maybe more so on the enterprise-login side than on websites which have added
it as a feature? I guess by "pretty common" I mean: both RH's single-sign-on
and the one for my previous university job worked this way. So, for my sample
size of two, it's very common. :)

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Tomasz Torcz]

Dnia Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 03:26:53PM -0500, Brandon Nielsen napisał(a):
> On 3/26/21 3:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:48:39PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> [Snip]
> > > * In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order to
> > > log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
> > > really play nice with password managers.
> > 
> > This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password managers
> > should support this pattern.
> > 
> 
> I can't say I have ever appended an OTP to a regular password, and I use 2FA
> everywhere I can.

  I second that. I've only seen OTP appending on FreeIPA's
implementation of 2FA. Everywhere else it's first a normal password
prompt, then second for 2FA code (or push notification to phone, which
is way easier for user).


-- 
Tomasz TorczOnly gods can safely risk perfection,
to...@pipebreaker.pl it's a dangerous thing for a man.  — Alia
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Brandon Nielsen]

On 3/26/21 3:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:48:39PM -0400, Christopher wrote:

[Snip]

* In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order to
log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
really play nice with password managers.


This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password managers
should support this pattern.



I can't say I have ever appended an OTP to a regular password, and I use 
2FA everywhere I can.

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:48:39PM -0400, Christopher wrote:
> The new accounts site is awesome. But, the 2FA system does seem to be
> a bit annoying.

Can you file this as a ticket at
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues? I got bitten by basically
all the same things, and I think we can improve all of this over time. We
should make it easy for people to opt in to 2fa.


> * In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order to
> log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
> really play nice with password managers.

This is pretty common in my experience; it seems like password managers
should support this pattern.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Lennart Poettering]

On Fr, 26.03.21 19:50, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 01:27:46PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > I'm using the copr build in f34. It seems to be working but the ipv6
> > ipv4 flip on successive runs as if there's some kind of race in
> > reporting one or the other first? Is that relevant?
>
> That's a feature!
>
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/3f0a7b3a32:
>
> resolved: randomize RR order in answers each time we get something from 
> the cache
>
> This allows some minimal, crappy load balancing.
> Fixes: #16297

Actually, it's more complex than that. The randomization only takes
place for addresses of the same family. i.e. we'll randomize the order
of A RRs among themselves (i.e of IPv4 addresses), and among  RRs
among themselves (i.e. of IPv6 addresses), but we will not mix A and
 RRs.

What you are seeing simply has to do with the order the replies came
in. i.e. when you do not specify the protocol that shall be used two
requests will be sent to your DNS server, typically via UDP: one for A
RRs and another one for  RRs. Depending on the order they replies
come back you'll see the addresses in one or the other order.

We probably should add some fixed ordering between the address
families though, so that what is returned here is independent of the
order of replies we get.

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

License change: giada (now “GPLv3+ and MIT and BSD”)

[Benjamin Beasley]

The license of giada has changed from “GPLv3+ and MIT and CC0 and BSD” to 
“GPLv3+ and MIT and BSD” since json/nlohmann_json/“JSON for Modern C++” was 
unbundled. (It in turn bundled Hedley, which is where the CC0 part of the 
license field came from.)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 03:53:39PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> I have just tried https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/ and it is
> certainly welcome refresh.
> 
> Congrats and thx to all involved.

+100!

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 01:27:46PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I'm using the copr build in f34. It seems to be working but the ipv6
> ipv4 flip on successive runs as if there's some kind of race in
> reporting one or the other first? Is that relevant?

That's a feature!

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/3f0a7b3a32:

resolved: randomize RR order in answers each time we get something from the 
cache

This allows some minimal, crappy load balancing.
Fixes: #16297

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Chris Murphy]

I'm using the copr build in f34. It seems to be working but the ipv6
ipv4 flip on successive runs as if there's some kind of race in
reporting one or the other first? Is that relevant?


[chris@fmac ~]$ resolvectl query google.com
google.com: 2607:f8b0:400f:805::200e   -- link: enp2s0f0
172.217.1.206  -- link: enp2s0f0

-- Information acquired via protocol DNS in 34.9ms.
-- Data is authenticated: no; Data was acquired via local or encrypted
transport: no
-- Data from: network
[chris@fmac ~]$ resolvectl query google.com
google.com: 172.217.1.206  -- link: enp2s0f0
2607:f8b0:400f:801::200e   -- link: enp2s0f0

-- Information acquired via protocol DNS in 19.0ms.
-- Data is authenticated: no; Data was acquired via local or encrypted
transport: no
-- Data from: network
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Is Pagure openid login broken?

[Otto Urpelainen]

Kevin Fenzi kirjoitti 26.3.2021 klo 18.07:

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 09:25:28AM +0200, Otto Urpelainen wrote:

Richard W.M. Jones kirjoitti 25.3.2021 klo 20.56:


Thanks - it is working now.


I have similar but different problem which still happens:

1. Open pagure.io or src.fedoraproject.org
2. Log In
3. The new account system asks to approve the request, approve it
4. Redirected back to pagure.io: Page with text "Strange state: failure"
shown

Address bar shows this:


Try clearing any cookies you have from *fedoraproject.org and pagure.io
and re-try login?

We moved ipsilon instances, and while they have the same config, your
old auth isn't known to the new instance.

If you still see an issue, please file a ticket:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues


It turned out that this was caused by using user's email address as the 
username. That worked in the old system, but now it leads to different 
kinds of faulty behavior for different Fedora services. I created a ticket:


https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9781

Using the username for login works as expected.

Otto
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Hans de Goede]

Hi All,

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 2:15 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:55:40PM +, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has reached
> > the point in our deployment that critical path services have been
> > configured to the new solution and end user impact should be little to
> > none, so we are now officially out of outage!
>
> Awesome. Thanks everyone for all of you work on this long, complicated, and
> very important infrastructure project!

+1 many thanks to the infra team for all their hardwork, not just on this
project, bit in general.

Regards,

Hans
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Christopher]

The new accounts site is awesome. But, the 2FA system does seem to be
a bit annoying.

* It can't be disabled, so you can't try it out and later change your mind.
* Unlike many other implementations, there is no backup code option
(GitHub, Google, others, provide 10 one-time use backup codes you can
use in case you don't have access to your authenticator app; these can
be regenerated after a successful login).
* There is no confirmation that you have configured your authenticator
correctly, because it does not prompt you for a OTP after setting it
up... the first time you know whether or not it works is when you try
to log in and are locked out of your account or not.
* In many places, including accounts.fedoraproject.org, in order to
log in, you have to append the OTP to your password, so it doesn't
really play nice with password managers.

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 2:15 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:55:40PM +, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has reached
> > the point in our deployment that critical path services have been
> > configured to the new solution and end user impact should be little to
> > none, so we are now officially out of outage!
>
> Awesome. Thanks everyone for all of you work on this long, complicated, and
> very important infrastructure project!
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-IoT-35-20210326.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Iot dvd aarch64
Iot dvd x86_64

Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64), 3/15 (aarch64)

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210322.0):

ID: 831566  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831566
ID: 831581  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831581
ID: 831587  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_rpmostree_overlay@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831587
ID: 831590  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831590

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210322.0):

ID: 831565  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831565

Passed openQA tests: 12/15 (aarch64), 14/16 (x86_64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210322.0):

ID: 831584  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831584
ID: 831585  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso podman_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831585
ID: 831589  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831589

Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.37 to 0.23
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/825521#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831563#downloads

Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso 
install_default_upload@uefi: 
System load changed from 0.56 to 0.40
Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/825537#downloads
Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831578#downloads
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:55:40PM +, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has reached
> the point in our deployment that critical path services have been
> configured to the new solution and end user impact should be little to
> none, so we are now officially out of outage!

Awesome. Thanks everyone for all of you work on this long, complicated, and
very important infrastructure project!

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Proposal to fail builds if RPATH is found in Fedora 35

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 06:51:56PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 26. 03. 21 18:24, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> >python2.7churchyard cstratak torsava vstinner
> 
> I was curious. The error is:
> 
>   0001: file '/usr/lib64/python2.7/lib-dynload/pyexpat.so' contains a standard
>   rpath '/usr/lib64' in [/usr/lib64]
> 
> And the cause is... our own patch 
> 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python2.7/blob/rawhide/f/00187-add-RPATH-to-pyexpat.patch
> 
> For reasons I don't understand, the bugzilla referenced from the
> patch is private. It is a RHEL 6.2 bugzilla from 2012 that could be
> summarized as:
> 
> "If the user sets $LD_LIBRARY_PATH to a directory with
> broken/incompatible libraries, Python breaks."

I'd vote for treating this as the wrong solution in the wrong place.
If you set LD_LIBRARY_PATH, you get to keep both pieces if anything goes wrong.

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Proposal to fail builds if RPATH is found in Fedora 35

[Miro Hrončok]

On 26. 03. 21 18:24, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:

python2.7churchyard cstratak torsava vstinner


I was curious. The error is:

  0001: file '/usr/lib64/python2.7/lib-dynload/pyexpat.so' contains a standard
  rpath '/usr/lib64' in [/usr/lib64]

And the cause is... our own patch 

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python2.7/blob/rawhide/f/00187-add-RPATH-to-pyexpat.patch

For reasons I don't understand, the bugzilla referenced from the patch is 
private. It is a RHEL 6.2 bugzilla from 2012 that could be summarized as:


"If the user sets $LD_LIBRARY_PATH to a directory with broken/incompatible 
libraries, Python breaks."


And as solution to this problem, RPATH was set to '%{_libdir}' for pyexpat 
(because the reporter happened to have incompatible libexpat in there and not 
different libraries).


If I cared about python2.7 in Fedora, I'd say we should get rid of this patch.

(OTOH if this patch is actually desired, we certainly need a lot more of them.)

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Default 'fedora' hostname and failing split DNS VPN

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Fri, Mar 26 2021 at 01:24:35 PM -0400, przemek klosowski via devel 
 wrote:

As to the issues with F5, I see that it rewrites /etc/hosts


You can ask them to fix their software according to my instructions 
here:


https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2020/12/17/understanding-systemd-resolved-split-dns-and-vpn-configuration/

under the heading "Custom VPN Software." Your problem is unrelated to 
this thread, so if you want to discuss it further, please create a new 
topic rather than respond further here.


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Default 'fedora' hostname and failing split DNS VPN

[przemek klosowski via devel]

I've been having problems with DNS resolution in F33 as well: I use F5 
VPN (work requirement).


I tried your nsswitch recipe, but got some errors:

   authselect apply-changes
   [error] [/etc/nsswitch.conf] is not a symbolic link!
   [error] [/etc/nsswitch.conf] was not created by authselect!
   [error] Unexpected changes to the configuration were detected.
   [error] Refusing to activate profile unless those changes are
   removed or overwrite is requested.
   Some unexpected changes to the configuration were detected. Use
   'select' command instead.

and the DNS still returns 'Name or service not known'

I've been successfully fixing my problem by running explicit

   sudo resolvectl dns eno1 

   sudo resolvectl domain eno1 


As to the issues with F5, I see that it rewrites /etc/hosts

#F5 Networks Inc. :File modified by VPN process
127.0.0.1   localhost localhost.localdomain localhost4 
localhost4.localdomain4
::1 localhost localhost.localdomain localhost6 
localhost6.localdomain6


12.34.56.78 f5.server.mycompany.com

BTW, why isn't RPM seeing that change?

rpm -qf /etc/hosts
setup-2.13.7-2.fc33.noarch

rpm -q --verify setup
.M...  c /etc/fstab
S.5T.  c /etc/printcap
.MG..  g /var/log/lastlog


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943595] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943595

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079-1.fc
   ||35




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 08:42:51AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Can you do a Koji scratch build? This is easier for me to test in
> openQA (I already have the tooling set up to schedule tests on scratch
> builds, it cannot do it for COPR builds). Thanks!

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=64648010
Should be done in about half an hour.

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943595] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943595



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-6483127319 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-6483127319


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Proposal to fail builds if RPATH is found in Fedora 35

[Charalampos Stratakis]

Hi all.

Some time ago there was a discussion from the Fedora Packaging Committee [0] 
about automatically disallowing the usage of RPATH in Fedora to bring it 
in-line with the packaging guidelines[1]. Essentially a package MUST remove the 
RPATH entry from its binaries and/or .so files if it is detected by the 
check-rpaths script [2] coming from the rpm-build package.

However, the script was never run during rpmbuild so it was on the discretion 
of the packager if they'd check for it or not. The intention is to enable the 
check through redhat-rpm-config during the the invocation of  
%__os_install_post. An opt-out mechanism will be provided for cases where it's 
absolutely necessary.

After an analysis of all the x86_64 packages, 92 fail to build due to an RPATH 
issue detected by the check-rpaths script [3]. Full list is provided bellow.

Everything will be implemented through a Fedora change and all the packagers 
that their package has been affected by the preliminary analysis will be 
contacted first.

Thoughts and feedback are welcome.

[0] https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/886
[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_beware_of_rpath
[2] 
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/6b21e736a3e47071b33ff7c34e5cfb5447997e18/scripts/check-rpaths-worker
[3] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/cstratak/rpath/builds/

List of packages affected so far:

Maintainers by package: 
Io-language  limb 
NLoptbesser82 
SDL_imagejwrdegoede limb moezroy 
WindowMaker  sham1 
abc  brouhaha jjames somlo 
audiofileajax alexl caillon caolanm limb rhughes rstrode ssp 
binutils aoliva jakub jankratochvil law mcermak nickc 
cfitsio  orion sergiopr 
community-mysql  hhorak ljavorsk mmuzila mschorm 
compat-guile18   jskarvad limb mlichvar tkorbar 
condor   bbockelm bcotton eerlands matt matyas stevetraylen 
tstclair ttheisen valtri 
conky-managermoceap 
czmq denisarnaud jpo 
eb   moceap petersen 
esc  jmagne 
ettercap limb 
fcl  rmattes thofmann 
fortune-mod  sheltren shlomif 
freeradius   cipherboy nkondras rharwood 
glib2alexl caillon caolanm mbarnes mclasen rhughes rstrode rtcm 
ssp 
gnokii   limb robert snirkel 
gpgmefkluknav ignatenkobrain isimluk rdieter 
gpickluya 
gupnp-dlna   kalev zeenix 
hdf  orion sagitter 
jq   hguemar lon 
k3guitunedtimms 
kdebase3 jreznik kkofler rdieter than 
kdegames3kkofler rdieter than 
kdepim3  jreznik ovasik rdieter than 
kicadavigne coremodule lkundrak stevenfalco tnorth 
koffice-kiviokkofler rdieter 
komparator   nbecker 
laszip   devrim neteler smani 
levmar   aalvarez brouhaha 
libXcm   cicku kwizart 
libburn  cwickert fkluknav hhorak pcahyna robert 
libcommuni   atim 
libdkimppdfateyev 
libdxfrw hobbes1069 spot 
libeXosip2   nucleo 
libisoburn   fkluknav hhorak robert 
libkkc   ueno 
libminc  ignatenkobrain 
liboping fab lkundrak 
libosip2 nucleo 
libprelude   fab totol 
librfid  kushal 
lutokjmmv 
mcpp kmatsui mef 
mingw-qt5-qt3d   epienbro smani 
mingw-qt5-qtbase epienbro smani 
mingw-qt5-qtdeclarative epienbro smani 
mingw-qt5-qttoolsepienbro smani 
mod_wsgi jdornak jkaluza jorton lmacken mrunge 
mongo-c-driver   remi 
ncview   deji orion 
nightviewlkundrak 
openjade ovasik 
openscap evgenyz isimluk jcerny matyc mmarhefk pvrabec vpolasek 
wsato 
pam_mountlupinix steve till 
pam_yubico   nb ohaessler wzzrd 
perl-SDL jwrdegoede 
pinentry branto jjelen rdieter 
plotmm   orphan 
python2.7churchyard cstratak torsava vstinner 
qucs avigne jskarvad 
qwtpolar volter 
rarian   nonamedotc 
rb_libtorrentfale mooninite 
rrdtool  jskarvad 
scap-workbench   evgenyz jcerny matyc mbarabas mlysonek mmarhefk pvrabec 
wsato 
scipycstratak jspaleta nforro orion tomspur ttomecek 
sofia-siporphan 
sqlite2  spot 
stp  amdunn jjames 
suitesparse  deji jkastner mjakubicek nphilipp orion 
sylfilteraarem 
texlive-base spot 
tracker  amigadave deji garnacho ignatenkobrain mcrha rishi 
tracker-miners   garnacho kalev rishi 
usnic-tools  honli 
vanessa_logger   hubbitus 
verbiste cicku icon tartare 
woff2erack tpopela 
xbsql

[rpms/perl-PPIx-Regexp] PR #1: Tests

[Petr Pisar]

ppisar closed without merging a pull-request against the project: 
`perl-PPIx-Regexp` that you
are following.

Closed pull-request:

``
Tests
``

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-PPIx-Regexp/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Looking for a co-maintainer for portaudio

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 3/26/21 11:26 AM, Uwe Klotz wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> 
> I started working on an update of the PortAudio package and hope to publish a 
> PR soon.

Great, thank you.

Regards,

Hans



> On 22.03.21 23:06, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> While working on bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939749
>> which involves a portaudio fix to make it work properly with pipewire's 
>> jack-server,
>> I realized that portaudio really could use some more love.
>>
>> Specifically it needs a rebase to a newer upstream version (also discussed
>> in the bug). I've lately been mainly active as an upstream kernel developer
>> and that takes up almost all my time, so I really don't have enough time
>> to spend on portaudio.
>>
>> So if anyone wants to help by co-maintaining it with me (1), that would be 
>> great.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>
>> p.s.
>>
>> More in general I welcome co-maintainers (1) for all my Fedora packages, see:
>> https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/jwrdegoede/projects
>>
>>
>> 1) Essentially becoming the new main maintainer, but I'm not going anywhere
>>
> 
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943595] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943595



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
An enhancement release suitable for Fedora ≥ 34.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[rpms/perl-PPIx-Regexp] PR #1: Tests

[Petr Pisar]

ppisar opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-PPIx-Regexp` that 
you are following:
``
Tests
``

To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-PPIx-Regexp/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

ELN SIG Meeting Minutes (2021-03-26)

[Stephen Gallagher]

=
#fedora-meeting: ELN (2021-03-26)
=


Meeting started by sgallagh at 16:02:28 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2021-03-26/eln.2021-03-26-16.02.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---
* Init Process  (sgallagh, 16:02:28)

* Agenda  (sgallagh, 16:05:02)
  * Agenda Item: ELN Mirroring  (sgallagh, 16:07:21)

* ELN Mirroring  (sgallagh, 16:08:17)
  * LINK: https://odcs.fedoraproject.org/composes/latest/   (sgallagh,
16:42:42)
  * LINK:
https://odcs.fedoraproject.org/composes/production/latest-Fedora-ELN/
this supposed to be it, i think, but the definition of "success" may
vary  (bookwar[m], 16:42:43)
  * ELN SIG will look into reducing the compose rate to enable mirroring
of the content  (sgallagh, 16:48:48)

Meeting ended at 17:02:02 UTC.




Action Items






Action Items, by person
---
* **UNASSIGNED**
  * (none)




People Present (lines said)
---
* sgallagh (83)
* dcavalca (51)
* michel_slm (25)
* zodbot (16)
* tdawson (14)
* cyberpear (12)
* bookwar[m] (10)
* jforbes (6)
* nirik (2)
* claudiozz (1)




Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4

.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 09:23 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 22:55 +, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > Evening/Morning all,
> > 
> > I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has
> > reached the point in our deployment that critical path services have
> > been configured to the new solution and end user impact should be
> > little to none, so we are now officially out of outage!
> > 
> Looks like we can now have multiple SSH keys registered? Super nice,
> thank you!
> 
Found one minor issue, looks like GPG keys get imported wrong (it used
to be we have the full exported key stored, now we list the fingerprint
... but the prefix 16 characters instead of the suffix, which can't be
looked up:

https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9778

Thanks,

-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-IoT-34-20210326.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64), 2/15 (aarch64)

ID: 831324  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831324
ID: 831339  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831339
ID: 831348  Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831348

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

ID: 831323  Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831323

Passed openQA tests: 14/16 (x86_64), 13/15 (aarch64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943595] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943595

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|ppi...@redhat.com   |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

RE: Issue while upgrading the package

[Artur Frenszek-Iwicki]

> I need to run fedpkg –-release f srpm instead of fedpkg srpm
This shouldn't be needed, as fedpkg was patched to properly handle "rawhide & 
"main" branch names over a month ago. Perhaps your fedpkg is out of date? 
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 22:55 +, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> Evening/Morning all,
> 
> I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has
> reached the point in our deployment that critical path services have
> been configured to the new solution and end user impact should be
> little to none, so we are now officially out of outage!
> 
Looks like we can now have multiple SSH keys registered? Super nice,
thank you!


-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:55:40PM +, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> Evening/Morning all,
> 
> I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has reached
> the point in our deployment that critical path services have been
> configured to the new solution and end user impact should be little to
> none, so we are now officially out of outage!

Many thanks to the team... things went pretty smoothly I think, and we
are in a much better place. ;) 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Is Pagure openid login broken?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 09:25:28AM +0200, Otto Urpelainen wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones kirjoitti 25.3.2021 klo 20.56:
> > 
> > Thanks - it is working now.
> 
> I have similar but different problem which still happens:
> 
> 1. Open pagure.io or src.fedoraproject.org
> 2. Log In
> 3. The new account system asks to approve the request, approve it
> 4. Redirected back to pagure.io: Page with text "Strange state: failure"
> shown
> 
> Address bar shows this:

Try clearing any cookies you have from *fedoraproject.org and pagure.io
and re-try login?

We moved ipsilon instances, and while they have the same config, your
old auth isn't known to the new instance. 

If you still see an issue, please file a ticket:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues

Thanks, 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: fedpkg update => Error returned from our POST to ipsilon (was: Re: Is Pagure openid login broken?)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 09:40:24PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> 
> fedpkg updates are also failing now:
> 
> $ fedpkg update
> Could not execute update: Could not generate update request: 
> ServerError(https://id.fedoraproject.org/api/v1/, 500, Error returned from 
> our POST to ipsilon.)

https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9773

Should be fixed now, please retry. 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 09:16 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> we have been trying to figure out the issue where resolved sometimes
> does not resolve certain names [1], e.g. 'google.com'. Unfortunately,
> the issue is only reproducible for some people (most likely it depends
> on the dns server or other network topology details…).
> 
> One of the patches that seem problematic [2] was included in F33 and
> then reverted. But it is still present in the systemd main branch.
> Before tagging the next release and pushing it to F34 and rawhide, we
> would like to solve this issue (or verify that it does not occur anymore).
> 
> I prepared a copr build of latest system git [3,4] to make this easy
> to test.
> 
> The ask: if you could reproduce the issue before, please test if it
> still occurs with the copr build. Just "yes"/"no" is already useful.

Can you do a Koji scratch build? This is easier for me to test in
openQA (I already have the tooling set up to schedule tests on scratch
builds, it cannot do it for COPR builds). Thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Gwyn Ciesla via devel]

Huge, huge thanks to everyone who worked on this; it was well communicated, 
surprisingly non-disruptive given the scope and impact, and it works!

-- 
Gwyn Ciesla
she/her/hers
 
in your fear, seek only peace 
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Thursday, March 25, 2021 5:55 PM, Aoife Moloney  wrote:

> Evening/Morning all,
> 

> I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has reached the 
> point in our deployment that critical path services have been configured to 
> the new solution and end user impact should be little to none, so we are now 
> officially out of outage!
> 

> For a while we thought we may need some additional time to work through some 
> misbehaving apps, but the group of people on the Fedora accounts team, and a 
> number of people from the wider Fedora project gave up countless hours to 
> help our team troubleshoot and test the deployment and it really sped up the 
> outage.
> 

> Our status on services is now: GREEN! https://status.fedoraproject.org/
> 

> The outage ticket is now: CLOSED! 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9747
> 

> To those of you who helped us, you know who you are, thank you so much! This 
> deployment would not have been possible without your help. It truly was FOSS 
> at its finest and was a privilege to see in action :)
> 

> Now to the details. The work is still not finished and there will probably be 
> issues users will run into over the next few days. Our team can still be 
> reached on IRC channel #fedora-aaa if you have any questions for us or need 
> some urgent assistance, but we will be reviewing and actioning tickets tagged 
> 'Noggin' over the coming days and weeks for fixes required.
> 

> Here's what work we have outstanding over the next few days: 
> 

> -   zodbot supybot-fedora needs adjusting
> -   Elections & FMN PR merges
> -   Any outstanding OTP for groups scripting
> -   Any UI fixes required
> -   Host configs & create some maintainer-tests to verify things are working
> -   Firewall changes that are necessary
> -   Fixes to opened tickets tagged 'Noggin'
> 

> And Here's what would we would like you to do if you hit any issues logging 
> in over the next few days:
> 

> -   Clear your cookies
> -   Clear your cache
> -   Retry the login
> -   If the above quick fixes dont work, please then file a ticket in 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure and tag it 'Noggin' so our team can 
> review and respond
> 

> On behalf of the Fedora Accounts Team, once again thank you all so so much 
> for your patience, understanding and most of all help over these last few 
> days as we rolled out this new system to production.
> 

> Kindest regards & many thanks,
> Aoife
> 

> --
> 

> Aoife Moloney
> 

> Product Owner
> 

> Community Platform Engineering Team
> 

> Red Hat EMEA
> 

> Communications House
> 

> Cork Road
> 

> Waterford

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Test-Announce] Fedora 34 Branched 20210326.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

[rawhide]

Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 34 Branched 20210326.n.0. 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 - 1.3: lorax-34.9-4.fc34.src, 20210326.n.0: lorax-34.9-5.fc34.src

Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at:
https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/testcase_stats/34

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_34_Branched_20210326.n.0_Summary

The individual test result pages are:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_34_Branched_20210326.n.0_Installation
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_34_Branched_20210326.n.0_Base
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_34_Branched_20210326.n.0_Server
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_34_Branched_20210326.n.0_Cloud
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_34_Branched_20210326.n.0_Desktop
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_34_Branched_20210326.n.0_Security_Lab

Thank you for testing!
-- 
Mail generated by relvalconsumer: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/relvalconsumer
___
test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Cloud-32-20210326.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

ID: 830426  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830426
ID: 830433  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830433

Passed openQA tests: 6/7 (x86_64), 6/7 (aarch64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1927466] perl-Graphics-TIFF-9 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927466

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Fixed In Version|perl-Graphics-TIFF-9-1.fc35 |perl-Graphics-TIFF-9-1.fc35
   ||perl-Graphics-TIFF-9-1.fc34
   ||perl-Graphics-TIFF-9-1.fc33
   ||perl-Graphics-TIFF-9-1.fc32
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-03-26 08:12:14




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: Please have look at One-Time Password password policy

[thierry bordaz]

On 3/25/21 11:28 PM, William Brown wrote:



On 25 Mar 2021, at 17:49, thierry bordaz  wrote:



On 3/25/21 3:20 AM, William Brown wrote:

On 25 Mar 2021, at 12:00, Mark Reynolds  wrote:


On 3/24/21 8:32 PM, William Brown wrote:

I think maybe it could be easy to visualise it.


We have time going from past to future like:


past -> future


So we want a window of:

* When can the OTP start to be used?
* When is the OTP no longer able to be used?

So my thinking is:

past -> future
^  ^ ^
|  | |
otp created| |
otp valid from   |
  otp expire at


So I would say otp valid from and the otp expire should be *absolute* date 
times in UTC.


Hi William

Good idea of that graphic. I am sorry to be so slow to understand but still 
things are not clear.
There are the attributes of the password policy and the operational attribute 
of the user account.

I think you meant and I agree with you that operational attributes (in the user 
account) should be absolute date.
What is not clear to me is how to compute those operational attributes from the 
password policy.
I see three options:
• password policy contains absolute time (e.g. passwordOTPValidFromUTC) 
=> account.validFrom = policyValidFromUTC
• password policy contains a delay after OTP create/reset (e.g. 
passwordOTPValidFromDelay) => account.validFrom = Now + policyValidFromDelay
• password policy contains both and if both are set we should give the 
priority to one or the other
If a password policy is a stable entry, then they should not contain absolute 
time. If we imagine password policy created on purpose to do a bunch of 
registration, then that is okay if they contain absolute time.

Do you think we should support password policy with absolute time ?


No we should not store actual times in the config.  These time values need to 
live in the entry itself, just like passwordExpirationtime. Perhaps this is a 
good candidate to handle through the CLI (maybe even a new task that uses a 
filter, base, etc)?

I'm a bit confused about this answer but:

Theirry thought you wanted to set:


 dn: cn=config
 passwordOTPStartTime: 2021034578489754Z


But I was saying it should be in the entry, not cn=config, like how we use 
passwordExpirationtime:


 uid=mark,dc=example,dc=com
 passwordOTPStartTime: 2021034578489754Z

Yep, this is exactly what I meant :)


Mark


I think there are no "operational" attributes here. These should all be 
absolute dates, set on the entry. No calculation or whatever needed.

Thanks Mark, William for the clarification.
Actually OTP is an extension of the current password policy. So there are new 
attribute in the password policy entry and new (operational) attributes in the 
account entry.

I understand and agree that attributes (in the account entry) that represent a 
window of validity will be absolute time.

For example we will have, assuming that an admin reset the userpassword of 
'uid=mark' at 10AM we will have

dn: cn=config
passwordMustChange: on
passwordOTPValidFromDelay: 1800
passwordOTPExpireDelay: 3600
passwordOTPMaxUse: 3

I actually don't think any of these fields in cn=config are required, and 
actually limit the capability of this.


This was an example for global password policy settings. These new 
attributes are supported in global pwp but also in pwpolicysubentries.




dn: uid=mark,dc=example,dc=com
userpassword: xxx
pwdOTPReset: true
pwdOTPUseCount: 0
pwdOTPValidFrom: 20210325103000Z
pwdOTPExpireAt: 2021032511Z

You should add pwdOTPMaxUse: X here.


The reason I say this is it grants flexibility. Imagine say ... we are 
enrolling 10,000 students to a university and creating their new accounts. We 
want to set exact times on their accounts and say ... given them 10 tries or 
something.

But at the same time we need to reset someones account. For them, we want them 
to have say ... 1 attempt to do the reset, and have a different time window.

All the cn=config fields do here is confuse and complicate the system - what is their 
purpose but to "template" out some values into the entry?


The only benefit I see (but I may miss something) in adding pwdOTPMaxUse 
in the account entry is in the case the password policies may change 
frequently. If we want to be sure the exact setting of the password 
policy at the time of the reset will be enforced, even if the password 
policy change later, then we have to copy that value in the entry.
During a bind attempts, we are retrieving the password policy that 
applies to that target bind entry and we can enforce the pwp without 
storing it in the target entry.


thanks
thierry


In this matter, I think that all the OTP fields should be on the entry to allow 
more possibilities of 

Issue while upgrading the package

[Muneendra Kumar M via devel]

Hi All,
I want to upgrade the fctxpd fedora package with additional features.

Iam the maintainer of this fctxpd package in fedora.

Can anyone help me the procedure regarding the same.

I did the below one but seeing some errors while calling fedpkg srpm


1)Get the package sources:

fedpkg clone fctxpd
cd fctxpd

2)Open the fctxpd.spec file and updated the various
versions (commit, snapshotdate etc.) and add a new entry to the %changelog
section. Save the file.




3)fedpkg srpm

Downloading fctxpd-ccbaf3a.tar.gz

100.0%
Could not execute srpm: Could not find the release/dist from branch name
rawhide
Please specify with --release





Can someone help me related to this error.Or if I miss anything steps
before I call fedpkg srpm.



And why it is downloading fctxpd-ccbaf3a.tar.gz it is suppose to create and
download fctxpd-c4dba7f.tar.gz





Below is the diff of the fctxpd.spec

Below it the diff for the same

-%global commit  ccbaf3a0cbadaaef727bcb53c1ac543fa049
+%global commit  c4dba7f21f8549b3cdd844b05613bb7ca1135619
 %global shortcommit %(c=%{commit}; echo ${c:0:7})
-%global snapshotdate20200827
+%global snapshotdate20210326

 Name:   fctxpd
 Version:0.2
-Release:3.%{snapshotdate}git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}
+Release:4.%{snapshotdate}git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}
 Summary:Fibrechannel transport daemon

 License:GPLv2+
@@ -58,6 +58,9 @@ application performance profiling software.
 %license LICENSES/GPL-2.0

 %changelog
+* Fri Mar 26 2021  Muneendra 
0.2-4.20210326gitc4dba7f
+- Added support to add change rport port_state to marginal on fpin-li



Regards,

Muneendra.

-- 
This electronic communication and the information and any files transmitted 
with it, or attached to it, are confidential and are intended solely for 
the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain 
information that is confidential, legally privileged, protected by privacy 
laws, or otherwise restricted from disclosure to anyone else. If you are 
not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the 
e-mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, 
copying, distributing, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of 
this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, 
please return the e-mail to the sender, delete it from your computer, and 
destroy any printed copy of it.


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|ppi...@redhat.com   |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-34-20210326.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 11/127 (aarch64), 7/189 (x86_64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-34-20210323.n.0):

ID: 830828  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830828
ID: 830829  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_selinux@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830829
ID: 830830  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
base_service_manipulation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830830
ID: 830833  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz release_identification@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830833
ID: 830894  Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
desktop_update_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830894
ID: 830902  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_update_cli@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830902
ID: 830903  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830903

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-34-20210323.n.0):

ID: 830796  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830796
ID: 830797  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830797
ID: 830802  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830802
ID: 830913  Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830913
ID: 830921  Test: x86_64 universal install_european_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830921
ID: 830936  Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830936
ID: 830971  Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830971
ID: 830986  Test: aarch64 universal install_cyrillic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830986
ID: 830990  Test: aarch64 universal install_european_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830990
ID: 830996  Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830996
ID: 831022  Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831022

Soft failed openQA tests: 6/127 (aarch64), 4/189 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-34-20210323.n.0):

ID: 830879  Test: aarch64 Server-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830879

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-34-20210323.n.0):

ID: 830718  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830718
ID: 830762  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830762
ID: 830825  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830825
ID: 830826  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830826
ID: 830854  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830854
ID: 830873  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830873
ID: 830906  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830906
ID: 830931  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830931
ID: 831000  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/831000

Passed openQA tests: 178/189 (x86_64), 110/127 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-34-20210323.n.0):

ID: 830721  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_btrfs_preserve_home_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830721
ID: 830725  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_standard_partition_ext4@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830725
ID: 830781  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_printing
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830781
ID: 830788  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830788
ID: 830836  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_btrfs_preserve_home_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830836
ID: 830877  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830877
ID: 830880  Test: aarch64 Server-raw_xz-raw.xz base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830880
ID: 830881  Test: aarch64 

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-0e593b8b25


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-fe4fac3c55


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1890795] EPEL8 Request: perl-PDL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890795

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-ec19eb6c90 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-ec19eb6c90


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

ask to test latest systemd build for systemd-resolved problems

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

Hi,

we have been trying to figure out the issue where resolved sometimes
does not resolve certain names [1], e.g. 'google.com'. Unfortunately,
the issue is only reproducible for some people (most likely it depends
on the dns server or other network topology details…).

One of the patches that seem problematic [2] was included in F33 and
then reverted. But it is still present in the systemd main branch.
Before tagging the next release and pushing it to F34 and rawhide, we
would like to solve this issue (or verify that it does not occur anymore).

I prepared a copr build of latest system git [3,4] to make this easy
to test.

The ask: if you could reproduce the issue before, please test if it
still occurs with the copr build. Just "yes"/"no" is already useful.

If "yes" and you are in the mood for more complex debugging, please
'dnf debuginfo-install systemd' and see the instructions in [5].

[1] https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/18917
[2] 
https://github.com/systemd/systemd-stable/commit/18674159ebbf622a9e6e5a45cc36b38f74dae315
[3] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/zbyszek/systemd/package/systemd/
[4] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/zbyszek/systemd/build/2099402/
[5] https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/18917#issuecomment-804722158

Zbyszek

(This mail is also sent directly to people who commented that they
they can reproduce the issue in the bodhi update for F33.)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Vít Ondruch]

I have just tried https://accounts.fedoraproject.org/ and it is 
certainly welcome refresh.


Congrats and thx to all involved.


Vít


Dne 25. 03. 21 v 23:55 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):

Evening/Morning all,

I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has 
reached the point in our deployment that critical path services have 
been configured to the new solution and end user impact should be 
little to none, so we are now officially out of outage!


For a while we thought we may need some additional time to work 
through some misbehaving apps, but the group of people on the Fedora 
accounts team, and a number of people from the wider Fedora project 
gave up countless hours to help our team troubleshoot and test the 
deployment and it really sped up the outage.


Our status on services is now: GREEN! 
https://status.fedoraproject.org/ 


The outage ticket is now: CLOSED! 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9747 



To those of you who helped us, you know who you are, thank you so 
much! This deployment would not have been possible without your help. 
It truly was FOSS at its finest and was a privilege to see in action :)


Now to the details. The work is still not finished and there will 
probably be issues users will run into over the next few days. Our 
team can still be reached on IRC channel #fedora-aaa if you have any 
questions for us or need some urgent assistance, but we will be 
reviewing and actioning tickets tagged 'Noggin' over the coming days 
and weeks for fixes required.


Here's what work we have outstanding over the next few days:

  * zodbot supybot-fedora needs adjusting
  * Elections & FMN PR merges
  * Any outstanding OTP for groups scripting
  * Any UI fixes required
  * Host configs & create some maintainer-tests to verify things are
working
  * Firewall changes that are necessary
  * Fixes to opened tickets tagged 'Noggin'


And Here's what would we would like you to do if you hit any issues 
logging in over the next few days:


  * Clear your cookies
  * Clear your cache
  * Retry the login
  * If the above quick fixes dont work, please then file a ticket in
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
 and tag it 'Noggin' so
our team can review and respond


On behalf of the Fedora Accounts Team, once again thank you all so so 
much for your patience, understanding and most of all help over these 
last few days as we rolled out this new system to production.



Kindest regards & many thanks,
Aoife

--

Aoife Moloney

Product Owner

Community Platform Engineering Team

Red Hat EMEA 

Communications House

Cork Road

Waterford 




___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2021-03-26 - 95% PASS

[vashirov]

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2021/03/26/report-389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210326git741e7a72a.fc33.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-2414aff513 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-2414aff513


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Rawhide-20210326.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed

Failed openQA tests: 11/189 (x86_64), 11/127 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210322.n.0):

ID: 830151  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830151
ID: 830184  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_update_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830184
ID: 830185  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830185
ID: 830190  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830190

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210322.n.0):

ID: 830135  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830135
ID: 830152  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_updates
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830152
ID: 830162  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830162
ID: 830216  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_services_start@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830216
ID: 830217  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_selinux@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830217
ID: 830218  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz 
base_service_manipulation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830218
ID: 830221  Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz release_identification@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830221
ID: 830235  Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830235
ID: 830286  Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830286
ID: 830301  Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830301
ID: 830309  Test: x86_64 universal install_european_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830309
ID: 830324  Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830324
ID: 830359  Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830359
ID: 830374  Test: aarch64 universal install_cyrillic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830374
ID: 830378  Test: aarch64 universal install_european_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830378
ID: 830384  Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830384
ID: 830390  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_minimal_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830390
ID: 830410  Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830410

Soft failed openQA tests: 71/189 (x86_64), 50/127 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210322.n.0):

ID: 830353  Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830353
ID: 830385  Test: aarch64 universal install_package_set_minimal@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830385
ID: 830387  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830387
ID: 830388  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830388
ID: 830396  Test: aarch64 universal install_pxeboot@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830396
ID: 830416  Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_realmd_client@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830416

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210322.n.0):

ID: 830102  Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830102
ID: 830103  Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830103
ID: 830105  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830105
ID: 830106  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830106
ID: 830114  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830114
ID: 830129  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830129
ID: 830130  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830130
ID: 830136  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_hd_variation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830136
ID: 830142  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830142
ID: 

[Bug 1943595] New: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943595

Bug ID: 1943595
   Summary: perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.079 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-PPIx-Regexp
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 0.079
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.078-1.fc34
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/PPIx-Regexp/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/3288/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

RE: Issue while upgrading the package

[Muneendra Kumar M via devel]

Hi All,

I have figured the issue .

I need to run fedpkg –-release f srpm instead of fedpkg srpm

With the above thing it works fine.



Apologies for the same.



Regards,

Muneendra.



*From:* Muneendra Kumar M [mailto:muneendra.ku...@broadcom.com]
*Sent:* Friday, March 26, 2021 3:12 PM
*To:* 'Development discussions related to Fedora' <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
*Subject:* Issue while upgrading the package



Hi All,
I want to upgrade the fctxpd fedora package with additional features.

Iam the maintainer of this fctxpd package in fedora.

Can anyone help me the procedure regarding the same.

I did the below one but seeing some errors while calling fedpkg srpm


1)Get the package sources:

fedpkg clone fctxpd
cd fctxpd

2)Open the fctxpd.spec file and updated the various
versions (commit, snapshotdate etc.) and add a new entry to the %changelog
section. Save the file.




3)fedpkg srpm

Downloading fctxpd-ccbaf3a.tar.gz

100.0%
Could not execute srpm: Could not find the release/dist from branch name
rawhide
Please specify with --release





Can someone help me related to this error.Or if I miss anything steps
before I call fedpkg srpm.



And why it is downloading fctxpd-ccbaf3a.tar.gz it is suppose to create and
download fctxpd-c4dba7f.tar.gz





Below is the diff of the fctxpd.spec

Below it the diff for the same

-%global commit  ccbaf3a0cbadaaef727bcb53c1ac543fa049
+%global commit  c4dba7f21f8549b3cdd844b05613bb7ca1135619
 %global shortcommit %(c=%{commit}; echo ${c:0:7})
-%global snapshotdate20200827
+%global snapshotdate20210326

 Name:   fctxpd
 Version:0.2
-Release:3.%{snapshotdate}git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}
+Release:4.%{snapshotdate}git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}
 Summary:Fibrechannel transport daemon

 License:GPLv2+
@@ -58,6 +58,9 @@ application performance profiling software.
 %license LICENSES/GPL-2.0

 %changelog
+* Fri Mar 26 2021  Muneendra 
0.2-4.20210326gitc4dba7f
+- Added support to add change rport port_state to marginal on fpin-li



Regards,

Muneendra.

-- 
This electronic communication and the information and any files transmitted 
with it, or attached to it, are confidential and are intended solely for 
the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain 
information that is confidential, legally privileged, protected by privacy 
laws, or otherwise restricted from disclosure to anyone else. If you are 
not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the 
e-mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, 
copying, distributing, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of 
this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, 
please return the e-mail to the sender, delete it from your computer, and 
destroy any printed copy of it.


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Is Pagure openid login broken?

[Otto Urpelainen]

Richard W.M. Jones kirjoitti 25.3.2021 klo 20.56:


Thanks - it is working now.


I have similar but different problem which still happens:

1. Open pagure.io or src.fedoraproject.org
2. Log In
3. The new account system asks to approve the request, approve it
4. Redirected back to pagure.io: Page with text "Strange state: failure" 
shown


Address bar shows this:

https://pagure.io/_flask_fas_openid_handler/?janrain_nonce=2021-03-26T07%3A09%3A55Zi1DePD_handle=%7BHMAC-SHA1%7D%7B605d88c5%7D%7Bb%27FWlvbg%3D%3D%27%7D=0=1=fetch_response=http%3A%2F%2Ffedoauth.org%2Fopenid%2Fschema%2FGPG%2Fkeyid=http%3A%2F%2Ffedoauth.org%2Fopenid%2Fschema%2FSSH%2Fkey=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%3D%3D_cla=_id=http%3A%2F%2Foturpe%40iki.fi.id.fedoraproject.org%2F=http%3A%2F%2Foturpe%40iki.fi.id.fedoraproject.org%2F_member==id_res=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0=http%3A%2F%2Ffedoraproject.org%2Fspecs%2Fopen_id%2Fcla=http%3A%2F%2Fns.launchpad.net%2F2007%2Fopenid-teams=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fextensions%2Fsreg%2F1.1_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fid.fedoraproject.org%2Fopenid%2F_nonce=2021-03-26T07%3A09%3A57Zigriqa_to=https%3A%2F%2Fpagure.io%2F_flask_fas_openid_handler%2F%3Fjanrain_nonce%3D2021-03-26T07%253A09%253A55Zi1DePD=jGhpFIEDmO45PQ%2FClHVbN%2FsmkIw%3D=assoc_handle%2Cax.count.ext0%2Cax.count.ext1%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.ext0%2Cax.type.ext1%2Cax.value.ext1.1%2Ccla.signed_cla%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Clp.is_member%2Cmode%2Cns%2Cns.ax%2Cns.cla%2Cns.lp%2Cns.sreg%2Cop_endpoint%2Cresponse_nonce%2Creturn_to%2Csigned%2Csreg.email%2Csreg.fullname%2Csreg.nickname%2Csreg.timezone=oturpe%40iki.fi=Otto+Urpelainen=oturpe%40iki.fi=Europe%2FHelsinki

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1921203] perl-Graph-0.9720 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1921203



--- Comment #5 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Skipping the scratch build because an SRPM could not be built: ['rpmbuild',
'-D', '_sourcedir .', '-D', '_topdir .', '-bs',
'/var/tmp/thn-o6tq6bt9/perl-Graph.spec'] returned 1: b'error: line 5: unclosed
macro or bad line continuation\n'


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Depict: package dependency visualizer

[Łukasz Posadowski]

On 2021-03-22 at 17:11 -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> There is no reason anybody should remember, but last summer I
> mentioned 3 tools that I really wanted to help me deal with
> packaging
> issues.  The first was opam2rpm, which I started work on last
> fall.
> It isn't done by a long shot, but it is useful enough that I
> started
> working on tool #2.
> 
> Introducing "depict", a Python tool to visualize package
> dependencies:
> 
> https://pagure.io/depict

Thank You. It should be really helpful with VM migrations, by
tracking 3rd party packages and leftover dependencies. I'm trying to
run it on RHEL 8 and it is working on Python 3.8, but not on 3.6. I
think I'll have to rebuild python-rpm for 3.8 first, then.

-- 
Łukasz Posadowski

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[389-devel] Re: Please have look at One-Time Password password policy

[William Brown]

> On 25 Mar 2021, at 17:49, thierry bordaz  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/25/21 3:20 AM, William Brown wrote:
>> 
>>> On 25 Mar 2021, at 12:00, Mark Reynolds  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 3/24/21 8:32 PM, William Brown wrote:
>>> I think maybe it could be easy to visualise it.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> We have time going from past to future like:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> past -> future
>>> 
>>> 
>>> So we want a window of:
>>> 
>>> * When can the OTP start to be used?
>>> * When is the OTP no longer able to be used?
>>> 
>>> So my thinking is:
>>> 
>>> past -> future
>>>^  ^ ^
>>>|  | |
>>>otp created| |
>>>otp valid from   |
>>>  otp expire at
>>> 
>>> 
>>> So I would say otp valid from and the otp expire should be *absolute* 
>>> date times in UTC.
>>> 
>> Hi William
>> 
>> Good idea of that graphic. I am sorry to be so slow to understand but 
>> still things are not clear.
>> There are the attributes of the password policy and the operational 
>> attribute of the user account.
>> 
>> I think you meant and I agree with you that operational attributes (in 
>> the user account) should be absolute date.
>> What is not clear to me is how to compute those operational attributes 
>> from the password policy.
>> I see three options:
>>  • password policy contains absolute time (e.g. passwordOTPValidFromUTC) 
>> => account.validFrom = policyValidFromUTC
>>  • password policy contains a delay after OTP create/reset (e.g. 
>> passwordOTPValidFromDelay) => account.validFrom = Now + 
>> policyValidFromDelay
>>  • password policy contains both and if both are set we should give the 
>> priority to one or the other
>> If a password policy is a stable entry, then they should not contain 
>> absolute time. If we imagine password policy created on purpose to do a 
>> bunch of registration, then that is okay if they contain absolute time.
>> 
>> Do you think we should support password policy with absolute time ?
>> 
> No we should not store actual times in the config.  These time values 
> need to live in the entry itself, just like passwordExpirationtime. 
> Perhaps this is a good candidate to handle through the CLI (maybe even a 
> new task that uses a filter, base, etc)?
 I'm a bit confused about this answer but:
>>> Theirry thought you wanted to set:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> dn: cn=config
>>> passwordOTPStartTime: 2021034578489754Z
>>> 
>>> 
>>> But I was saying it should be in the entry, not cn=config, like how we use 
>>> passwordExpirationtime:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> uid=mark,dc=example,dc=com
>>> passwordOTPStartTime: 2021034578489754Z
>> Yep, this is exactly what I meant :)
>> 
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>> 
 I think there are no "operational" attributes here. These should all be 
 absolute dates, set on the entry. No calculation or whatever needed.
> 
> Thanks Mark, William for the clarification.
> Actually OTP is an extension of the current password policy. So there are new 
> attribute in the password policy entry and new (operational) attributes in 
> the account entry.
> 
> I understand and agree that attributes (in the account entry) that represent 
> a window of validity will be absolute time.
> 
> For example we will have, assuming that an admin reset the userpassword of 
> 'uid=mark' at 10AM we will have
> 
> dn: cn=config
> passwordMustChange: on
> passwordOTPValidFromDelay: 1800
> passwordOTPExpireDelay: 3600
> passwordOTPMaxUse: 3

I actually don't think any of these fields in cn=config are required, and 
actually limit the capability of this. 

> 
> 
> dn: uid=mark,dc=example,dc=com
> userpassword: xxx
> pwdOTPReset: true
> pwdOTPUseCount: 0
> pwdOTPValidFrom: 20210325103000Z
> pwdOTPExpireAt: 2021032511Z

You should add pwdOTPMaxUse: X here.


The reason I say this is it grants flexibility. Imagine say ... we are 
enrolling 10,000 students to a university and creating their new accounts. We 
want to set exact times on their accounts and say ... given them 10 tries or 
something.

But at the same time we need to reset someones account. For them, we want them 
to have say ... 1 attempt to do the reset, and have a different time window.

All the cn=config fields do here is confuse and complicate the system - what is 
their purpose but to "template" out some values into the entry? 

In this matter, I think that all the OTP fields should be on the entry to allow 
more possibilities of how the pwdOTP can be used in diverse situations. 


> 
> Meaning the user 'Mark' should complete his registration between 10:30AM and 
> 11AM and he will be granted 3 tries to bind with 

Fedora-Cloud-33-20210326.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

ID: 830094  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830094
ID: 830101  Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/830101

Passed openQA tests: 6/7 (x86_64), 6/7 (aarch64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

fedpkg update => Error returned from our POST to ipsilon (was: Re: Is Pagure openid login broken?)

[Richard W.M. Jones]

fedpkg updates are also failing now:

$ fedpkg update
Could not execute update: Could not generate update request: 
ServerError(https://id.fedoraproject.org/api/v1/, 500, Error returned from our 
POST to ipsilon.)


-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines.  Supports shell scripting,
bindings from many languages.  http://libguestfs.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora Linux 34 Final blocker status update #2

[Ben Cotton]

I'm on PTO tomorrow, so you get this a day early. Lucky you!

Action summary


Accepted blockers
-
1. sddm — logout after switch returns the user to console instead of sddm — NEW
ACTION: sddm maintainers to diagnose and fix issue

2. shim — include new bootloaders on Fedora 34 install media so UEFI
Secure Boot enabled systems can boot from them — ASSIGNED
ACTION: shim maintainers to provide shim signed with new key

Proposed blockers
-

1. abrt — Abrt does not catch a simulated segfault — NEW
ACTION: QA to gather more data and have other testers confirm

2. LiveCD - KDE — KDE live image shows update notifications — MODIFIED
ACTION: QA to verify KDE live images

3. gdm — Login using password failed after upgrade to Fedora 34 — NEW
ACTION: gdm maintainers to diagnose and fix issue

4. mesa — External monitor doesn't work on Lenovo P50 after upgrading
to F34 — NEW
ACTION: mesa maintainers to submit F34 update for mesa-21.0.1-2

5. mutter — gnome-shell crashes when display blanking is activated — POST
ACTION: mutter maintainers to submit F34 update for mutter-40.0-2


Bug-by-bug detail
=

Accepted blockers
-
1. sddm — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929643 — NEW
logout after switch returns the user to console instead of sddm

Using the "Switch User" functionality in sddm results in dropping to a
console: either to tty2 with a working text login prompt, or to tty1
where only a blinking cursor appears (no login prompt).

2. shim — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1938630 — ASSIGNED
include new bootloaders on Fedora 34 install media so UEFI Secure Boot
enabled systems can boot from them

The current shim was signed in 2018 and its signing key was revoked
last year due to the Boothole vulnerability. We need a new shim to
make sure F34 images will boot on machines with Secure Boot enabled.

Proposed blockers
-

1. abrt — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937783 — NEW
Abrt does not catch a simulated segfault

abrt is not catching simulated segfaults when SELinux is enabled.
However it is not universally-reproducible, so further testing is
needed.

2. LiveCD - KDE — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939751 — NEW
KDE live image shows update notifications

Discover shows that updates are available, which live images are not
supposed to do. A fix to the kickstarts was merged, so now we just
need to verify a new compose.

3. gdm — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942443 — NEW
Login using password failed after upgrade to Fedora 34

When a device has a fingerprint reader, but no fingerprints are
enrolled, login fails on the default terminal. Switching to a
different virtual console allows login. Removing fprintd-pam resolves
the problem, but is probably not the solution we want.

4. mesa — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942175 — NEW
External monitor doesn't work on Lenovo P50 after upgrading to F34

If the display offloading GPU doesn't support OpenGL, we get two
OpenGL contexts for each GPU. Disabling zink, as in mesa-21.0.1-2
fixes the issue.

5. mutter — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941971 — POST
gnome-shell crashes when display blanking is activated

With hybrid GPUs, when the screen is set to blank after a period of
inactivity, the blanking crashes gnome-shell and returns the user to
the gdm greeting screen. This is fixed in mutter-40.0-2.

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1745564] Upgrade perl-XML-RSS to 1.61

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1745564

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-XML-RSS-1.61-1.fc32|perl-XML-RSS-1.61-1.fc32
   ||perl-XML-RSS-1.61-1.fc31
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-03-26 08:13:33




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora Account Migration & Production Deployment Update: COMPLETE!

[Aoife Moloney]

Evening/Morning all,

I am beyond pleased to announce that the Fedora Accounts Team has reached
the point in our deployment that critical path services have been
configured to the new solution and end user impact should be little to
none, so we are now officially out of outage!

For a while we thought we may need some additional time to work through
some misbehaving apps, but the group of people on the Fedora accounts team,
and a number of people from the wider Fedora project gave up
countless hours to help our team troubleshoot and test the deployment and
it really sped up the outage.

Our status on services is now: GREEN! https://status.fedoraproject.org/

The outage ticket is now: CLOSED!
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9747

To those of you who helped us, you know who you are, thank you so much!
This deployment would not have been possible without your help. It truly
was FOSS at its finest and was a privilege to see in action :)

Now to the details. The work is still not finished and there will probably
be issues users will run into over the next few days. Our team can still be
reached on IRC channel #fedora-aaa if you have any questions for us or need
some urgent assistance, but we will be reviewing and actioning tickets
tagged 'Noggin' over the coming days and weeks for fixes required.

Here's what work we have outstanding over the next few days:

   - zodbot supybot-fedora needs adjusting
   - Elections & FMN PR merges
   - Any outstanding OTP for groups scripting
   - Any UI fixes required
   - Host configs & create some maintainer-tests to verify things are
   working
   - Firewall changes that are necessary
   - Fixes to opened tickets tagged 'Noggin'


And Here's what would we would like you to do if you hit any issues logging
in over the next few days:

   - Clear your cookies
   - Clear your cache
   - Retry the login
   - If the above quick fixes dont work, please then file a ticket in
   https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure and tag it 'Noggin' so our team
   can review and respond


On behalf of the Fedora Accounts Team, once again thank you all so so much
for your patience, understanding and most of all help over these last few
days as we rolled out this new system to production.


Kindest regards & many thanks,
Aoife

-- 

Aoife Moloney

Product Owner

Community Platform Engineering Team

Red Hat EMEA 

Communications House

Cork Road

Waterford

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1941284] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20210320 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1941284

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   |0210320-1.fc35  |0210320-1.fc35
   ||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   ||0210320-1.fc34
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-03-26 00:16:30



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-89531251eb has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1921203] perl-Graph-0.9720 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1921203

Upstream Release Monitoring  
changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|perl-Graph-0.9718 is|perl-Graph-0.9720 is
   |available   |available



--- Comment #4 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
Latest upstream release: 0.9720
Current version/release in rawhide: 0.97.16-2.fc34
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Graph/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/7524/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1885423] perl-File-Listing-6.10 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1885423

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2021-03-26 08:11:14




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Default 'fedora' hostname and failing split DNS VPN

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 09:54:11AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25 2021 at 09:26:19 AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro
>  wrote:
> >For now, keep nss-myhostname at the start of the line, right after
> >files. We will probably need to find a way to either (a) fix
> >systemd-resolved to handle mDNS properly, so we can move it after
> >nss-resolve, where it really belongs, or (b) move nss-myhostname
> >in front of nss-mdns4_minimal.
> 
> OK, I've reported
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943199. It requires
> further discussion though, to see if the systemd package maintainers
> agree.

Yeah, I think that's the way to go.

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1931125] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20210220 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931125

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-03-26 08:09:58




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1943227] perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.0.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1943227

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-1.
   ||0.0-1.fc35



--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar  ---
A bug-fix release suitable for all Fedoras.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora 34 compose report: 20210326.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-34-20210323.n.0
NEW: Fedora-34-20210326.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images:  0
Added packages:  50
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages:   177
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  20.65 MiB
Size of dropped packages:1.39 MiB
Size of upgraded packages:   7.27 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   4.39 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =

= DROPPED IMAGES =

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: fx-20.0.2-3.fc34
Summary: Command-line JSON processing tool
RPMs:fx
Size:277.43 KiB

Package: gnome-connections-40.0-2.fc34
Summary: A remote desktop client for the GNOME desktop environment
RPMs:gnome-connections
Size:746.04 KiB

Package: golang-github-gl-0-0.1.20210320gitbf2b1f2.fc34
Summary: Go bindings for OpenGL
RPMs:golang-github-gl-devel
Size:376.43 KiB

Package: google-cpu_features-0.6.0-2.fc34
Summary: A cross-platform C library to retrieve CPU features at runtime
RPMs:google-cpu_features google-cpu_features-devel
Size:229.52 KiB

Package: iceauth-1.0.8-1.fc34
Summary: Display the authorization information used in connecting with ICE
RPMs:iceauth
Size:128.68 KiB

Package: libv3270-5.3-5.fc34
Summary: 3270 Virtual Terminal for GTK+3
RPMs:libv3270 libv3270-devel libv3270-doc
Size:1.27 MiB

Package: luit-1.1.1-1.fc34
Summary: Locale to UTF-8 encoding filter
RPMs:luit
Size:149.49 KiB

Package: noggin-0.0.1^git20210323.3b487ed-1.fc34
Summary: Self-service user portal for FreeIPA for communities
RPMs:noggin noggin-tests noggin-theme-centos noggin-theme-fas 
noggin-theme-openSUSE
Size:11.15 MiB

Package: npm-name-cli-3.0.0-4.fc34
Summary: Check whether a package or organization name is available on npm
RPMs:npm-name-cli
Size:1.01 MiB

Package: oclock-1.0.4-1.fc34
Summary: A simple analog clock
RPMs:oclock
Size:98.01 KiB

Package: perl-IO-stringy-2.113-5.module_f34+11615+acc6d657
Summary: I/O on in-core objects like strings and arrays for Perl
RPMs:perl-IO-stringy
Size:66.06 KiB

Package: python-allpairspy-2.5.0-1.fc34
Summary: Pairwise test combinations generator
RPMs:python3-allpairspy
Size:22.25 KiB

Package: python-dbus-next-0.2.2-1.fc34
Summary: Zero-dependency DBus library for Python with asyncio support
RPMs:python3-dbus-next
Size:104.47 KiB

Package: python-flask-talisman-0.7.0-1.fc34
Summary: HTTP security headers for Flask
RPMs:python3-flask-talisman
Size:29.57 KiB

Package: python-langdetect-1.0.8-1.fc34
Summary: Language detection library ported from Google's language-detection
RPMs:python3-langdetect
Size:880.19 KiB

Package: python-openpaperwork-core-2.0.2-1.fc34
Summary: OpenPaperwork's core
RPMs:python3-openpaperwork-core
Size:143.23 KiB

Package: python-openpaperwork-gtk-2.0.2-1.fc34
Summary: OpenPaperwork GTK plugins
RPMs:python3-openpaperwork-gtk
Size:97.87 KiB

Package: python-translitcodec-0.6.0-1.fc34
Summary: Unicode to 8-bit charset transliteration codec
RPMs:python3-translitcodec
Size:21.37 KiB

Package: rgb-1.0.6-40.fc34
Summary: X color name database
RPMs:rgb
Size:89.19 KiB

Package: sessreg-1.1.2-1.fc34
Summary: Utility to manage utmp/wtmp entries for X sessions
RPMs:sessreg
Size:82.82 KiB

Package: sway-systemd-0.1.1-1.fc34
Summary: Systemd integration for Sway session
RPMs:sway-systemd
Size:15.20 KiB

Package: x11perf-1.6.1-1.fc34
Summary: X11 server performance test program
RPMs:x11perf
Size:393.84 KiB

Package: xbiff-1.0.4-1.fc34
Summary: Graphical notification of new e-mail
RPMs:xbiff
Size:100.31 KiB

Package: xclipboard-1.1.3-1.fc34
Summary: Utility to collect and display text selections
RPMs:xclipboard
Size:137.06 KiB

Package: xclock-1.0.9-1.fc34
Summary: The classic X Window System clock utility
RPMs:xclock
Size:190.12 KiB

Package: xconsole-1.0.7-1.fc34
Summary: Display messages in an X11 window
RPMs:xconsole
Size:96.67 KiB

Package: xcursorgen-1.0.7-1.fc34
Summary: Prepare X11 cursor sets for use with libXcursor
RPMs:xcursorgen
Size:86.16 KiB

Package: xeyes-1.1.2-1.fc34
Summary: A follow the mouse X demo
RPMs:xeyes
Size:94.32 KiB

Package: xfd-1.1.2-1.fc34
Summary: Display characters of a font
RPMs:xfd
Size:127.98 KiB

Package: xfontsel-1.0.6-1.fc34
Summary: Tool to list X11 core protocol fonts
RPMs:xfontsel
Size:165.13 KiB

Package: xgamma-1.0.6-1.fc34
Summary: X utility to query and alter the gamma correction of a monitor
RPMs:xgamma
Size:80.50 KiB

Package: xhost-1.0.7-1.fc34
Summary: Manage hosts or users allowed to connect to the X server
RPMs:xhost
Size:97.13 KiB

Package: xinput-1.6.3-1.fc34
Summary: Utility to query X Input devices
RPMs:xinput
Size:184.05 KiB

Package: xisxwayland-1-1.fc34
Summary: Tool to check if the X server is XWayland
RPMs:xisxwayland
Size

Re: Is there a reason to do Python runtime flatpackages anymore?

[Miro Hrončok]

On 22. 03. 21 15:50, Neal Gompa wrote:

Hey all,


Hey Neal, thanks for bringing this up.


Things have changed in Python runtime packaging since we started
introducing alternative Python versions years ago. For one, we now
always have fully versioned source packages, and now we have a flag
for whether the packages are "main runtime" vs "alternate runtime".
Another is that RHEL now offers multiple Python runtimes that you can
build packages from.


Yes, everything is prepared on the source-level to work nicely. RHEL 9 will show 
if this is indeed the case and we'll correct the stuff that's broken.



I'm wondering if it makes sense to continue having the logic in the
Python runtime packaging for "flatpackage" when we can now just have
them build as alternative runtimes. This doesn't get rid of the
concept of a "main runtime" that is generally supported by the macros,
but it brings us closer in line with what our downstreams are doing.


This is possible. The reason we are not doing it is simple: We don't have the 
capacity to support this in Fedora. Taking care of one Python stack is an 
enormous amount of work. Taking care of another one can be simpler (because it 
might be smaller), but will bring other challenges (how long do we keep an 
alternate stack hanging around before we deprecate and remove it, how many 
parallel stacks do we allow t the same time, how do we handle building 
subpackages for multiple stacks form on source). Not to mention the maintenance 
cost fo the interpreters themselves. Quite often we close security bugzillas as 
WONTFIX or UPSTREAM, saying something like: "This package exists in Fedora only 
so that Python developers could run their test suites e.g. with tox." Once we 
make it possible to run actual Fedora packages on top of this, we cannot longer 
do that.



This could also ease Python transitions in the future, since we
wouldn't have the Python runtime ripped out from under us for DNF as
we rebootstrap the whole environment to a new Python version default.


This would only make things easier if we package the entire dnf dependency tree 
for the next stack before we proceed with the upgrade. We tried a similar thing 
once (for "system-python") and it was enormously time- and energy-consumig. I 
don't want to do this myself ever again, so this would only possibly get easier 
if *all* the maintainers of the packages from the stack are actively 
participating (hint: usually, only some are).


I am also afraid that this would actually be more complicated at first, because 
there would be new challenges and new problems, before it gets easier. I am a 
bit pessimistic about the "return on investment" here.



At least for me, it would also make it easier for me to trivially
rebuild packages in COPR against an alternate Python version for
specific purposes, too, since the only required change to switch to an
alternate runtime would be setting %__python/%__python3 and making
sure the subpackage has the fully qualified Python version name in it.


That I actually consider "supported". Flip the bcond in Python X.Y, rebuild it 
and start rebuilding packages atop. That's what RHEL 9 is going to do.



What do you all think? Is this crazy talk or something we might want
to think about?


It is actually a very nice thought and I could support it, if only I wouldn't 
see all the work behind this. Give me 3 more full time people dedicated to this 
long-term and I might even drive this myself (I probably shouldn't, to avoid a 
burn-out).




I also have some reservations about how would Fedora's content actually look 
like if we allow package (as in apps, tools, services) maintainers to hand-pick 
a Python stack to use. Currently, we don't plan to do this in RHEL 9 (I imagine 
the "alternate" stacks as "leaf-clusters"), but this might change after couple 
years of RHEL 9 life-time - e.g. in EPEL or even in some internal stuff.


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure