Re: Fedora CoreOS Community Video Meeting 2021-11-02

[Dusty Mabe]

Correction in the subject: 2021-11-03

And in the Body: Time: 16:30 UTC (same as normal) on Wednesday November 3rd

On 11/2/21 10:19 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Tomorrow we will be holding a video meeting for the Fedora CoreOS community.
> 
> Colin Walters will be presenting on a new proposal for "CoreOS Layering".
> https://github.com/coreos/enhancements/pull/7
> 
> We'll also be discussing any meeting tickets and possibly revisit our list of 
> high level
> issues.
> 
> Time: 16:30 UTC (same as normal) on Wednesday October 6th
> Location: https://meet.google.com/igd-ekxw-nzi (will be recorded)
> Agenda/Notes: https://hackmd.io/5bdC2OLjQYmB5ErZ4AzpdA
> 
> Dusty
___
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 2017168] perl-libwww-perl-6.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-8507a3a75e 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-2021-8507a3a75e`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-8507a3a75e

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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168
___
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 CoreOS Community Video Meeting 2021-11-02

[Dusty Mabe]

Hi All,

Tomorrow we will be holding a video meeting for the Fedora CoreOS community.

Colin Walters will be presenting on a new proposal for "CoreOS Layering".
https://github.com/coreos/enhancements/pull/7

We'll also be discussing any meeting tickets and possibly revisit our list of 
high level
issues.

Time: 16:30 UTC (same as normal) on Wednesday October 6th
Location: https://meet.google.com/igd-ekxw-nzi (will be recorded)
Agenda/Notes: https://hackmd.io/5bdC2OLjQYmB5ErZ4AzpdA

Dusty
___
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 2016725] perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016725

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   |-1.fc36 |-1.fc36
   |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   |-1.fc35 |-1.fc35
   |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   |-1.fc34 |-1.fc34
   ||perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   ||-1.fc33



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-e74f7a005e 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016725
___
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 2017168] perl-libwww-perl-6.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-5b4f7e4e5a 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-2021-5b4f7e4e5a`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-5b4f7e4e5a

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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168
___
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 2017168] perl-libwww-perl-6.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-39b5459896 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2021-39b5459896`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-39b5459896

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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168
___
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

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

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
  46  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f005e1b879   
debmirror-2.35-1.el7
   6  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-9db00036f5   
java-latest-openjdk-17.0.1.0.12-1.rolling.el7
   2  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-c1992565eb   
rpki-client-7.4-1.el7


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

cacti-1.2.19-1.el7
cacti-spine-1.2.19-1.el7
mock-2.13-1.el7
php-composer-ca-bundle-1.3.1-1.el7
rust-1.56.1-1.el7
snapd-2.53.1-2.el7
uglify-js3-3.14.3-1.el7
xrootd-5.3.2-1.el7
zabbix40-4.0.35-1.el7
zabbix50-5.0.17-1.el7

Details about builds:



 cacti-1.2.19-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-8f1a739899)
 An rrd based graphing tool

Update Information:

- Update to 1.2.19  Release notes: https://www.cacti.net/info/changelog/1.2.19

ChangeLog:

* Tue Nov  2 2021 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.19-1
- Update to 1.2.19

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1950494 - Cacti 1.2.16 is not available for EPEL7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950494
  [ 2 ] Bug #2001018 - CVE-2020-14424 cacti: lack of escaping on template 
import can lead to XSS [epel-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001018




 cacti-spine-1.2.19-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-8f1a739899)
 Threaded poller for Cacti written in C

Update Information:

- Update to 1.2.19  Release notes: https://www.cacti.net/info/changelog/1.2.19

ChangeLog:

* Tue Nov  2 2021 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.19-1
- Update to 1.2.19
* Sun Sep  5 2021 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.17-3
- Added patch for #1987395
* Wed Jul 21 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.2.17-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild
* Mon May 10 2021 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.17-1
- Update to 1.2.17
* Tue Jan 26 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.2.16-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Mass_Rebuild
* Mon Dec 14 2020 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.16-1
- Update to 1.2.16

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #1950494 - Cacti 1.2.16 is not available for EPEL7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950494
  [ 2 ] Bug #2001018 - CVE-2020-14424 cacti: lack of escaping on template 
import can lead to XSS [epel-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001018




 mock-2.13-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-af2ed0807c)
 Builds packages inside chroots

Update Information:

Release notes: https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-2.13

ChangeLog:

* Mon Nov  1 2021 Pavel Raiskup  2.13-1
- local repositories to use gpgcheck=0 by default
- A new option --additional-package (for --rebuild)
- external-deps: install pip packages to /usr
- Install external deps into build chroot, not bootstrap
- Migrate from optparse to argparse
- mock: don't specify SOURCE when remounting bind-mounts
- mock: add option --debug-config-expanded (ser...@serjux.com)
- Fix use of deprecated function (xfgu...@gmail.com)
- lvm_root: fix copy/paste error in a warning message (kdu...@redhat.com)




 php-composer-ca-bundle-1.3.1-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-e313601781)
 Lets you find a path to the system CA

Update Information:

**Version 1.3.1**  *Fixed compatibility issue with open_basedir restrictions
#69

ChangeLog:

* Sat Oct 30 2021 Remi Collet  - 1.3.1-1
- update to 1.3.1




 rust-1.56.1-1.el7 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f69cb3c1f1)
 The Rust Programming Language

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   6  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-f9c76d4c79   
ansible-2.9.27-1.el8
   2  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-51a1d774bf   
rpki-client-7.4-1.el8


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing

cacti-1.2.19-1.el8
cacti-spine-1.2.19-1.el8
mock-2.13-1.el8
notcurses-2.4.8-2.el8
snapd-2.53.1-2.el8
uglify-js3-3.14.3-1.el8
xrootd-5.3.2-1.el8

Details about builds:



 cacti-1.2.19-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-242bfc4463)
 An rrd based graphing tool

Update Information:

- Update to 1.2.19  Release notes: https://www.cacti.net/info/changelog/1.2.19

ChangeLog:

* Tue Nov  2 2021 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.19-1
- Update to 1.2.19
* Wed Jul 21 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.2.17-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2001018 - CVE-2020-14424 cacti: lack of escaping on template 
import can lead to XSS [epel-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001018




 cacti-spine-1.2.19-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-242bfc4463)
 Threaded poller for Cacti written in C

Update Information:

- Update to 1.2.19  Release notes: https://www.cacti.net/info/changelog/1.2.19

ChangeLog:

* Tue Nov  2 2021 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.19-1
- Update to 1.2.19
* Sun Sep  5 2021 Morten Stevens  - 1.2.17-3
- Added patch for #1987395
* Wed Jul 21 2021 Fedora Release Engineering  - 
1.2.17-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Mass_Rebuild

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #2001018 - CVE-2020-14424 cacti: lack of escaping on template 
import can lead to XSS [epel-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001018




 mock-2.13-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-98e0932614)
 Builds packages inside chroots

Update Information:

Release notes: https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-2.13

ChangeLog:

* Mon Nov  1 2021 Pavel Raiskup  2.13-1
- local repositories to use gpgcheck=0 by default
- A new option --additional-package (for --rebuild)
- external-deps: install pip packages to /usr
- Install external deps into build chroot, not bootstrap
- Migrate from optparse to argparse
- mock: don't specify SOURCE when remounting bind-mounts
- mock: add option --debug-config-expanded (ser...@serjux.com)
- Fix use of deprecated function (xfgu...@gmail.com)
- lvm_root: fix copy/paste error in a warning message (kdu...@redhat.com)




 notcurses-2.4.8-2.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-522bd2626d)
 Character graphics and TUI library

Update Information:

https://github.com/dankamongmen/notcurses/releases/tag/v2.4.8

ChangeLog:

* Mon Oct 25 2021 Nick Black  2.4.8-2
- RPMAUTOSPEC: unresolvable merge




 snapd-2.53.1-2.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2021-0b1ba44b2e)
 A transactional software package manager

Update Information:

Update to 2.53.1

ChangeLog:

* Tue Nov  2 2021 Maciek Borzecki  - 2.53.1-2
- Disable BPF support on systems that are too old
* Tue Nov  2 2021 Maciek Borzecki  - 2.53.1-1
- Release 2.53.1 to Fedora
* Thu Oct 21 2021 Ian Johnson 
- New upstream release 2.53.1
 - spread: run lxd tests with version from latest/stable
 - secboot: use latest secboot with tpm legacy platform and v2 fully
   optional (#10946)
 - cmd/snap-confine: die when snap process 

[Bug 2016731] perl-CBOR-XS-1.85 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016731

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc36|perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc36
   |perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc35|perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc35
   ||perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc34



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-19d258aad2 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016731
___
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 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-CBOR-XS-1.84-1.fc36|perl-CBOR-XS-1.84-1.fc36
   |perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc35|perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc35
   ||perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc34



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-19d258aad2 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223
___
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 2016725] perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016725

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   |-1.fc36 |-1.fc36
   |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   |-1.fc35 |-1.fc35
   ||perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   ||-1.fc34



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-306d1d3920 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016725
___
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 2016542] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20211020 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016542

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   |0211020-1.fc36  |0211020-1.fc36
   |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   |0211020-1.fc34  |0211020-1.fc34
   |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   |0211020-1.fc33  |0211020-1.fc33
   ||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   ||0211020-1.fc35



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-c6f031d14a has been pushed to the Fedora 35 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016542
___
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 2016731] perl-CBOR-XS-1.85 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016731

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc36|perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc36
   ||perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc35
Last Closed||2021-11-03 01:11:28



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-78dbcbb5a5 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016731
___
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 2017154] perl-Spreadsheet-XLSX-0.16 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017154

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Spreadsheet-XLSX-0.16-
   ||1.fc35
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2021-11-03 01:11:56



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-fe48819943 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017154
___
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 2016725] perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016725

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version|perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07 |perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   |-1.fc36 |-1.fc36
   ||perl-Locale-SubCountry-2.07
   ||-1.fc35
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
Last Closed||2021-11-03 01:11:24



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-23c4b14727 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016725
___
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 2016223] perl-CBOR-XS-1.84 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version|perl-CBOR-XS-1.84-1.fc36|perl-CBOR-XS-1.84-1.fc36
   ||perl-CBOR-XS-1.85-1.fc35
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
Last Closed||2021-11-03 01:11:26



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-78dbcbb5a5 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016223
___
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 2016648] perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.081 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016648

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-PPIx-Regexp-0.081-1.fc
   ||35
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
Last Closed||2021-11-03 01:11:17



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-e818aeded5 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016648
___
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 2016538] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20211020 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016538

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021
   |1020-1.fc36 |1020-1.fc36
   |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021
   |1020-1.fc34 |1020-1.fc34
   |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021
   |1020-1.fc33 |1020-1.fc33
   ||perl-Module-CoreList-5.2021
   ||1020-1.fc35



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-a1907df133 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016538
___
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: F36 Change: Package information on ELF objects (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 25. 10. 21 v 21:09 Ben Cotton napsal(a):

=== Why not just use the rpm database? ===


17:34:33  The main reason for this appears to be that we
need the RPM db locally to resolve build-ids to package names. But
since containers wipe /var/lib/rpm, we can't do that. So the solution
is to put the ''nevra'' in ELF metadata?
17:34:39  That feels like the wrong approach.


First, there are legitimate reasons to strip packaging metadata from
images. For example, for an initrd image from rpms, I get 117 MB of
files (without compression), and out of this `/var/lib/rpm` is 5.9 MB,
and `/var/lib/dnf` is 4.2 MB. This is an overhead of 9%. This is ''not
much'', but still too much to keep in the image unless necessary.
Similar ratios will happen for containers of similar size. Reducing
image size by one tenth is important. There is no `rpm` or `dnf` in
the image, to the package database is not even usable without external
tools.


Devil advocate here:

**Some** people wipe `/var/lib/rpm` to save 5.9 MB. And because of this we will put another 5.9 MB [citation needed] as 
metadata split across various ELF objects for **everybody**.


When someone want really tiny image, I will expect they will start stipping ELF 
objects when they discover this feature.

Miroslav
___
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: License correction: wlcs is “GPLv3”, not “GPLv2 or GPLv3”

[Ben Beasley]

Yes, exactly, this is based on an audit of actual source file licenses 
via a combination of licensecheck and manual inspection.


I listed the full details in a spec file comment, but basically, the 
files that are sources for the compiled binaries are either (LGPLv2 or 
LGPLv3) or GPLv3, so the binaries are GPLv3 overall. All files that are 
installed directly from the source tree, like API headers and examples, 
are also GPLv3 only. Therefore, everything in the binary RPMs is GPLv3.


- Ben

On 11/2/21 17:20, Ian McInerney via devel wrote:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:06 PM Tomasz Torcz > wrote:


On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 03:26:52PM -0400, Ben Beasley wrote:
 > The License field of wlcs has been corrected from “GPLv2 or GPLv3” to
 > “GPLv3”.

https://github.com/MirServer/wlcs
 (is this the right repo?) contains
  both COPYING.GPL2 and COPYING.GPL3.  How did you determine correct
  license?


I am guessing based on the actual license listed in the source files. 
Looking through some of them (such as 
https://github.com/MirServer/wlcs/blob/master/src/primary_selection.cpp 
), 
some only list GPLv3 while others list GPLv3 or GPLv2 - so the files 
that are only licensed under GPLv3 means it should be GPLv3 only.


-Ian

___
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

Re: License correction: wlcs is “GPLv3”, not “GPLv2 or GPLv3”

[Ian McInerney via devel]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:06 PM Tomasz Torcz  wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 03:26:52PM -0400, Ben Beasley wrote:
> > The License field of wlcs has been corrected from “GPLv2 or GPLv3” to
> > “GPLv3”.
>
>  https://github.com/MirServer/wlcs (is this the right repo?) contains
>  both COPYING.GPL2 and COPYING.GPL3.  How did you determine correct
>  license?
>
>
I am guessing based on the actual license listed in the source files.
Looking through some of them (such as
https://github.com/MirServer/wlcs/blob/master/src/primary_selection.cpp),
some only list GPLv3 while others list GPLv3 or GPLv2 - so the files that
are only licensed under GPLv3 means it should be GPLv3 only.

-Ian
___
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: License correction: wlcs is “GPLv3”, not “GPLv2 or GPLv3”

[Tomasz Torcz]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 03:26:52PM -0400, Ben Beasley wrote:
> The License field of wlcs has been corrected from “GPLv2 or GPLv3” to
> “GPLv3”.

 https://github.com/MirServer/wlcs (is this the right repo?) contains
 both COPYING.GPL2 and COPYING.GPL3.  How did you determine correct
 license?


-- 
Tomasz Torcz   72->|   80->|
to...@pipebreaker.pl   72->|   80->|
___
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: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Prioritized bugs and issues

[Ben Cotton]

> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:00 AM  wrote:
>
> You are kindly invited to the meeting:
>Prioritized bugs and issues on 2021-11-03 from 11:00:00 to 12:00:00 
> America/Indiana/Indianapolis
>At fedora-meetin...@libera.chat
>
> More information available at: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/program_management/prioritized_bugs/
>
We will discuss the following nominated bug (for real this time. I
swear I won't forget to run the meeting this time):

* gnome-shell: gnome-shell killed by SIGSEGV —
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960938

There are no currently accepted prioritized bugs.

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
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

Re: Fedora 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:30 PM Adam Williamson
 wrote:

> Further to this .

Thanks for the report on your research.

When there are enough fragile moving parts,
sooner or later something goes sideways
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 02:43:05PM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> As a side-effect I received 49 identical e-mails from 
> notificati...@fedoraproject.org
> with not very specific subject "fedmsg notification" and the following link 
> inside:


"Update fedmsg notification email system" is one of the potential future CPE
(Red Hat Community Platform Engineering) projects. Lots of other needs to
balance it against, though.

-- 
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

Self Introduction: Maíra Canal

[Maíra Canal via devel]

Hello,

I'm an undergrad student of Computer Engineering in Brazil. I use Fedora for 
about a year as my only OS and I love the philosophy (and the performance) of 
Fedora. Currently, I'm looking forward to being a part of the community and 
contributing by supporting packages and developing. I have already some 
experience contributing to the Linux kernel, but I would like to contribute to 
Fedora directly.

I'm looking for suggestions of applications to be packaged, so if you have any, 
I'm glad to know.

Looking forward to future cooperation,
Maíra
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2021-11-02 at 10:32 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
> 3. I'm not sure why Bodhi is still not allowing the update to be
> submitted for stable even though the tests have been waived, this is
> odd. I ran the greenwave query manually and it returns (in part):
> 
> "policies_satisfied": true,
> "unsatisfied_requirements": []
> 
> which should always satisfy Bodhi. If I've figured this out before (as
> Kalev implied), then I've forgotten it now. :P But whenever the new
> Bodhi version actually does get released and deployed, it tweaks
> several things in this area, so whatever the problem is may get fixed.
> Hopefully, once I re-run the openQA tests and they actually pass, Bodhi
> will be happy.

Further to this: I did re-run the tests, they did pass, it did make
Bodhi happy, and I successfully submitted the update to stable. It
should get pushed in the next push, I hope.

It looks like what happened is that Bodhi didn't update its recorded
gating status for the update when the waivers were submitted. Note
there's two different calculations of the gating status in Bodhi, which
can confuse things. The status you see on the right-hand side of the
web UI - "All required tests passed" or whatever - is actually
generated *by the front end code* whenever your browser loads the page.
The JS front end code runs a (verbose) Greenwave query when you view
the page, and uses the results to generate that status and also the
Automated Tests results list itself. So that status will always be 'up
to date'.

When you try and push the update, though - whether by clicking on the
button in the web UI, or using the CLI client - Bodhi doesn't use that
status, because the Bodhi back end code doesn't *know* about that
status at all. Instead it checks a property of the update object, which
gets updated...sometimes. The "This update's test gating status has
been changed to XXX" messages that get posted on the update
periodically are actually telling you about *that* status check.
Basically, unless the most recent message was "This update's test
gating status has been changed to passed" or "This update's test gating
status has been changed to ignored", you will not be able to push it.

I think probably the bit that broke down here is that when you
submitted your waivers, Bodhi didn't get told. The way this is
*currently* supposed to work is that Greenwave listens out for new
waivers, decides whether they change an update push decision, and
publishes a greenwave.decision.update message if so. Bodhi listens for
the greenwave.decision.update messages and either just accepts what
they say or re-calculates the decision (it depends on some other stuff
that doesn't matter rn). Looking through datagrepper logs, I see
waiverdb.waiver.new messages from waiverdb when you created your
waivers, but I *don't* see greenwave.decision.update messages in
response to them. So I think Greenwave messed up and didn't think the
waivers changed the decision. So Bodhi didn't get a message telling it
to re-calculate the gating status, and it stayed at 'failed'.

There is, I believe, a cron job that runs every few hours or every day
or something that re-calculates the gating status of *every* active
update, so it would probably have got caught up at some point. But it
should really get recalculated as soon as a relevant waiver is
submitted.

I *hope* this should be fixed in the next Bodhi release, whenever it
gets done and deployed. I actually rewrote how that works completely:

https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/pull/4230

mainly because I considered the existing design to be flat out wrong
(for reasons I won't go into unless you really care :>), but also
because I did, a few months ago, look through the code and find that
greenwave could get this wrong for openQA tests/waivers. I forget the
details, but there's some point at which it makes some assumptions
which are only true for CI tests/waivers. I started out aiming to fix
that, but instead decided the design was wrong and it made more sense
to have Bodhi just listen out for new result / new waiver messages
directly. I believe I wrote that properly so it will work for
waivers/results related to both CI and openQA tests, but we'll find out
for sure when it's deployed, I guess. :D

Sorry again for the trouble!
-- 
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

License correction: wlcs is “GPLv3”, not “GPLv2 or GPLv3”

[Ben Beasley]

The License field of wlcs has been corrected from “GPLv2 or GPLv3” to 
“GPLv3”.

___
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: Self Introduction: Zuzana Miklankova

[Mikolaj Izdebski]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 3:23 PM Zuzana Miklankova  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am an employee of Red Hat, using Fedora as my main working environment.
>
> I have tried various Linux distributions yet, even though I have never 
> contributed to any.
> However, I have gained some experience in contributing to open-source 
> projects during my studies at university.
>
> I will be maintaining some java database-related packages. And I have also 
> already
> submitted my first package [1].

Welcome.

Please consider joining java-devel mailing list [1] used for
Java-related packaging topics.

--
Mikolaj Izdebski

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Java#Mailing_list

>
> Looking forward to future cooperation,
> Zuzana.
>
> [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/container-workflow-tool
> ___
> 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

Re: openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Tom Hughes via devel]

Fedora also doesn't shop openswan so a plugin wouldn't be very useful.

There does seem to be a plasma-nm-strongswan though, but not one for
libreswan that I can see.

Also NetworkManager's libreswan plugin used to be called openswan
up to version 1.0.0 when it was renamed (libreswan is a fork of
openswan) so I suspect the plasma-nm-openswan is really configuring
the libreswan plugin now and nmcli may well still accept openswan
as an alias I guess?

Tom

On 02/11/2021 18:16, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
That's the reason of my confusion: Fedora doesn't ship NM plugin for 
openswan, but ships libreswan and strongswan plugins. Yet, plasma-nm 
doesn't have an interface to create/manage libreswan or strongswan VPNs, 
but it has interface for openswan.


Creating an openswan VPN connection either in plasma-nm or directly in 
nmcli seems to work in some way... but how, since there is no plugin?



Inviato da ProtonMail mobile



 Messaggio originale 
On 2 Nov 2021, 15:23, Petr Pisar < ppi...@redhat.com> ha scritto:


V Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 02:08:58PM +, Mattia Verga via devel
napsal(a):
 > mmm, but if I:
 > $ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type openswan
 >
 > it creates a vpn of vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.openswan,
 > while if I:
 > $ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type libreswan
 >
 > it creates a vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.libreswan
 >
 > Do you mean that both are using the same implementation even if they
 > seem to point to different plugins?
 >
No. I think each plugin uses a different implementation. I made few
mistakes
in my previous reply and I explained them later. I'm sorry.

-- Petr
___
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




--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
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: openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Mattia Verga via devel]

That's the reason of my confusion: Fedora doesn't ship NM plugin for openswan, 
but ships libreswan and strongswan plugins. Yet, plasma-nm doesn't have an 
interface to create/manage libreswan or strongswan VPNs, but it has interface 
for openswan.

Creating an openswan VPN connection either in plasma-nm or directly in nmcli 
seems to work in some way... but how, since there is no plugin?

Inviato da ProtonMail mobile

 Messaggio originale 
On 2 Nov 2021, 15:23, Petr Pisar ha scritto:

> V Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 02:08:58PM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
>> mmm, but if I:
>> $ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type openswan
>>
>> it creates a vpn of vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.openswan,
>> while if I:
>> $ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type libreswan
>>
>> it creates a vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.libreswan
>>
>> Do you mean that both are using the same implementation even if they
>> seem to point to different plugins?
>>
> No. I think each plugin uses a different implementation. I made few mistakes
> in my previous reply and I explained them later. I'm sorry.
>
> -- Petr
> ___
> 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 1879741] CVE-2014-10402 perl-dbi: Incomplete fix for CVE-2014-10401

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1879741

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:47:37




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1879741
___
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 1877444] CVE-2014-10401 perl-dbi: DBD::File drivers open files from folders other than specifically passed

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877444

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:38:46




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877444
___
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 1877405] CVE-2019-20919 perl-dbi: NULL profile dereference in dbi_profile()

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877405

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:26:15




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877405
___
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 1877402] CVE-2020-14392 perl-dbi: Memory corruption in XS functions when Perl stack is reallocated

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877402

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:24:39




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877402
___
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 1877447] CVE-2013-7491 perl-dbi: Stack corruption on callbacks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877447

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:39:02




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877447
___
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 1877427] CVE-2013-7490 perl-dbi: Risk of memory corruption with many arguments in DBI method dispatch

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877427

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:38:07




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877427
___
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 1877421] perl-dbi: Old API functions vulnerable to overflow

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877421

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:27:20




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877421
___
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 1877409] CVE-2020-14393 perl-dbi: Buffer overflow on an overlong DBD class name

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877409

Todd Cullum  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2021-11-02 17:26:38




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877409
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2021-11-02 at 16:19 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 3:50 PM Kamil Dudka  wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 3:37:03 PM CET Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > > Maybe multiple people attempting to waive test results and re-triggering
> > > tests while things are still pending is not a good idea?
> > > 
> > > It looks like the re-triggered tests failed again, after the tests had
> > been
> > > waived, overriding the waiver. (please correct me if I'm wrong)
> > > 
> > > Fabio
> > > 
> > > (PS: sorry if this shows up as HTML email, I don't have access to my
> > Fedora
> > > machine right now)
> > 
> > To be sure, I tried to do both actions (waive and request stable) in a
> > short
> > period of time but the result is still the same.  Another batch of useless
> > e-mail notifications is now coming my way...
> > 
> 
> My understanding is that the test that failed and is blocking the push to
> stable is the openQA test. When I discussed a similar issue that a GNOME
> megaupdate ran into with adamw a few weeks ago, he said that the way to
> retrigger openQA tests is to either edit the builds in the update or
> unpush/submit it again to testing, and that the retrigger tests button
> doesn't do anything for openQA tests. Apparently Bodhi also has some kind
> of issue with waiving openQA tests so waiving doesn't work in practice. :)
> 
> Maybe it's worth a try here to see if unpushing and resubmitting to testing
> helps? And if it doesn't, maybe ask on irc in #fedora-qa to see if they can
> help get the openQA tests for the update going again?

Yeah, so, uh, sorry about this! There are kind of a lot of moving parts
here.

I explained in an early comment on the update why the tests failed
initially - the update depended on a version of openssl which was still
in updates-testing, so it was correct that the tests failed then. It
looks like that openssl update was later pushed stable, but the tests
on the curl update do not appear to have been re-run until today. So
until today, the update was still blocked on the original failed tests.

Today the tests have got re-run but in an unfortunate coincidence of
timing, some of them failed again. This is entirely my fault - it
happened because I updated a definition of the 'current stable' release
of Fedora last night and forgot I needed to trigger a rebuild of
openQA's base disk images at the same time, otherwise tests will fail
because they try to use an image that hasn't been built. I'm doing that
now and will re-run the tests, they should pass this time.

Other issues:

1. As noted, this could not have been pushed stable until this week
anyway as there was no FE or blocker bug. As Peter said, if there is a
good reason to push an update stable during freeze - 'fixes a security
bug' is certainly a good reason - please propose a bug that the update
fixes as a release blocker (if it's "important" or higher on the RH
scale) or freeze exception (otherwise). You can do this via
https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug .

2. The "re-trigger tests" button in Bodhi does not currently re-run
openQA tests due to a couple of bugs in Bodhi which make it more or
less impossible to implement properly. I've fixed those bugs, but a new
version of Bodhi which includes the fixes has not yet been released and
deployed to stable. When it is, I can update the openQA test scheduler
to respond to the messages the button publishes; I have a ticket for
that and am just waiting on the Bodhi update. As Kalev says, you can
trigger an openQA re-run by editing the update in any way (just adding
or removing a single character from the description will do it), though
this is of course a non-obvious workaround.

3. I'm not sure why Bodhi is still not allowing the update to be
submitted for stable even though the tests have been waived, this is
odd. I ran the greenwave query manually and it returns (in part):

"policies_satisfied": true,
"unsatisfied_requirements": []

which should always satisfy Bodhi. If I've figured this out before (as
Kalev implied), then I've forgotten it now. :P But whenever the new
Bodhi version actually does get released and deployed, it tweaks
several things in this area, so whatever the problem is may get fixed.
Hopefully, once I re-run the openQA tests and they actually pass, Bodhi
will be happy.

4. The email notifications should be customizable via
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/notifications/ , I believe. I do agree
it would be good if we could tweak some defaults in the notification
code to not notify you when you do things to your own stuff, as you
likely don't need a notification in that case. But I never get around
to doing this for my own account, let alone sending a patch to make it
better for everyone...
-- 
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 

Re: [HEADS UP] ImageMagick-6.9.12.28

[Sérgio Basto]

Please build your packages for F35 in f35-build-side-47231

or maybe we should request help of an proven packager 

Thank you 



On Sun, 2021-10-31 at 22:02 +, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-10-31 at 22:56 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 10:44 PM Luya Tshimbalanga
> >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hello team,
> > > 
> > > ImageMagick is updated 6.9.12.28 on Rawhide and got side tag as
> > > 35-build-side-47231.
> > 
> > Sorry, I am confused. Did you mean to say the update and rebuilds for
> > rawhide are *finished* and you're starting the process for f35 now?
> 
> yes, we are asking to build all packages for F35 in f35-build-side-
> 47231
> 
> I did it for dvdauthor 
> 
> cd ../dvdauthor
> git pull
> git checkout f35
> git merge rawhide
> git push
> fedpkg build --target=f35-build-side-47231
> 
> Thank you 
> 
> > Otherwise, the side tag name does not match "updated [...] on Rawhide
> > and got side tag as [f]35-build-side-x".
> > 
> > > For my understanding, the following packages
> > > (including those from RPM Fusion) may need a rebuild based on these
> > > dependencies:
> > > 
> > > `dnf repoquery  --whatrequires "libMagick*" --qf "%{reponame}
> > > %{sourcerpm}" -q | sed 's/updates/fedora/' | pkgname | sort -u`
> > > 
> > > fedora autotrace
> > > fedora chafa
> > > fedora converseen
> > > fedora digikam
> > > fedora dmtx-utils
> > > fedora dvdauthor
> > > fedora eom
> > > fedora ImageMagick
> > > fedora kxstitch
> > > fedora pfstools
> > > fedora php-pecl-imagick
> > > fedora psiconv
> > > fedora q
> > > fedora R-magick
> > > fedora rss-glx
> > > fedora rubygem-rmagick
> > > fedora synfig
> > > fedora synfigstudio
> > > fedora vdr-scraper2vdr
> > > fedora vdr-skinelchihd
> > > fedora vdr-skinnopacity
> > > fedora vdr-tvguide
> > > fedora vips
> > > fedora WindowMaker
> > > rpmfusion-free libopenshot
> > > rpmfusion-free xine-lib
> > > 
> > > Please use f35-build-side-47231 side-tag to build your package, and
> > > I
> > > (or my co-maintainer) am intending to merge in F35 repository in
> > > about a
> > > week.
> > 
> > Given that Fedora 35 is now officially *stable*, and ImageMagick not
> > being a leaf package, such a disruptive update would require FESCo
> > exception to the Updates Policy.
> > If you want to file a ticket for such an exception, it would be great
> > if people could verify that this is actually the *complete* list of
> > packages that need to be rebuilt (and that they indeed *can* be
> > rebuilt without issues on F35), so that there is no negative fallout
> > from broken dependencies on a stable release.
> > 
> > Fabio
> > ___
> > 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
> 
> -- 
> Sérgio M. B.
> ___
> 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

-- 
Sérgio M. B.
___
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: Self Introduction: Zuzana Miklankova

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 03:23:04PM +0100, Zuzana Miklankova wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I am an employee of Red Hat, using Fedora as my main working environment.
> 
> I have tried various Linux distributions yet, even though I have never
> contributed to any.
> However, I have gained some experience in contributing to open-source
> projects during my studies at university.
> 
> I will be maintaining some java database-related packages. And I have also
> already
> submitted my first package [1].
> 
> Looking forward to future cooperation,
> Zuzana.

Hi, welcome to Fedora.

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

Mock v2.13 release

[Pavel Raiskup]

Hello!

I'm glad I can announce that we have a new release of Mock.  Two new
commandline options were added, and several bugs were fixed.  For more
info see the upstream release notes:

  https://rpm-software-management.github.io/mock/Release-Notes-2.13

Note that this release is likely the last v2 release being shipped both in
Fedora 33+ and EPEL 7+.  We'll keep v2 in bugfix mode for the purpose of
EPEL 7 builds, and elsewhere we'll forward with v3.  For more info see:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/issues/755

Happy building!
Pavel


___
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

[EPEL-devel] [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : EPEL Steering Committee

[tdawson]

Dear all,

You are kindly invited to the meeting:
   EPEL Steering Committee on 2021-11-03 from 16:00:00 to 17:00:00 US/Eastern
   At fedora-meet...@irc.libera.chat

The meeting will be about:
This is the weekly EPEL Steering Committee Meeting.

A general agenda is the following:

#meetingname EPEL
#topic Intros
#topic Old Business
#topic EPEL-7
#topic EPEL-8
#topic EPEL-9
#topic Openfloor
#endmeeting




Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/9854/

___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Fedora 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kamil Dudka]

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 4:19:23 PM CET Kalev Lember wrote:
> My understanding is that the test that failed and is blocking the push to
> stable is the openQA test. When I discussed a similar issue that a GNOME
> megaupdate ran into with adamw a few weeks ago, he said that the way to
> retrigger openQA tests is to either edit the builds in the update or
> unpush/submit it again to testing, and that the retrigger tests button
> doesn't do anything for openQA tests. Apparently Bodhi also has some kind
> of issue with waiving openQA tests so waiving doesn't work in practice. :)
> 
> Maybe it's worth a try here to see if unpushing and resubmitting to testing
> helps? And if it doesn't, maybe ask on irc in #fedora-qa to see if they can
> help get the openQA tests for the update going again?
> 
> Hope this helps,
> Kalev

Thanks for the suggestion!  I have just tried it.  It seems to be one step 
backwards now but it might help with some delay...

Kamil

___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kalev Lember]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 3:50 PM Kamil Dudka  wrote:

> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 3:37:03 PM CET Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > Maybe multiple people attempting to waive test results and re-triggering
> > tests while things are still pending is not a good idea?
> >
> > It looks like the re-triggered tests failed again, after the tests had
> been
> > waived, overriding the waiver. (please correct me if I'm wrong)
> >
> > Fabio
> >
> > (PS: sorry if this shows up as HTML email, I don't have access to my
> Fedora
> > machine right now)
>
> To be sure, I tried to do both actions (waive and request stable) in a
> short
> period of time but the result is still the same.  Another batch of useless
> e-mail notifications is now coming my way...
>

My understanding is that the test that failed and is blocking the push to
stable is the openQA test. When I discussed a similar issue that a GNOME
megaupdate ran into with adamw a few weeks ago, he said that the way to
retrigger openQA tests is to either edit the builds in the update or
unpush/submit it again to testing, and that the retrigger tests button
doesn't do anything for openQA tests. Apparently Bodhi also has some kind
of issue with waiving openQA tests so waiving doesn't work in practice. :)

Maybe it's worth a try here to see if unpushing and resubmitting to testing
helps? And if it doesn't, maybe ask on irc in #fedora-qa to see if they can
help get the openQA tests for the update going again?

Hope this helps,
Kalev
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kamil Dudka]

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 3:37:03 PM CET Fabio Valentini wrote:
> Maybe multiple people attempting to waive test results and re-triggering
> tests while things are still pending is not a good idea?
> 
> It looks like the re-triggered tests failed again, after the tests had been
> waived, overriding the waiver. (please correct me if I'm wrong)
> 
> Fabio
> 
> (PS: sorry if this shows up as HTML email, I don't have access to my Fedora
> machine right now)

To be sure, I tried to do both actions (waive and request stable) in a short 
period of time but the result is still the same.  Another batch of useless
e-mail notifications is now coming my way...

Kamil

___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Fabio Valentini]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021, 15:31 Miro Hrončok  wrote:

> On 02. 11. 21 15:10, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> > Il 02/11/21 14:43, Kamil Dudka ha scritto:
> >> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 2:17:28 PM CET Kamil Dudka wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 1:58:02 PM CET Miro Hrončok wrote:
>  On 02. 11. 21 8:47, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which
> obsoleted
> > a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has
> reached
> > karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update
> to
> >
> > stable:
> >
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93
> >
> > I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no
> idea
> > where the tests come from or how to waive their results.
>  To waive their results:
> $ bodhi updates waive FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93 "Test didn't run"
> >>> Thanks for the hint!  I have just tried it but there seems to be no
> status
> >>> update as of yet.  The current status is still "testing".
> >> As a side-effect I received 49 identical e-mails from
> notificati...@fedoraproject.org
> >> with not very specific subject "fedmsg notification" and the following
> link inside:
> >>
> >>
> https://waiverdb-web-waiverdb.app.os.fedoraproject.org/api/v1.0/waivers/9123
> >>
> >> Kamil
> >
> > It appears that the tests are now waived, so you can push the update to
> > stable as usual.
>
> The right column says:
>
>"All required tests passed"
>
> The latest message from the comments/karma section says:
>
>"This update's test gating status has been changed to 'failed'."
>
> And the push to stable action is not available.
>

Maybe multiple people attempting to waive test results and re-triggering
tests while things are still pending is not a good idea?

It looks like the re-triggered tests failed again, after the tests had been
waived, overriding the waiver. (please correct me if I'm wrong)

Fabio

(PS: sorry if this shows up as HTML email, I don't have access to my Fedora
machine right now)


> --
> 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
>
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Miro Hrončok]

On 02. 11. 21 15:10, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:

Il 02/11/21 14:43, Kamil Dudka ha scritto:

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 2:17:28 PM CET Kamil Dudka wrote:

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 1:58:02 PM CET Miro Hrončok wrote:

On 02. 11. 21 8:47, Kamil Dudka wrote:

On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to

stable:
   https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93

I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
where the tests come from or how to waive their results.

To waive their results:
   $ bodhi updates waive FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93 "Test didn't run"

Thanks for the hint!  I have just tried it but there seems to be no status
update as of yet.  The current status is still "testing".

As a side-effect I received 49 identical e-mails from 
notificati...@fedoraproject.org
with not very specific subject "fedmsg notification" and the following link 
inside:

  
https://waiverdb-web-waiverdb.app.os.fedoraproject.org/api/v1.0/waivers/9123

Kamil


It appears that the tests are now waived, so you can push the update to
stable as usual.


The right column says:

  "All required tests passed"

The latest message from the comments/karma section says:

  "This update's test gating status has been changed to 'failed'."

And the push to stable action is not available.

--
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: Fedora 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kamil Dudka]

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 3:10:47 PM CET Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> It appears that the tests are now waived, so you can push the update to
> stable as usual.
> 
> Mattia

I wish I could but it is unfortunately sill not the case:

$ bodhi updates request FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93 stable
Requirement not met Required tests did not pass on this update

Kamil

___
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: openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Petr Pisar]

V Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 02:08:58PM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
> mmm, but if I:
> $ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type openswan
> 
> it creates a vpn of vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.openswan,
> while if I:
> $ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type libreswan
> 
> it creates a vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.libreswan
> 
> Do you mean that both are using the same implementation even if they
> seem to point to different plugins?
> 
No. I think each plugin uses a different implementation. I made few mistakes
in my previous reply and I explained them later. I'm sorry.

-- Petr


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

Self Introduction: Zuzana Miklankova

[Zuzana Miklankova]

Hi all,

I am an employee of Red Hat, using Fedora as my main working environment.

I have tried various Linux distributions yet, even though I have never
contributed to any.
However, I have gained some experience in contributing to open-source
projects during my studies at university.

I will be maintaining some java database-related packages. And I have also
already
submitted my first package [1].

Looking forward to future cooperation,
Zuzana.

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/container-workflow-tool
___
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 2019407] perl-Sys-Virt-7.9.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2019407

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|berra...@redhat.com,|
   |crobi...@redhat.com,|
   |jples...@redhat.com,|
   |st...@silug.org |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2019407
___
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: openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Petr Pisar]

V Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:24:33AM -0400, Simo Sorce napsal(a):
> Petr,
> your message comes back quite unclear.
> 
I'm sorry. I made a typo:

  So the answer is that nmcli in Fedora does NOT use Openswan

> I think what you mean is that because there were multiple related
> implementations of IPsec all derived by the same old project that NM
> decided to support them all under the name "openswan", but it is
> compatible also with configuring libreswan and strongswan which were
> forks of this project in the past and then developed independently.
>
> Just to be clear, IPsec *is* a protocol, and Openswan *is* an
> implementation, it's just the NM treat all of these implementation the
> same and handles them all with a single plugin.
> 
> It's be nice if NM renamed it's plugin to something that just uses the
> name IPsec, it would avoid a lot of confusion.
> 
And my repoquery was suboptimal:

# dnf -q repoquery --qf '%{name} %{summary}' 'NetworkManager*' |grep -i IPsec
NetworkManager-l2tp NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec
NetworkManager-l2tp-gnome NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec - 
GNOME files
NetworkManager-libreswan NetworkManager VPN plug-in for IPsec VPN
NetworkManager-strongswan NetworkManager strongSwan IPSec VPN plug-in

(See the IPsec misspelling at NetworkManager-strongswan.)

I wanted to say that each swan has its own plugin for NetworkManager.
Openswan also had its own. Maybe the swans are not fully interchangable. Maybe
their packaging predates RPM rich dependencies. Also historically, there were
other, unrelated IPsec implementations (Plutto, Racoon) with a completely
different interface.

-- Petr



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: protobuf 3.18.1 update coming to rawhide

[Zuzana Miklankova]

Hello,

Sorry for the late reply, but I noticed this change only when the rebuild
of mysql-connector-java failed.

> Because of missing dependencies we had to disable the Java bindings
> which breaks the build of:

mysql-connector-java has a protobuf-java BuildRequires, so unfortunately
is not buildable in current rawhide (the dependency is quite big).
Could I please just ask, what were the specific reasons for removing java
bindings from protobuf - what dependencies are problematic? Is dropping
of java support inevitable?

BR,
Zuzana.


On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:20 PM Ben Beasley 
wrote:

> I looked at a few of the failures.
>
>  >   4. opencv
>  >   6. gazebo
>  >   7. fawkes
>
> The root cause is of course a bad python-flake8 update, as described here:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2014589
>
> A lot of other packages are affected as well. The python-flake8 package
> should definitely be fixed, but in the meantime, opencv can be fixed by
> dropping the linting tests, which are discouraged by current packaging
> guidelines anyway. I have proposed a PR to do this:
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/opencv/pull-request/14
>
>  >   8. et
>  >   catch.hpp:10827:58: error: call to non-'constexpr' function
> 'long int sysconf(int)'
>  >   catch.hpp:10887:45: error: size of array 'altStackMem' is not
> an integral constant-expression
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1987466
> https://github.com/catchorg/Catch2/issues/2178
>
> It looks like the et packagers made an effort to patch this, but didn’t
> quite get it working.
>
> I have proposed a PR that would finish the job by using the system
> Catch2 package instead (unbundling):
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/et/pull-request/3
>
>  > 12. mir
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001358
>
> The gtest package (https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gtest) was updated
> to 1.11.0 in Rawhide with an unannounced breaking ABI change. See the
> comments on
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-7f23873afa, the F35
> update that was unpushed. A simple rebuild of wlcs should take care of
> the problem.
>
>
> I would be surprised if any of the other rebuild failures (other than
> osmpbf) is actually related to changes in protobuf.
>
> – Ben
>
> On 10/18/21 08:45, Adrian Reber wrote:
> >
> > The protobuf maintainers prepared an update to protobuf 3.18.1 in
> > rawhide. protobuf comes, as always, with a new SO name and requires
> > a rebuild of all dependencies. The list of dependencies grows with each
> > rebuild and we have now reached 58 protobuf dependencies according to
> > repoquery.
> >
> > This time the number of rebuild failures is unusually high with 13
> > broken dependencies.
> >
> > Because of missing dependencies we had to disable the Java bindings
> > which breaks the build of:
> >
> >   1. osmpbf
> >   Problem: package protobuf-java-3.14.0-6.fc35.noarch conflicts with
> protobuf-compiler > 3.14.0 provided by
> protobuf-compiler-3.18.1-1.fc36.x86_64
> >
> > There are two openssl error:
> >
> >   2. community-mysql
> >   Cannot find appropriate system libraries for WITH_SSL=system.
> >   Make sure you have specified a supported SSL version.
> >   Valid options are :
> >   system (use the OS openssl library),
> >   yes (synonym for system),
> >   
> >
> >   4. mumble
> >   error: 'CRYPTO_mem_ctrl' was not declared in this scope; did you
> mean 'CRYPTO_memcmp'?
> >
> > A python 3.10 dependency problem break:
> >
> >   4. opencv
> >   nothing provides (python3.10dist(pyflakes) < 2.5 with
> python3.10dist(pyflakes) >= 2.4) needed by
> python3-flake8-4.0.1-1.fc36.noarch
> >
> > which breaks:
> >
> >   6. gazebo
> >   package opencv-core-4.5.4-1.fc36.x86_64 requires
> libprotobuf.so.25()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> >
> > which breaks:
> >
> >   7. fawkes
> >   package gazebo-10.1.0-21.fc36.x86_64 requires
> libprotobuf.so.25()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> >
> > There are also couple of seemingly protobuf unrelated compiler errors:
> >
> >   8. et
> >   catch.hpp:10827:58: error: call to non-'constexpr' function 'long
> int sysconf(int)'
> >   catch.hpp:10887:45: error: size of array 'altStackMem' is not an
> integral constant-expression
> >
> >   9. qgis
> >   sip: Py_ssize_t is undefined
> >
> > 10. bear
> >   type_traits.hpp:362:46: error: incomplete type
> 'nlohmann::detail::is_constructible,
> std::filesystem::__cxx11::path>' used in nested name specifier
> >
> > 11. opentrep
> >   action_dispatch.hpp:135:29: error: no match for call to '(const
> OPENTREP::PorParserHelper::storeAltLangCodeHist) (std::vector std::allocator >&,
> >
> > And two more dependency errors:
> >
> > 12. mir
> >   Problem: package wlcs-devel-1.3.0-2.fc35.x86_64 requires
> wlcs(x86-64) = 1.3.0-2.fc35, but none of the providers can be installed
> > - cannot install the best candidate for the 

Re: Fedora 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Mattia Verga via devel]

Il 02/11/21 14:43, Kamil Dudka ha scritto:
> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 2:17:28 PM CET Kamil Dudka wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 1:58:02 PM CET Miro Hrončok wrote:
>>> On 02. 11. 21 8:47, Kamil Dudka wrote:
 On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
 a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
 karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to

 stable:
   https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93

 I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
 where the tests come from or how to waive their results.
>>> To waive their results:
>>>   $ bodhi updates waive FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93 "Test didn't run"
>> Thanks for the hint!  I have just tried it but there seems to be no status
>> update as of yet.  The current status is still "testing".
> As a side-effect I received 49 identical e-mails from 
> notificati...@fedoraproject.org
> with not very specific subject "fedmsg notification" and the following link 
> inside:
>
>  
> https://waiverdb-web-waiverdb.app.os.fedoraproject.org/api/v1.0/waivers/9123
>
> Kamil

It appears that the tests are now waived, so you can push the update to
stable as usual.

Mattia

___
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: openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Mattia Verga via devel]

Il 02/11/21 13:15, Petr Pisar ha scritto:
> V Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:46:28AM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
>> I was trying to set up a VPN to my work company network. It seems I need
>> to use IPSec XAuth PSK, so I found some guide in internet that says to
>> set up a libreswan VPN.
>> I'm facing several problems, first of all I'm using Plasma KDE which
>> seems to not have a GUI for setup/editing libreswan VPNs. Plasma-nm only
>> has support for openswan. I've reported that upstream and downstream. So
>> I went setting up the VPN through nmcli: it doesn't work, but that's not
>> my point here.
>>
>> I was wondering how both plasma-nm and nmcli allow to setup an openswan
>> VPN since openswan has been retired in Fedora many years ago... it also
>> seems to work (well, in some way, since the connection fails) even if
>> there's no NM plugin or openswan package installed.
>> How is it possible? Does NM bundles some openswan library itself? If so,
>> is it updated (latest Fedora openswan build was 8 years ago) or there
>> may be any security concern?
>>
> An explanation is that you mistaken IPsec as a protocol and Openswan as an
> implementation of the protocol. There are multiple implementations of IPsec.
> E.g. in Fedora we have Strongswan and Libreswan. And NetworkManager plugins
> for both of them:
>
> # dnf repoquery --qf '%{name} %{summary}' |grep IPsec
> NetworkManager-l2tp NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec
> NetworkManager-l2tp-gnome NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec - 
> GNOME files
> NetworkManager-libreswan NetworkManager VPN plug-in for IPsec VPN
> ike-scan IKE protocol tool to discover, fingerprint and test IPsec VPN servers
> libreswan Internet Key Exchange (IKEv1 and IKEv2) implementation for IPsec
> openvswitch-ipsec Open vSwitch IPsec tunneling support
> strongswan An OpenSource IPsec-based VPN and TNC solution
>
> So the answer is that nmcli in Fedora does use Openswan. It uses Strongswan or
> Libreswan.
>
> -- Petr

mmm, but if I:
$ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type openswan

it creates a vpn of vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.openswan,
while if I:
$ nmcli conn add type vpn vpn-type libreswan

it creates a vpn-type=org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.libreswan

Do you mean that both are using the same implementation even if they
seem to point to different plugins?

Mattia

___
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 35 is available now!

[Matthew Miller]

Here we go! Fedora Linux 35 is now officially released. I know I say it
every time, but: this is a good one! You'll want to get it (or upgrade)
right away.

Read the details in our Fedora Magazine article at:

* https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-35

or just go ahead and upgrade your system, or download install media from:

* https://getfedora.org/

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel-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 Linux 35 is available now!

[Matthew Miller]

Here we go! Fedora Linux 35 is now officially released. I know I say it
every time, but: this is a good one! You'll want to get it (or upgrade)
right away.

Read the details in our Fedora Magazine article at:

* https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-35

or just go ahead and upgrade your system, or download install media from:

* https://getfedora.org/

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 2019407] New: perl-Sys-Virt-7.9.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2019407

Bug ID: 2019407
   Summary: perl-Sys-Virt-7.9.0 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Sys-Virt
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: berra...@redhat.com, crobi...@redhat.com,
jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, st...@silug.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Latest upstream release: 7.9.0
Current version/release in rawhide: 7.8.0-1.fc36
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Sys-Virt/

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/3355/


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2019407
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kamil Dudka]

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 2:17:28 PM CET Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 1:58:02 PM CET Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 02. 11. 21 8:47, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > > On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
> > > a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
> > > karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to
> > > 
> > > stable:
> > >  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93
> > > 
> > > I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
> > > where the tests come from or how to waive their results.
> > 
> > To waive their results:
> >  $ bodhi updates waive FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93 "Test didn't run"
> 
> Thanks for the hint!  I have just tried it but there seems to be no status
> update as of yet.  The current status is still "testing".

As a side-effect I received 49 identical e-mails from 
notificati...@fedoraproject.org
with not very specific subject "fedmsg notification" and the following link 
inside:

https://waiverdb-web-waiverdb.app.os.fedoraproject.org/api/v1.0/waivers/9123

Kamil

___
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 2017168] perl-libwww-perl-6.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-8507a3a75e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-8507a3a75e


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168
___
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 2017168] perl-libwww-perl-6.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-39b5459896 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-39b5459896


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168
___
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 2017168] perl-libwww-perl-6.58 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2021-5b4f7e4e5a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-5b4f7e4e5a


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2017168
___
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: openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Simo Sorce]

On Tue, 2021-11-02 at 13:15 +0100, Petr Pisar wrote:
> V Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:46:28AM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
> > I was trying to set up a VPN to my work company network. It seems I need
> > to use IPSec XAuth PSK, so I found some guide in internet that says to
> > set up a libreswan VPN.
> > I'm facing several problems, first of all I'm using Plasma KDE which
> > seems to not have a GUI for setup/editing libreswan VPNs. Plasma-nm only
> > has support for openswan. I've reported that upstream and downstream. So
> > I went setting up the VPN through nmcli: it doesn't work, but that's not
> > my point here.
> > 
> > I was wondering how both plasma-nm and nmcli allow to setup an openswan
> > VPN since openswan has been retired in Fedora many years ago... it also
> > seems to work (well, in some way, since the connection fails) even if
> > there's no NM plugin or openswan package installed.
> > How is it possible? Does NM bundles some openswan library itself? If so,
> > is it updated (latest Fedora openswan build was 8 years ago) or there
> > may be any security concern?
> > 
> An explanation is that you mistaken IPsec as a protocol and Openswan as an
> implementation of the protocol. There are multiple implementations of IPsec.
> E.g. in Fedora we have Strongswan and Libreswan. And NetworkManager plugins
> for both of them:
> 
> # dnf repoquery --qf '%{name} %{summary}' |grep IPsec
> NetworkManager-l2tp NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec
> NetworkManager-l2tp-gnome NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec - 
> GNOME files
> NetworkManager-libreswan NetworkManager VPN plug-in for IPsec VPN
> ike-scan IKE protocol tool to discover, fingerprint and test IPsec VPN servers
> libreswan Internet Key Exchange (IKEv1 and IKEv2) implementation for IPsec
> openvswitch-ipsec Open vSwitch IPsec tunneling support
> strongswan An OpenSource IPsec-based VPN and TNC solution
> 
> So the answer is that nmcli in Fedora does use Openswan. It uses Strongswan or
> Libreswan.

Petr,
your message comes back quite unclear.

I think what you mean is that because there were multiple related
implementations of IPsec all derived by the same old project that NM
decided to support them all under the name "openswan", but it is
compatible also with configuring libreswan and strongswan which were
forks of this project in the past and then developed independently.

Just to be clear, IPsec *is* a protocol, and Openswan *is* an
implementation, it's just the NM treat all of these implementation the
same and handles them all with a single plugin.

It's be nice if NM renamed it's plugin to something that just uses the
name IPsec, it would avoid a lot of confusion.

HTH,
Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
RHEL Crypto Team
Red Hat, Inc



___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kamil Dudka]

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 1:58:02 PM CET Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 02. 11. 21 8:47, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> > On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
> > a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
> > karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to
> > 
> > stable:
> >  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93
> > 
> > I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
> > where the tests come from or how to waive their results.
> 
> To waive their results:
> 
>  $ bodhi updates waive FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93 "Test didn't run"

Thanks for the hint!  I have just tried it but there seems to be no status 
update as of yet.  The current status is still "testing".  The only action 
that is available to me is "Unpush", which is not really helpful.

> To actually run the tests: there is a *Re-Trigger Tests* button in the ride
> column of the update in bodhi. Also:
> 
>  $ bodhi updates trigger-tests FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93

I clicked the button multiple times in the past.  It did not help.

Kamil

___
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: ceph/rbd broken deps Re: [HEADS UP] lttng-ust 2.13 soname bump

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:54:47PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 21:33:
> > On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:22:06PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> > > Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 20:50:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:35:45PM -0400, Michael Jeanson wrote:
> > > > > I have started the process of updating lttng-ust to 2.13 in rawhide 
> > > > > which
> > > > > implies a soname bump of liblttng-ust to 1 and liblttng-ust-ctl to 5.
> > > > > 
> > > > >   From what I understand, the following packages will need to be 
> > > > > rebuilt:
> > > > > 
> > > > > libcamera
> > > > > mir-server-libs
> > > > > 
> > > > > These packages might also be impacted:
> > > > > 
> > > > > ceph-base
> > > > > dotnet-runtime
> > > > > librados2
> > > > > librbd1
> > > > > librgw2
> > > > > lttng-tools
> > > > > mir-test-tools
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have created a side tag 'f36-build-side-47029' and built lttng-ust 
> > > > > and
> > > > > lttng-tools. I plan to have the side-tag merged in rawhide in about a 
> > > > > week.
> > > > 
> > > > What's the status of the dependant builds for the side tag ?
> > > > 
> > > > I've just tried to build libvirt in rawhide and it fails to install
> > > > the build root because librbd is still linking against the old soname
> > > > for liblttng-ust
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8499/78208499/root.log
> > > > 
> > > > Error:
> > > >  Problem 1: package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > > > librbd.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> > > >   - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > > > librbd_tp.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> > > >   - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librbd1 = 
> > > > 2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
> > > >   - conflicting requests
> > > >   - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
> > > > librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
> > > >  Problem 2: package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > > > librados.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> > > >   - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > > > librados_tp.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> > > >   - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > > > librados2 = 2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
> > > >   - conflicting requests
> > > >   - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
> > > > librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
> > > > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Daniel
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Looks like only lttng-ust and lttng-tools are built on the side tag and
> > > they are merged:
> > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-758d58d74f
> > > 
> > > So perhaps the dependant packages needs rebuilding...
> > 
> > Sigh.
> > 
> > I long for a day when rawhide gating CI blocks RPM updates that
> > break soname until all affected packages are re-built...
> > 
> > soname bump breakage is what makes rawhide so unpleasant use or
> > work with.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Daniel
> > 
> 
> $ dnf repoquery --qf 
> '%{name}-%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}.%{arch}\t%{sourcerpm}' --whatrequires 
> "liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit)"
> ceph-base-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64  ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
> dotnet-runtime-3.1-0:3.1.17-2.fc35.x86_64 dotnet3.1-3.1.117-2.fc35.src.rpm
> dotnet-runtime-5.0-0:5.0.8-1.fc35.x86_64  dotnet5.0-5.0.205-1.fc35.src.rpm
> libcamera-0:0.0.0~git.20210928.e00149f-1.fc36.x86_64  
> libcamera-0.0.0~git.20210928.e00149f-1.fc36.src.rpm
> librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64  ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
> librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
> librgw2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
> mir-server-libs-0:2.4.0-3.fc35.x86_64 mir-2.4.0-3.fc35.src.rpm
> mir-test-tools-0:2.4.0-3.fc35.x86_64  mir-2.4.0-3.fc35.src.rpm
> 
> ceph - currently rebuilding
> dotnet3.1 - rebuild fails, looks like bootstrapping is needed
> dotnet5.0 - rebuild fails, looks like bootstrapping is needed
> libramera - currently rebuilding
> mir - rebuild failed - looks like wlcs needs rebuild against new gtest first

Great, thanks for kicking off the rebuilds for ceph.


Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com  -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
___
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: 

Re: Fedora 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Miro Hrončok]

On 02. 11. 21 8:47, Kamil Dudka wrote:

On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to
stable:

 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93

I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
where the tests come from or how to waive their results.


To waive their results:

$ bodhi updates waive FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93 "Test didn't run"

To actually run the tests: there is a *Re-Trigger Tests* button in the ride 
column of the update in bodhi. Also:


$ bodhi updates trigger-tests FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93

--
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: ceph/rbd broken deps Re: [HEADS UP] lttng-ust 2.13 soname bump

[Mamoru TASAKA]

Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 21:33:

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:22:06PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:

Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 20:50:

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:35:45PM -0400, Michael Jeanson wrote:

I have started the process of updating lttng-ust to 2.13 in rawhide which
implies a soname bump of liblttng-ust to 1 and liblttng-ust-ctl to 5.

  From what I understand, the following packages will need to be rebuilt:

libcamera
mir-server-libs

These packages might also be impacted:

ceph-base
dotnet-runtime
librados2
librbd1
librgw2
lttng-tools
mir-test-tools

I have created a side tag 'f36-build-side-47029' and built lttng-ust and
lttng-tools. I plan to have the side-tag merged in rawhide in about a week.


What's the status of the dependant builds for the side tag ?

I've just tried to build libvirt in rawhide and it fails to install
the build root because librbd is still linking against the old soname
for liblttng-ust

https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8499/78208499/root.log

Error:
 Problem 1: package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
  - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd_tp.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
  - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librbd1 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
 Problem 2: package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
  - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados_tp.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
  - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librados2 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
  - conflicting requests
  - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64

Regards,
Daniel



Looks like only lttng-ust and lttng-tools are built on the side tag and
they are merged:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-758d58d74f

So perhaps the dependant packages needs rebuilding...


Sigh.

I long for a day when rawhide gating CI blocks RPM updates that
break soname until all affected packages are re-built...

soname bump breakage is what makes rawhide so unpleasant use or
work with.

Regards,
Daniel



$ dnf repoquery --qf '%{name}-%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}.%{arch}\t%{sourcerpm}' 
--whatrequires "liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit)"
ceph-base-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
dotnet-runtime-3.1-0:3.1.17-2.fc35.x86_64   dotnet3.1-3.1.117-2.fc35.src.rpm
dotnet-runtime-5.0-0:5.0.8-1.fc35.x86_64dotnet5.0-5.0.205-1.fc35.src.rpm
libcamera-0:0.0.0~git.20210928.e00149f-1.fc36.x86_64
libcamera-0.0.0~git.20210928.e00149f-1.fc36.src.rpm
librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64  ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
librgw2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64  ceph-16.2.6-2.fc36.src.rpm
mir-server-libs-0:2.4.0-3.fc35.x86_64   mir-2.4.0-3.fc35.src.rpm
mir-test-tools-0:2.4.0-3.fc35.x86_64mir-2.4.0-3.fc35.src.rpm

ceph - currently rebuilding
dotnet3.1 - rebuild fails, looks like bootstrapping is needed
dotnet5.0 - rebuild fails, looks like bootstrapping is needed
libramera - currently rebuilding
mir - rebuild failed - looks like wlcs needs rebuild against new gtest first

Regards,
Mamoru
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:49:45AM +0100, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 9:14:31 AM CET Peter Robinson wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:48 AM Kamil Dudka  wrote:
> > > On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
> > > a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
> > > karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to
> > > stable:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
> > > where the tests come from or how to waive their results.  The tests
> > > directory in the f35 branch in Fedora git has not been touched since
> > > 2017:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/curl/c/c7e4ac60
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Any idea how to move the update forward?
> > 
> > 
> > Well I don't know about the tests but you could have filed it as a
> > blocker/freeze exception [1] for F-35 as we have a policy for fixing
> > CVEs for things that are shipped in core artifacts because things like
> > installers/Live images etc aren't updated over the life of the
> > release, that ship has now sailed but please be aware of the process
> > going forward especially for something as core as curl.

Yep, if there's a security-relevant update, a freeze exception should be
filed.

> > [1] https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/
> 
> Thanks for heads up!  Nevertheless, curl upstream releases each 8 weeks and 
> each release usually contains some security fixes.  So, if the images do not 
> get updated over the life of the release, we will be in a similar situation
> a few weeks later anyway.  And we always need to balance the risk and profit 
> for any last minute changes...

How many of those issues are relevant to the functionality used by the
installer? E.g. bugs in gopher:// or ftp:// don't really matter.

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: ceph/rbd broken deps Re: [HEADS UP] lttng-ust 2.13 soname bump

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:22:06PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 20:50:
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:35:45PM -0400, Michael Jeanson wrote:
> > > I have started the process of updating lttng-ust to 2.13 in rawhide which
> > > implies a soname bump of liblttng-ust to 1 and liblttng-ust-ctl to 5.
> > > 
> > >  From what I understand, the following packages will need to be rebuilt:
> > > 
> > > libcamera
> > > mir-server-libs
> > > 
> > > These packages might also be impacted:
> > > 
> > > ceph-base
> > > dotnet-runtime
> > > librados2
> > > librbd1
> > > librgw2
> > > lttng-tools
> > > mir-test-tools
> > > 
> > > I have created a side tag 'f36-build-side-47029' and built lttng-ust and
> > > lttng-tools. I plan to have the side-tag merged in rawhide in about a 
> > > week.
> > 
> > What's the status of the dependant builds for the side tag ?
> > 
> > I've just tried to build libvirt in rawhide and it fails to install
> > the build root because librbd is still linking against the old soname
> > for liblttng-ust
> > 
> >https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8499/78208499/root.log
> > 
> >Error:
> > Problem 1: package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > librbd.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> >  - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > librbd_tp.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> >  - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librbd1 = 
> > 2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
> >  - conflicting requests
> >  - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
> > librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
> > Problem 2: package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > librados.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> >  - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
> > librados_tp.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
> >  - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librados2 = 
> > 2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
> >  - conflicting requests
> >  - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
> > librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Daniel
> > 
> 
> Looks like only lttng-ust and lttng-tools are built on the side tag and
> they are merged:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-758d58d74f
> 
> So perhaps the dependant packages needs rebuilding...

Sigh.

I long for a day when rawhide gating CI blocks RPM updates that
break soname until all affected packages are re-built...

soname bump breakage is what makes rawhide so unpleasant use or
work with.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com  -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
___
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: ceph/rbd broken deps Re: [HEADS UP] lttng-ust 2.13 soname bump

[Mamoru TASAKA]

Daniel P. Berrangé wrote on 2021/11/02 20:50:

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:35:45PM -0400, Michael Jeanson wrote:

I have started the process of updating lttng-ust to 2.13 in rawhide which
implies a soname bump of liblttng-ust to 1 and liblttng-ust-ctl to 5.

 From what I understand, the following packages will need to be rebuilt:

libcamera
mir-server-libs

These packages might also be impacted:

ceph-base
dotnet-runtime
librados2
librbd1
librgw2
lttng-tools
mir-test-tools

I have created a side tag 'f36-build-side-47029' and built lttng-ust and
lttng-tools. I plan to have the side-tag merged in rawhide in about a week.


What's the status of the dependant builds for the side tag ?

I've just tried to build libvirt in rawhide and it fails to install
the build root because librbd is still linking against the old soname
for liblttng-ust

   https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8499/78208499/root.log

   Error:
Problem 1: package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
 - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd_tp.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
 - package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librbd1 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
 - conflicting requests
 - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
Problem 2: package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
 - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados_tp.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
 - package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librados2 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
 - conflicting requests
 - nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64

Regards,
Daniel



Looks like only lttng-ust and lttng-tools are built on the side tag and
they are merged:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-758d58d74f

So perhaps the dependant packages needs rebuilding...

Regards,
Mamoru
___
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: openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Petr Pisar]

V Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:46:28AM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a):
> I was trying to set up a VPN to my work company network. It seems I need
> to use IPSec XAuth PSK, so I found some guide in internet that says to
> set up a libreswan VPN.
> I'm facing several problems, first of all I'm using Plasma KDE which
> seems to not have a GUI for setup/editing libreswan VPNs. Plasma-nm only
> has support for openswan. I've reported that upstream and downstream. So
> I went setting up the VPN through nmcli: it doesn't work, but that's not
> my point here.
> 
> I was wondering how both plasma-nm and nmcli allow to setup an openswan
> VPN since openswan has been retired in Fedora many years ago... it also
> seems to work (well, in some way, since the connection fails) even if
> there's no NM plugin or openswan package installed.
> How is it possible? Does NM bundles some openswan library itself? If so,
> is it updated (latest Fedora openswan build was 8 years ago) or there
> may be any security concern?
> 
An explanation is that you mistaken IPsec as a protocol and Openswan as an
implementation of the protocol. There are multiple implementations of IPsec.
E.g. in Fedora we have Strongswan and Libreswan. And NetworkManager plugins
for both of them:

# dnf repoquery --qf '%{name} %{summary}' |grep IPsec
NetworkManager-l2tp NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec
NetworkManager-l2tp-gnome NetworkManager VPN plugin for L2TP and L2TP/IPsec - 
GNOME files
NetworkManager-libreswan NetworkManager VPN plug-in for IPsec VPN
ike-scan IKE protocol tool to discover, fingerprint and test IPsec VPN servers
libreswan Internet Key Exchange (IKEv1 and IKEv2) implementation for IPsec
openvswitch-ipsec Open vSwitch IPsec tunneling support
strongswan An OpenSource IPsec-based VPN and TNC solution

So the answer is that nmcli in Fedora does use Openswan. It uses Strongswan or
Libreswan.

-- Petr


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

ceph/rbd broken deps Re: [HEADS UP] lttng-ust 2.13 soname bump

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:35:45PM -0400, Michael Jeanson wrote:
> I have started the process of updating lttng-ust to 2.13 in rawhide which
> implies a soname bump of liblttng-ust to 1 and liblttng-ust-ctl to 5.
> 
> From what I understand, the following packages will need to be rebuilt:
> 
> libcamera
> mir-server-libs
> 
> These packages might also be impacted:
> 
> ceph-base
> dotnet-runtime
> librados2
> librbd1
> librgw2
> lttng-tools
> mir-test-tools
> 
> I have created a side tag 'f36-build-side-47029' and built lttng-ust and
> lttng-tools. I plan to have the side-tag merged in rawhide in about a week.

What's the status of the dependant builds for the side tag ?

I've just tried to build libvirt in rawhide and it fails to install
the build root because librbd is still linking against the old soname
for liblttng-ust

  https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8499/78208499/root.log

  Error: 
   Problem 1: package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librbd_tp.so.1()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package librbd-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librbd1 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
- conflicting requests
- nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librbd1-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64
   Problem 2: package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires 
librados_tp.so.2()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed
- package librados-devel-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64 requires librados2 = 
2:16.2.6-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed
- conflicting requests
- nothing provides liblttng-ust.so.0()(64bit) needed by 
librados2-2:16.2.6-2.fc36.x86_64

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com  -o-https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o-https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org-o-https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
___
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

openswan/libreswan VPNs and NetworkManager

[Mattia Verga via devel]

I'm totally noob about VPNs and NetworkManager, so forgive me if I'm
writing something wrong.

I was trying to set up a VPN to my work company network. It seems I need
to use IPSec XAuth PSK, so I found some guide in internet that says to
set up a libreswan VPN.
I'm facing several problems, first of all I'm using Plasma KDE which
seems to not have a GUI for setup/editing libreswan VPNs. Plasma-nm only
has support for openswan. I've reported that upstream and downstream. So
I went setting up the VPN through nmcli: it doesn't work, but that's not
my point here.

I was wondering how both plasma-nm and nmcli allow to setup an openswan
VPN since openswan has been retired in Fedora many years ago... it also
seems to work (well, in some way, since the connection fails) even if
there's no NM plugin or openswan package installed.
How is it possible? Does NM bundles some openswan library itself? If so,
is it updated (latest Fedora openswan build was 8 years ago) or there
may be any security concern?

Mattia

___
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-34-20211102.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20211101.0):

ID: 1049252 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1049252
ID: 1049253 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1049253

Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (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

Re: F36 Change: java-17-openjdk as system JDK in F36 (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:47:12AM +0100, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> On 11/1/21 18:48, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:37:42AM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >>== Dependencies ==
> >>Around 2000 packages will need attendance (that is aprox 1/3 of time
> >>of jdk11 bump, but It seems, that 1100 packages remained on jdk8)
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-headless |wc -l
> >>  1007
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java | wc -l
> >>  53
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-devel | wc -l
> >>  28
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless |wc -l
> >>  1003
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-1.8.0-openjdk  | wc -l
> >>  80
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel  | wc -l
> >>  42
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-11-openjdk-headless |wc -l
> >>  1030
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-11-openjdk  | wc -l
> >>  78
> >>  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-11-openjdk-devel  | wc -l
> >>  36
> >Shouldn't those queries be done with 'repoquery --arch src' ?
> 
> They should be run together with it. Quick scan made them all return 0...
> Will add this .
> >
> >>== Contingency Plan ==
> >>* If the mass rebuild, after the change application, breaks to much
> >>packages, or some important will be unfixable, jdk11 must be restored
> >>back to the position of system jdk.
> >>* Contingency mechanism: Return jdk8 as system jdk and mass rebuild
> >>again. Note, that this may be very hard, because during build of
> >>packages by jdk8, by jdk11 built dependencies will be picekd up, so
> >>build will fail. Maybe several iterations of mass rebuild will be
> >>needed.
> >>* Contingency deadline: beta freeze
> >
> >Hmm, so if the contingency plan may require a few rounds of rebuilds,
> >should we activate it earlier than beta freeze? At the beta freeze
> >we expect things to be "testable", and if at that point we are with
> >a bunch of java applications that will not run, it'll be hard to test
> >things. So I think we should move this a bit earlier.
> 
> You are most likely right.
> Considering it should really be finished before branching, taht moves it 
> somewhere to :
> 73Announce release blocking deliverables  Tue 2022-02-01  Tue 2022-02-01  
> 0 (8days before branching, 22 before beta freeze)
> 
> wdyt?

+1

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: Fedora 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kamil Dudka]

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 9:14:31 AM CET Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:48 AM Kamil Dudka  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
> > a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
> > karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to
> > stable:
> >
> >
> >
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93
> >
> >
> >
> > I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
> > where the tests come from or how to waive their results.  The tests
> > directory in the f35 branch in Fedora git has not been touched since
> > 2017:
> >
> >
> >
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/curl/c/c7e4ac60
> >
> >
> >
> > Any idea how to move the update forward?
> 
> 
> Well I don't know about the tests but you could have filed it as a
> blocker/freeze exception [1] for F-35 as we have a policy for fixing
> CVEs for things that are shipped in core artifacts because things like
> installers/Live images etc aren't updated over the life of the
> release, that ship has now sailed but please be aware of the process
> going forward especially for something as core as curl.
> 
> [1] https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/

Thanks for heads up!  Nevertheless, curl upstream releases each 8 weeks and 
each release usually contains some security fixes.  So, if the images do not 
get updated over the life of the release, we will be in a similar situation
a few weeks later anyway.  And we always need to balance the risk and profit 
for any last minute changes...

Kamil

___
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-35-20211102.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20211101.0):

ID: 1049201 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1049201
ID: 1049202 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1049202

Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (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

Re: F36 Change: java-17-openjdk as system JDK in F36 (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Jiri Vanek]

On 11/1/21 18:48, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:37:42AM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:

== Dependencies ==
Around 2000 packages will need attendance (that is aprox 1/3 of time
of jdk11 bump, but It seems, that 1100 packages remained on jdk8)
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-headless |wc -l
  1007
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java | wc -l
  53
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-devel | wc -l
  28
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless |wc -l
  1003
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-1.8.0-openjdk  | wc -l
  80
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel  | wc -l
  42
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-11-openjdk-headless |wc -l
  1030
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-11-openjdk  | wc -l
  78
  $ repoquery -q --whatrequires java-11-openjdk-devel  | wc -l
  36
  
Shouldn't those queries be done with 'repoquery --arch src' ?


They should be run together with it. Quick scan made them all return 0...
Will add this .



== Contingency Plan ==
* If the mass rebuild, after the change application, breaks to much
packages, or some important will be unfixable, jdk11 must be restored
back to the position of system jdk.
* Contingency mechanism: Return jdk8 as system jdk and mass rebuild
again. Note, that this may be very hard, because during build of
packages by jdk8, by jdk11 built dependencies will be picekd up, so
build will fail. Maybe several iterations of mass rebuild will be
needed.
* Contingency deadline: beta freeze


Hmm, so if the contingency plan may require a few rounds of rebuilds,
should we activate it earlier than beta freeze? At the beta freeze
we expect things to be "testable", and if at that point we are with
a bunch of java applications that will not run, it'll be hard to test
things. So I think we should move this a bit earlier.


You are most likely right.
Considering it should really be finished before branching, taht moves it 
somewhere to :
73  Announce release blocking deliverables  Tue 2022-02-01  Tue 2022-02-01  
0 (8days before branching, 22 before beta freeze)

wdyt?


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



--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Peter Robinson]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:48 AM Kamil Dudka  wrote:
>
> On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
> a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
> karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to
> stable:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93
>
> I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
> where the tests come from or how to waive their results.  The tests
> directory in the f35 branch in Fedora git has not been touched since 2017:
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/curl/c/c7e4ac60
>
> Any idea how to move the update forward?

Well I don't know about the tests but you could have filed it as a
blocker/freeze exception [1] for F-35 as we have a policy for fixing
CVEs for things that are shipped in core artifacts because things like
installers/Live images etc aren't updated over the life of the
release, that ship has now sailed but please be aware of the process
going forward especially for something as core as curl.

[1] https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/
___
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: F36 Change: Remove .la files from buildroot (Self-Contained Change proposal)

[Florian Weimer]

* Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:

> I read the mythbuster page, and I still don't understand if removing
> the file has any effect or not. Will there be any difference in builds
> (for package builds and end-user builds)?

As far as I understand it, linking with static libraries using libtool
will not handle indirect dependencies anymore.

Thanks,
Florian
___
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 35 security update of curl blocked for a month

[Kamil Dudka]

On September 22 I submitted a Fedora 35 update of curl, which obsoleted
a previously submitted security update of curl.  The update has reached
karma +13 since then, yet I was unable to make Bodhi push the update to 
stable:

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-1d24845e93

I can see that there are some automated tests failing but I have no idea
where the tests come from or how to waive their results.  The tests
directory in the f35 branch in Fedora git has not been touched since 2017:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/curl/c/c7e4ac60

Any idea how to move the update forward?

Kamil

___
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-33-20211102.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20211101.0):

ID: 1049063 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1049063
ID: 1049064 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1049064

Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (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

License change: liblcf: "MIT and BSD" -> "MIT and BSD and Boost"

[Artur Frenszek-Iwicki]

I'm currently working on updating liblcf and easyrpg-player to v0.7.0 [0,1]. 

As part of this new release, the liblcf library now bundles some header-only 
C++ libraries [2,3].
Those are Boost-licensed, which means the package's effective license changes 
from "MIT and BSD" to "MIT and BSD and Boost".

A.FI.

[0] https://github.com/EasyRPG/liblcf/releases/tag/0.7.0
[1] https://github.com/EasyRPG/Player/releases/tag/0.7.0
[2] https://github.com/martinmoene/span-lite
[3] https://github.com/martinmoene/string-view-lite
___
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