[Bug 2061310] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-d0d90a6d22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d0d90a6d22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 ___ 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 2061310] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-6b21853779 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-6b21853779 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 ___ 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 2061310] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-1b0c6f7b72 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-1b0c6f7b72 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #5: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 5.20220313 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/5 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #5: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following: `` 5.20220313 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/5 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #4: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 5.20220313 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/4 ___ 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 2062963] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.18 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2062963 Michal Josef Spacek changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value CC||mspa...@redhat.com --- Comment #4 from Michal Josef Spacek --- I prepared PR for this: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2062963 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #4: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following: `` 5.20220313 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/4 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #1: 0.18 bump and package tests
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following: `` 0.18 bump and package tests `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/1 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #3: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 5.20220313 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/3 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #3: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following: `` 5.20220313 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/3 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #2: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 5.20220313 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/2 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases] PR #2: 5.20220313 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases` that you are following: `` 5.20220313 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases/pull-request/2 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl] PR #3: 5.34.1 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl` that you are following: `` 5.34.1 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/3 ___ 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: openssl maintainerships?
On 15. 03. 22 22:27, Peter Robinson wrote: Hi Dmitry. It seems since the openssl 3 GA release back in September there's not been a single successful openssl build[1], and a number of bugs [2], and even more CVEs [3][4]. Why aren't these being dealt with in a semi reasonable fashion? The last actual successful build is now over 6 months ago. I am also curious why the OpenSSL version in CentOS Stream 9 is once again higher than in Fedora. -- 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: Landing a larger-than-release change (distrusting SHA-1 signatures)
On 15/03/2022 22:45, Robert Relyea wrote: 1) in fedora 37, provide a policy that turns SHA-1 off. in our testing, we encourage people to run with that policy and write bugs against components. That policy already exists in Fedora 34 and 35 where the FUTURE policy does not allow SHA1 in signature algorithms. Tom -- 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: F37 Change: Drop i686 builds of jdk8,11,17 and latest (18) rpms from f37 onwards (System-Wide Change)
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 4:43 PM Ben Beasley wrote: > > I interpreted this to mean that, while this Java proposal and > Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval both have to do with i686 removals: > > - the Java change should not be seen as part of > Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval > - the Java change was written without knowledge of > Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval > - the Java change should be considered separately from > Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval > - learning about Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval has not given the Java > change owners any reason to change or reconsider this proposal If that's the case, then yes. The two changes are similar, but their scope does not really overlap. 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
Re: Landing a larger-than-release change (distrusting SHA-1 signatures)
On 3/9/22 1:56 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 10:46:21AM +0100, Alexander Sosedkin wrote: On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 10:20 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 07:40:15PM +0100, Alexander Sosedkin wrote: We've been disabling it in TLS, but its usage is much wider than TLS. The next agonizing step is to restrict its usage for signatures on the cryptographic libraries level, with openssl being the scariest one. Good news is, RHEL-9 is gonna lead the way and thus will take a lot of the hits first. Fedora doesn't have to pioneer it. Bad news is, Fedora has to follow suit someday anyway, and this brings me to how does one land such a change. --- Fedora is a large distribution with short release cycles, and the only realistic way to weed out its reliance on SHA-1 signatures from all of its numerous dark corners is to break them. Make creation and verification fail in default configuration. But it's unreasonable to just wait for, say, Fedora 37 branch-off and break it in Rawhide for Fedora 38. The fallout will just be too big. If RHEL-9 has lead the way, what are the stats for real world RHEL impact ? We'll know when the real world starts using RHEL-9 en masse? What is/was the absolute number of packages and % number of packages from the RHEL distro that saw breakage ? Does preventing the distro from installing altogether count as 100%? If yes, 100%. =) Jokes aside, I can't give you an accurate estimate yet. Perhaps a useful first step is to just modify the three main crypto libs (gnutls, openssl, and nss) to send a scary warnihg message to stderr/syslog any time they get use of SHA1 in a signature. Leave that active for a release cycle and see how many bug reports we get. To be clear, the actual mechanism to turn off SHA1 for signatures doesn't involve any changes to any of our crypto libraries, it involves changing the crypto policies file. With crypto policies, you can actually turn off almost any algorithm involved in SSL or signatures in all of our libraries. There is really no good way to 'log' from the crypto libraries. Actually I think that provides a way forward that might work. 1) in fedora 37, provide a policy that turns SHA-1 off. in our testing, we encourage people to run with that policy and write bugs against components. 2) in fedora 38, SHA-1 gets turned of in the default policy and ships that way. Things that still fail would only work once in the legacy policy. 3) some day in the future (fedora 39?) it gets turned off legacy as well. bob ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F35 to F36
On 3/16/22 01:13, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 15/03/2022 01:25, Ian Laurie wrote: Sadly it's not able to boot graphically, but I think the issue is with my RPMFusion NVIDIA drivers. I can login fine to a virtual console however, and lightdm is running, just not working. The startx command also fails. 1. You need to disable UEFI Secure Boot or configure akmods to automatically sign all built kmods (no documentation available yet). 2. On 470xx drivers branch you must disable Wayland on GDM (Fedora 36 system-wide change). NVIDIA support Wayland only on 495.xx branch or newer. As an 470.xx NVIDIA drivers maintainer, I think I should disable Wayland support on our side during the package installation. Thanks for that info. I'm running Xfce so I have lightdm not gdm. In my case it was UEFI enabled in the BIOS, but this would have been the case with fc35 as well so I'm a bit perplexed why previously with Fedora 35 it "appeared" to work but failed miserably in Fedora 36. Also after the upgrade to 36, I was able to get graphics by booting the last 35 kernel. Maybe the NVIDIA drivers were never working as such before, but somehow it was gracefully "falling back" to default drivers with the old kernel but not the new one? No idea what was happening. -- Ian Laurie FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser TZ: Australia/Sydney ___ 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 2064054] perl-HTML-Parser-3.77 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-9cc10cb703 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9cc10cb703 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 ___ 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 2064054] perl-HTML-Parser-3.77 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-897a7321e9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-897a7321e9 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 ___ 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 2064054] perl-HTML-Parser-3.77 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-6e8348a6a9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-6e8348a6a9 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 ___ 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
openssl maintainerships?
Hi Dmitry. It seems since the openssl 3 GA release back in September there's not been a single successful openssl build[1], and a number of bugs [2], and even more CVEs [3][4]. Why aren't these being dealt with in a semi reasonable fashion? The last actual successful build is now over 6 months ago. Peter [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=109 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW_status=ASSIGNED=Fedora=openssl_id=12493381=Fedora=Fedora%20EPEL [3] https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities-3.0.html [4] https://lwn.net/Articles/887970/ ___ 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: Orphaning some of my packages
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 4:13:26 AM EDT Dan Callaghan wrote: > I've decided to orphan all the packages > which I no longer use: ... > linenoise I am taking this one. -- Garry T. Williams ___ 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
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #6: 3.77 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 3.77 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/6 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #6: 3.77 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following: `` 3.77 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/6 ___ 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: Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2022-03-15)
> > > === > #fedora-meeting: FESCO (2022-03-15)... (full message at > https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/f0e5009e37f1c570d2bcffca2107e9d250de840d) > === > > > Meeting started by sgallagh at 18:00:19 UTC. The full logs are available > athttps://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-15/fesco.2022-03-15-18.00.log.html > . > > > > Meeting summary > --- > * LINK: > > https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/procedure-moving-area-one-time-zone-another > (dcantrell, 18:00:37) > * init process (sgallagh, 18:01:30) > > * #2772 Change proposal: Drop i686 builds of jdk8,11,17 and latest (18) > rpms from f37 onwards (sgallagh, 18:04:16) > * AGREED: FESCo awaits more feedback from the Change owners (+7, 0, > -0) (sgallagh, 18:21:15) > > * Sunsetting i686 in Fedora (sgallagh, 18:22:11) > > * Next week's chair (sgallagh, 18:32:53) > * ACTION: mhroncok will chair the next meeting (sgallagh, 18:36:12) > > * Open Floor (sgallagh, 18:36:15) > * AGREED: FESCo meeting is at 17:00 UTC from now on (mhroncok, > 18:43:13) > * ACTION: mhroncok to update the wiki (mhroncok, 18:43:28) > * ACTION: somebody to update fedocal (mhroncok, 18:43:35) > > Meeting ended at 18:52:45 UTC. > > > > > Action Items > > * mhroncok will chair the next meeting > * mhroncok to update the wiki > * somebody to update fedocal > > > > > Action Items, by person > --- > * mhroncok > * mhroncok will chair the next meeting > * mhroncok to update the wiki > * **UNASSIGNED** > * somebody to update fedocal > > > > > People Present (lines said) > --- > * mhroncok (67) > * sgallagh (55) > * Eighth_Doctor (36) > * nirik (23) > * zodbot (21) > * zbyszek (16) > * dustymabe (14) > * dcantrell (11) > * tstellar (8) > * trodgers (7) > * michel (5) > * mboddu (4) > * salimma (3) > * decathorpe (3) > * Conan_Kudo (0) > * Pharaoh_Atem (0) > * Son_Goku (0) > * King_InuYasha (0) > * Sir_Gallantmon (0) > > > > > Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.4 > > .. _`MeetBot`: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions > > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-IoT-36-20220315.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 3/15 (x86_64), 4/15 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220313.0): ID: 1176577 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176577 ID: 1176588 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176588 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220313.0): ID: 1176567 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176567 ID: 1176579 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176579 ID: 1176580 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176580 ID: 1176582 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176582 ID: 1176594 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_zezere_ignition@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176594 Passed openQA tests: 12/15 (x86_64), 11/15 (aarch64) Installed system changes in test x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi: System load changed from 0.22 to 0.06 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1172696#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176566#downloads Installed system changes in test aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload@uefi: System load changed from 0.25 to 0.40 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1172711#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176581#downloads -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #5: 3.77 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 3.77 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/5 ___ 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 2063950] perl-Net-DAVTalk-0.22 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063950 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-907e07a5bc 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-2022-907e07a5bc` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-907e07a5bc 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=2063950 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #5: 3.77 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following: `` 3.77 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/5 ___ 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-arm] Re: F36 buildroot broken on armv7hl
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 01:21:09PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Tuesday, 15 March 2022 at 11:39, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > Hello! > > Has anyone else seen this? > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84213778 > > failed on armv7hl: > > > > Error: > > Problem 1: conflicting requests > > - nothing provides /bin/sh needed by dnf-4.10.0-2.fc36.noarch > > Problem 2: package dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch requires > > python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.24-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be > > installed > > - conflicting requests > > - nothing provides python3-dbus needed by > > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > > - nothing provides python(abi) = 3.10 needed by > > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > > - nothing provides python3-hawkey >= 0.46.1 needed by > > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > > (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) > > > > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10696 filed. Fixed. It was a misconfigured builder you happened to hit. > > The above task has also failed on aarch64 with what looks like a crash, > > but I'm unable to reproduce it either on aarch64-test01.fedorainfracloud.org > > or locally on a Pinebook Pro in mock with the same golang package in > > buildroot. > > Strangely enough, a resubmitted task succeeded: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84217961 > > I had to resubmit it a couple of times, though. Two attempts failed: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84217283 > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84217961 It looks like the tests for this package are flaky/have race conditions? Both those failed in random tests... kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2061310] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 Michal Josef Spacek changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|jples...@redhat.com |mspa...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Michal Josef Spacek --- Changes: --- version 5.20220313 at 2022-03-15 15:47:03 + --- Change: bda56dc5a3e5ddfb2fbedfa83e129bd1f9b3893b Author: Chris 'BinGOs' Williams Date : 2022-03-15 15:47:03 + Updated for v5.34.1 --- version 5.20220306 at 2022-03-07 10:17:05 + --- Change: 09fd011ae9422824a8876a2a0caf8b8cd589e61f Author: Chris 'BinGOs' Williams Date : 2022-03-07 10:17:05 + Updated for v5.34.1-RC2 For f34, f35, f36 and rawhide -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 ___ 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: F37 Change: Boost 1.78 upgrade (System-Wide Change proposal)
I have completed mock builds of roughly 70% of the Boost dependent packages in Fedora rawhide as of today. There have been no FTBFS issues related to the upgrade to Boost 1.78.0. Fesco approved the change proposal last week, I have confidence that this version of Boost is stable enough to proceed with. On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 6:12 PM Thomas Rodgers wrote: > I started on it in anger last week. I've been tracking down some breakage > in the upstream's build build that was preventing me from getting a > successful .rpm build, so I haven't even started to evaluate dependent > package breakage. I expect to have a scratch build done by this time > tomorrow. > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 1:02 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> On 23. 02. 22 17:48, Ben Cotton wrote: >> > ** Request a "f37-boost" >> > [https://docs.pagure.org/releng/sop_adding_side_build_targets.html >> > build system tag] >> > ([ >> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-November/159908.html >> > discussion]): >> > >> > ** Build boost into that tag >> >> Hey Thomas, >> >> when do you expect to do this? Is there an estimated schedule? I recall >> some >> side tag conflicts between Python and Boost in the past, so we better >> coordinate. See our dates in: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python3.11#Important_dates_and_plan >> >> Thanks, >> -- >> 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
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #4: 3.77 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 3.77 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/4 ___ 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 2061310] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 Upstream Release Monitoring changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |0220306 is available|0220313 is available --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Latest upstream release: 5.20220313 Current version/release in rawhide: 5.20220227-1.fc37 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CPAN-Perl-Releases/ 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/5881/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #4: 3.77 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following: `` 3.77 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/4 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #3: 3.77 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 3.77 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/3 ___ 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 2064353] New: perl-Module-CoreList-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064353 Bug ID: 2064353 Summary: perl-Module-CoreList-5.20220313 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Module-CoreList Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: jples...@redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: jose.p.oliveira@gmail.com, jples...@redhat.com, mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, spo...@gmail.com, st...@silug.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 5.20220313 Current version/release in rawhide: 5.20220220-1.fc37 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Module-CoreList/ 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/3080/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064353 ___ 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: F37 Change: Drop i686 builds of jdk8,11,17 and latest (18) rpms from f37 onwards (System-Wide Change)
I interpreted this to mean that, while this Java proposal and Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval both have to do with i686 removals: - the Java change should not be seen as part of Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval - the Java change was written without knowledge of Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval - the Java change should be considered separately from Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval - learning about Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval has not given the Java change owners any reason to change or reconsider this proposal On Tue, Mar 15, 2022, at 11:31 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 1:08 PM Jiri Vanek wrote: >> >> Small clarification. I had jsut lerned abotu >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval . This >> java proposal have nothig to do with that and was asctually done without >> anybody from JDK maintainers beeing aware. >> Still ti remains valid. > > What do you mean with "This java proposal have nothig to do with that > and was asctually done without anybody from JDK maintainers beeing > aware."? The JDK maintainers were not aware of this Java-related > proposal? How can that be? > > 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 ___ 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
Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2022-03-15)
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Tuesday at 18:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2022-03-15 18:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be discussed can be found at: https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda = Discussed and Voted in the Ticket = Title of issue https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2769 APPROVED (+5,0,-0) = Followups = = New business = #2772 Change proposal: Drop i686 builds of jdk8,11,17 and latest (18) rpms from f37 onwards https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2772 = Open Floor = For more complete details, please visit each individual issue. The report of the agenda items can be found at https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new issue at https://pagure.io/fesco, e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting. ___ 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-36-20220315.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 14/229 (x86_64), 11/161 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175932 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175932 ID: 1175935 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso gnome_text_editor URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175935 ID: 1175936 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175936 ID: 1175981 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175981 ID: 1176028 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_hd_variation@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176028 ID: 1176044 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfsiso_variation@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176044 ID: 1176069 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz evince@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176069 ID: 1176103 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176103 ID: 1176108 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_update_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176108 ID: 1176127 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_update_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176127 ID: 1176161 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_minimal_uefi@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176161 ID: 1176186 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_uefi@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176186 ID: 1176245 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176245 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-36-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175974 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175974 ID: 1175983 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175983 ID: 1176031 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso support_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176031 ID: 1176081 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176081 ID: 1176083 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_update_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176083 ID: 1176104 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade gnome_text_editor URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176104 ID: 1176105 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176105 ID: 1176124 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade gnome_text_editor@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176124 ID: 1176158 Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176158 ID: 1176159 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176159 ID: 1176224 Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176224 ID: 1176232 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176232 Soft failed openQA tests: 7/229 (x86_64), 5/161 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-36-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175951 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175951 ID: 1175986 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gnome_text_editor URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175986 ID: 1176075 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176075 ID: 1176090 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176090 ID: 1176118 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade eog@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176118 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-36-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175939 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175939 ID: 1175970 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175970 ID: 1175989 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175989 ID: 1175999 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175999 ID: 1176079 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176079 ID: 1176097 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176097 ID: 1176123 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1176123 Passed openQA tests: 207/229 (x86_64), 145/161 (aarch64)
Re: F37 Change: Drop i686 builds of jdk8,11,17 and latest (18) rpms from f37 onwards (System-Wide Change)
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 1:08 PM Jiri Vanek wrote: > > Small clarification. I had jsut lerned abotu > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval . This java > proposal have nothig to do with that and was asctually done without anybody > from JDK maintainers beeing aware. > Still ti remains valid. What do you mean with "This java proposal have nothig to do with that and was asctually done without anybody from JDK maintainers beeing aware."? The JDK maintainers were not aware of this Java-related proposal? How can that be? 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
Re: F37 Change: Drop i686 builds of jdk8,11,17 and latest (18) rpms from f37 onwards (System-Wide Change)
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:31 AM Jiri Vanek wrote: > > Hi! > > You have valid points. > The non transitive list is indeed not somehow immense[1]. Will add it to wiki > page. Will also provide few recursive iterations. Ty for reminder. > As for the java-arches macro, I have no objections to it. It is PR to > jpackages-tools? But maybe one note against - it may cause inconsistency, if > somebody will decide to maintain another version of java - eg as now happens > for jdk8 aarch32 Thank you for including the list of non-noarch Java packages. However, *all* Java packages will need to be adapted to have "ExcludeArch: i686", even the noarch packages (which will need something like: "ExclusiveArch: everything-except-i686 noarch"). Otherwise the noarch packages will randomly fail to build, if they are assigned to a i686 builder. 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
[Bug 2063950] perl-Net-DAVTalk-0.22 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063950 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-7759708df5 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-7759708df5` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-7759708df5 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=2063950 ___ 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] Re: Packaging issue with nodejs and mongodb-server
MongoDB was retired from Fedora and epel7 a couple of years ago, due to the license issues. Thus there is no longer a mongodb-server in epel7.https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1855725 Problem: nodejs had a major update in epel7, and mongodb relies on the v8 in nodejs. Why the major update? v8 Security issues. v8-3.14 (libv8.so.3) hasn't had any official security updates in 6 years. v8 is the javascript engine for a browser, and as such, needs to be updated constantly because it touches so many things. It was announced that it was being obsoleted by nodejs, but it was part of the nodejs announcement, so you might not have seen it. We apologize for this. But in the end, it was no longer safe to be using the old nodejs and the old v8. Solution: At this point, we recommend you update your mongodb server from mongodb the company. It is still free for a majority of use cases.https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/tutorial/install-mongodb-on-red-hat/ On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 7:36 AM Nick Howitt via epel-devel < epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Hi, > With the major bump to nodejs, I believe a conflict has been created > between nodejs-libs and mongodb: > > [root@services26 ~]# yum install mongodb-server > Loaded plugins: clearcenter-marketplace, fastestmirror > ClearCenter Marketplace: fetching repositories... > Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile > > Resolving Dependencies > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package mongodb-server.x86_64 0:2.6.12-6.el7 will be installed > --> Processing Dependency: v8 for package: > mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libyaml-cpp.so.0.5()(64bit) for package: > mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libv8.so.3()(64bit) for package: > mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > Package v8 is obsoleted by nodejs-libs, but obsoleting package does not > provide for requirements > --> Processing Dependency: libtcmalloc.so.4()(64bit) for package: > mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libstemmer.so.0()(64bit) for package: > mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libboost_thread-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for > package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libboost_system-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for > package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: > libboost_program_options-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for package: > mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libboost_filesystem-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for > package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package boost-filesystem.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed > ---> Package boost-program-options.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed > ---> Package boost-system.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed > ---> Package boost-thread.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed > ---> Package gperftools-libs.x86_64 0:2.6.1-1.el7 will be installed > ---> Package libstemmer.x86_64 0:0-2.585svn.el7 will be installed > ---> Package mongodb-server.x86_64 0:2.6.12-6.el7 will be installed > --> Processing Dependency: libv8.so.3()(64bit) for package: > mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 > Package v8 is obsoleted by nodejs-libs, but obsoleting package does not > provide for requirements > ---> Package nodejs-libs.x86_64 1:16.14.0-2.el7 will be installed > --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1)(64bit) for > package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) for > package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1e)(64bit) for > package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1b)(64bit) for > package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1)(64bit) for > package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0g)(64bit) for > package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) for > package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libuv.so.1()(64bit) for package: > 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.1.1()(64bit) for package: > 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) for package: > 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libbrotlienc.so.1()(64bit) for package: > 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > --> Processing Dependency: libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit) for package: > 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 > ---> Package yaml-cpp.x86_64 1:0.5.1-2.el7 will be installed > --> Running transaction check > ---> Package brotli.x86_64 0:1.0.7-5.el7 will be installed > ---> Package libuv.x86_64 1:1.43.0-2.el7 will be installed > ---> Package mongodb-server.x86_64
[EPEL-devel] Packaging issue with nodejs and mongodb-server
Hi, With the major bump to nodejs, I believe a conflict has been created between nodejs-libs and mongodb: [root@services26 ~]# yum install mongodb-server Loaded plugins: clearcenter-marketplace, fastestmirror ClearCenter Marketplace: fetching repositories... Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package mongodb-server.x86_64 0:2.6.12-6.el7 will be installed --> Processing Dependency: v8 for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libyaml-cpp.so.0.5()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libv8.so.3()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 Package v8 is obsoleted by nodejs-libs, but obsoleting package does not provide for requirements --> Processing Dependency: libtcmalloc.so.4()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libstemmer.so.0()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libboost_thread-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libboost_system-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libboost_program_options-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libboost_filesystem-mt.so.1.53.0()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 --> Running transaction check ---> Package boost-filesystem.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed ---> Package boost-program-options.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed ---> Package boost-system.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed ---> Package boost-thread.x86_64 0:1.53.0-28.el7 will be installed ---> Package gperftools-libs.x86_64 0:2.6.1-1.el7 will be installed ---> Package libstemmer.x86_64 0:0-2.585svn.el7 will be installed ---> Package mongodb-server.x86_64 0:2.6.12-6.el7 will be installed --> Processing Dependency: libv8.so.3()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 Package v8 is obsoleted by nodejs-libs, but obsoleting package does not provide for requirements ---> Package nodejs-libs.x86_64 1:16.14.0-2.el7 will be installed --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1)(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1e)(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1b)(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1)(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0g)(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libuv.so.1()(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libssl.so.1.1()(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libbrotlienc.so.1()(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 --> Processing Dependency: libbrotlidec.so.1()(64bit) for package: 1:nodejs-libs-16.14.0-2.el7.x86_64 ---> Package yaml-cpp.x86_64 1:0.5.1-2.el7 will be installed --> Running transaction check ---> Package brotli.x86_64 0:1.0.7-5.el7 will be installed ---> Package libuv.x86_64 1:1.43.0-2.el7 will be installed ---> Package mongodb-server.x86_64 0:2.6.12-6.el7 will be installed --> Processing Dependency: libv8.so.3()(64bit) for package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 Package v8 is obsoleted by nodejs-libs, but obsoleting package does not provide for requirements ---> Package openssl11-libs.x86_64 1:1.1.1k-2.el7 will be installed --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: mongodb-server-2.6.12-6.el7.x86_64 (clearos-epel) Requires: libv8.so.3()(64bit) Available: 1:v8-3.14.5.10-25.el7.x86_64 (clearos-epel) libv8.so.3()(64bit) You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest [root@services26 ~]# Is there a missing "provides" in the updated nodejs-libs or something else? Thanks, Nick ___ 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:
Re: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F35 to F36
On 15/03/2022 01:25, Ian Laurie wrote: Sadly it's not able to boot graphically, but I think the issue is with my RPMFusion NVIDIA drivers. I can login fine to a virtual console however, and lightdm is running, just not working. The startx command also fails. 1. You need to disable UEFI Secure Boot or configure akmods to automatically sign all built kmods (no documentation available yet). 2. On 470xx drivers branch you must disable Wayland on GDM (Fedora 36 system-wide change). NVIDIA support Wayland only on 495.xx branch or newer. As an 470.xx NVIDIA drivers maintainer, I think I should disable Wayland support on our side during the package installation. -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-HTML-Parser] PR #3: 3.77 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-HTML-Parser` that you are following: `` 3.77 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-HTML-Parser/pull-request/3 ___ 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 36 compose report: 20220315.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-36-20220314.n.0 NEW: Fedora-36-20220315.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 70 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 998.99 MiB Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 94.25 MiB Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree ppc64le Path: Kinoite/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-ppc64le-36-20220315.n.0.iso = DROPPED IMAGES = = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: R-jqr-1.2.1-3.fc36 Old package: R-jqr-1.2.1-2.fc35 Summary: Client for 'jq', a 'JSON' Processor RPMs: R-jqr Size: 826.26 KiB Size change: -4.03 KiB Changelog: * Wed Jan 19 2022 Fedora Release Engineering - 1.2.1-3 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Mass_Rebuild Package: adwaita-qt-1.4.1-3.fc36 Old package: adwaita-qt-1.4.1-2.fc36 Summary: Adwaita theme for Qt-based applications RPMs: adwaita-qt5 adwaita-qt6 libadwaita-qt5 libadwaita-qt5-devel libadwaita-qt6 libadwaita-qt6-devel Size: 3.15 MiB Size change: 521.39 KiB Changelog: * Sat Mar 05 2022 Neal Gompa - 1.4.1-3 - Small cleanups to the packaging Package: baobab-42~rc-1.fc36 Old package: baobab-42~beta-1.fc36 Summary: A graphical directory tree analyzer RPMs: baobab Size: 1.90 MiB Size change: 2.57 KiB Changelog: * Tue Mar 08 2022 David King - 42~rc-1 - Update to 42.rc Package: cairo-1.17.4-7.fc36 Old package: cairo-1.17.4-6.fc36 Summary: A 2D graphics library RPMs: cairo cairo-devel cairo-gobject cairo-gobject-devel cairo-tools Size: 5.61 MiB Size change: 3.95 KiB Changelog: * Fri Feb 25 2022 David King - 1.17.4-7 - Fix permissions on cairo-trace - Add explicit Requires to tools subpackage Package: cloud-init-22.1-3.fc36 Old package: cloud-init-22.1-2.fc36 Summary: Cloud instance init scripts RPMs: cloud-init Size: 1.10 MiB Size change: -584 B Changelog: * Thu Mar 10 2022 Dusty Mabe - 22.1-3 - Drop requirement on NetworkManager-config-server Package: eog-42~rc-1.fc36 Old package: eog-42~beta-1.fc36 Summary: Eye of GNOME image viewer RPMs: eog eog-devel eog-tests Size: 20.82 MiB Size change: 38.89 KiB Changelog: * Fri Mar 04 2022 Adam Williamson - 42~beta-2 - Backport MR#122 to fix setting window title * Tue Mar 08 2022 David King - 42~rc-1 - Update to 42.rc Package: eog-plugins-42~rc-1.fc36 Old package: eog-plugins-42~alpha-1.fc36 Summary: A collection of plugins for the eog image viewer RPMs: eog-plugin-exif-display eog-plugin-export-to-folder eog-plugin-fit-to-width eog-plugin-fullscreenbg eog-plugin-light-theme eog-plugin-map eog-plugin-maximize-windows eog-plugin-postasa eog-plugin-pythonconsole eog-plugin-send-by-mail eog-plugin-slideshowshuffle eog-plugins eog-plugins-data Size: 1.20 MiB Size change: 3.64 KiB Changelog: * Tue Mar 08 2022 David King - 42~rc-1 - Update to 42.rc Package: evolution-3.43.3-1.fc36 Old package: evolution-3.43.2-1.fc36 Summary: Mail and calendar client for GNOME RPMs: evolution evolution-bogofilter evolution-devel evolution-devel-docs evolution-help evolution-langpacks evolution-pst evolution-spamassassin Size: 32.47 MiB Size change: -6.45 KiB Changelog: * Fri Mar 04 2022 Milan Crha - 3.43.3-1 - Update to 3.43.3 Package: evolution-data-server-3.43.3-1.fc36 Old package: evolution-data-server-3.43.2-1.fc36 Summary: Backend data server for Evolution RPMs: evolution-data-server evolution-data-server-devel evolution-data-server-doc evolution-data-server-langpacks evolution-data-server-perl evolution-data-server-tests Size: 23.67 MiB Size change: -13.38 KiB Changelog: * Fri Mar 04 2022 Milan Crha - 3.43.3-1 - Update to 3.43.3 Package: evolution-ews-3.43.3-1.fc36 Old package: evolution-ews-3.43.2-1.fc36 Summary: Evolution extension for Exchange Web Services RPMs: evolution-ews evolution-ews-langpacks Size: 3.07 MiB Size change: -1.74 KiB Changelog: * Fri Mar 04 2022 Milan Crha - 3.43.3-1 - Update to 3.43.3 Package: glib2-2.71.3-1.fc36 Old package: glib2-2.71.2-1.fc36 Summary: A library of handy utility functions RPMs: glib2 glib2-devel glib2-doc glib2-static glib2-tests Size: 41.41 MiB Size change: -176.85 KiB Changelog: * Mon Mar 07 2022 David King 2.71.3-1 - Update to 2.71.3 Package: gnome-backgrounds-42~beta-2.fc36 Old package: gnome-backgrounds-42~beta-1.fc36 Summary: Desktop backgrounds packaged with the GNOME desktop RPMs: gnome-backgrounds gnome-backgrounds-extras Size: 48.92 MiB Size
[Bug 2064172] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 Product Security DevOps Team changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |UPSTREAM Last Closed||2022-03-15 13:01:41 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 ___ 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 2064174] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 --- Comment #2 from Product Security DevOps Team --- This CVE Bugzilla entry is for community support informational purposes only as it does not affect a package in a commercially supported Red Hat product. Refer to the dependent bugs for status of those individual community products. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 ___ 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 2064174] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 Product Security DevOps Team changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |UPSTREAM Status|NEW |CLOSED Last Closed||2022-03-15 13:02:23 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 ___ 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 2064172] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 --- Comment #2 from Product Security DevOps Team --- This CVE Bugzilla entry is for community support informational purposes only as it does not affect a package in a commercially supported Red Hat product. Refer to the dependent bugs for status of those individual community products. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 ___ 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: why opencv Python package doesn't provide python3dist(opencv-python) ?
On 18. 02. 22 1:37, Sérgio Basto wrote: Hi, Can someone help me ? https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/opencv/blob/rawhide/f/opencv.spec have py_provides but https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2054951 Hi Sérgio, for some reason, you message ended in my Spam box. Sorry for a delayed response. First of all, %py_provides has nothing to do with python3dist(opencv-python) Provides. %py_provides takes a given *alternative* name (such as python3-opencv) and turns it into other names (such as python-opencv and python3.10-opencv). On a package already named python3-opencv, you don't need to use %py_provides, it does nothing. OTOH python3dist(opencv-python) would only be generated if the package actually provided a Python opencv-python package, in a Python sense. I.e. when you dnf install python3-opencv and run "pip list", do you see opencv-python listed? If you do, but the python3dist(opencv-python) provide is missing, there is bug in our generators. If you don't see opencv-python listed, the package MUST NOT provide python3dist(opencv-python). The provide literally means "Python tools will consider this package is opencv-python". Looking at the linked bugzilla, it seems to me that the package provides no Python metadata at all, only the importable module: /usr/lib64/python3.10/site-packages/cv2.cpython-310-x86_64-linux-gnu.so In order to provide the actual metadata you would need to create and install dist-info/egg-info directory. However, it appears to me that the opencv-python package is actually https://github.com/opencv/opencv-python and not what we are shipping in Fedora as python3-opencv. This is a weird variant of a missing dependency. In Fedora, we don't package opencv-python at all. Packages that require python3dist(opencv-python) have a missing dependency. But that dependency can be technically substituted by our pytohn3-opencv package, however that requires patching the dependent package not to require opencv-python and instead add the dependency for python3-opencv on the RPM level manually. Alternatively, we could package opencv-python to Fedora and patch it to require and use python3-opencv, to avoid bundling/duplication. Either way, there is no easy solution, this is where the Python ecosystem clashes with the RPM ecosystem instead of cooperating. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064054] perl-HTML-Parser-3.77 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 Michal Josef Spacek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jples...@redhat.com |mspa...@redhat.com Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek --- Changes: 3.77 2022-03-14 * Update tests to remove HTML4 specific tags (GH#25) (Jess) for f34, f35, f36 and rawhide -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064054 ___ 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 buildroot broken on armv7hl
On Tuesday, 15 March 2022 at 11:39, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Hello! > Has anyone else seen this? > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84213778 > failed on armv7hl: > > Error: > Problem 1: conflicting requests > - nothing provides /bin/sh needed by dnf-4.10.0-2.fc36.noarch > Problem 2: package dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch requires > python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.24-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be > installed > - conflicting requests > - nothing provides python3-dbus needed by > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > - nothing provides python(abi) = 3.10 needed by > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > - nothing provides python3-hawkey >= 0.46.1 needed by > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) > > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10696 filed. > > The above task has also failed on aarch64 with what looks like a crash, > but I'm unable to reproduce it either on aarch64-test01.fedorainfracloud.org > or locally on a Pinebook Pro in mock with the same golang package in > buildroot. Strangely enough, a resubmitted task succeeded: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84217961 I had to resubmit it a couple of times, though. Two attempts failed: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84217283 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84217961 Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan ___ 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
perl-PerlX-Maybe-1.202 license correction
I corrected a license declaration in perl-PerlX-Maybe-1.202 from "(GPL+ or Artistic) and CC-BY-SA and Public Domain" to "(GPL+ or Artistic) and Public Domain". -- 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
Fedora-Rawhide-20220315.n.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check! All required tests passed Failed openQA tests: 11/231 (x86_64), 18/161 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175237 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_hd_variation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175237 ID: 1175360 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_selinux@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175360 ID: 1175561 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175561 ID: 1175579 Test: aarch64 universal install_repository_http_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175579 ID: 1175636 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175636 ID: 1175637 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175637 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175290 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175290 ID: 1175294 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175294 ID: 1175337 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175337 ID: 1175340 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175340 ID: 1175384 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175384 ID: 1175405 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso mediakit_repoclosure@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175405 ID: 1175411 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175411 ID: 1175413 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175413 ID: 1175439 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175439 ID: 1175441 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175441 ID: 1175443 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_update_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175443 ID: 1175465 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175465 ID: 1175469 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_fprint URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175469 ID: 1175483 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175483 ID: 1175484 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade gnome_text_editor@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175484 ID: 1175518 Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175518 ID: 1175519 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175519 ID: 1175584 Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175584 ID: 1175591 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175591 ID: 1175592 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175592 ID: 1175594 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_realmd_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175594 ID: 1175604 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175604 ID: 1175606 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_2_realmd_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175606 Soft failed openQA tests: 4/161 (aarch64), 6/231 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175427 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175427 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220314.n.0): ID: 1175297 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175297 ID: 1175309 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175309 ID: 1175328 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175328 ID: 1175332 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175332 ID: 1175356 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175356 ID: 1175435 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi URL:
Re: [fedora-arm] F36 buildroot broken on armv7hl
Works fine on a scratch build for me: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84218959 On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 10:39 AM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > Hello! > Has anyone else seen this? > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84213778 > failed on armv7hl: > > Error: > Problem 1: conflicting requests > - nothing provides /bin/sh needed by dnf-4.10.0-2.fc36.noarch > Problem 2: package dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch requires > python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.24-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be > installed > - conflicting requests > - nothing provides python3-dbus needed by > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > - nothing provides python(abi) = 3.10 needed by > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > - nothing provides python3-hawkey >= 0.46.1 needed by > python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch > (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) > > https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10696 filed. > > The above task has also failed on aarch64 with what looks like a crash, > but I'm unable to reproduce it either on aarch64-test01.fedorainfracloud.org > or locally on a Pinebook Pro in mock with the same golang package in > buildroot. > > Regards, > Dominik > -- > Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org > There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and > oppression to develop psychic muscles. > -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan > ___ > arm mailing list -- a...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to arm-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/a...@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
[EPEL-devel] Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 2:59 PM Dan Čermák wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > Adam Williamson writes: > > > snip > > > That could obviously have pretty significant consequences for Fedora. > > Bugzilla isn't only an issue tracker for Fedora; we run some > > significant processes through it, notably the Change process, the > > blocker/FE bug process, and the prioritized bug process. In A World > > Without Bugzilla all of those would need adapting (and their > > documentation updating). There's fairly tight integration between Bodhi > > and Bugzilla, which would need to be redesigned. Those are just things > > I can think of off the top of my head. There are also a couple of > > decades worth of internet links to Fedora issues on RH Bugzilla, of > > course. > > > > I guess the two big choices for Fedora if RH said "we're not > > maintaining Bugzilla any more" would be 1) take over maintaining > > Bugzilla or 2) switch to something else. 1) would probably be the path > > of least resistance, I guess. > > Short term it is the path of the least resistance, but at least what > I've heard from $dayjob, maintaining a Bugzilla instance is no easy > task, as they are often customized (via non-upstream patches) and this > all needs to be maintained. I cannot speak for our infra team, but I > really don't know if they'd like yet another huge service, because this > effectively means they'd have to take over maintenance of > bugzilla.redhat.com... > > > > > This does also kinda lead to a larger question for me, trying to wear > > both Red Hat and Fedora hats at the same time[0]. I wonder if we're > > kind of lacking a...mechanism, for want of a better word, to handle the > > *generic* case here. Let's rewind to Ye Olde Days, when "the Fedora > > project" first started. At that point Fedora and Red Hat shared a lot > > of tooling and infrastructure, and this was useful to both sides in > > many ways; it saves on development costs and it makes it easy for > > people to work in both worlds. With my Red Hat on, I think I'm allowed > > to say that internally we often talk about this being desirable - > > having consistency between how X is done in Fedora and how it's done > > for RHEL - and it obviously has benefits to Fedora too (it means we > > don't have to find the resources to do that same work at Fedora level). > > > > However, situations like this make me wonder if we might have an issue > > with keeping shared infra/tooling where it's desirable. It seems like > > this is a decision/conversation that's been happening within RH, about > > what makes sense for RH in terms of RHEL development. AFAIK this is the > > first time it's been formally talked about in a Fedora context, and the > > messaging is "RH has already decided to stop using Bugzilla for RHEL > > after 9". In other words, RH has decided on its own to move away from > > something that is part of the shared RH/Fedora "heritage way of doing > > things". > > > > I'm not saying that's wrong, but as I said it does make me wonder > > whether, if both sides do find shared tooling/approaches beneficial, we > > might want to approach this kind of potential change differently in > > future. Otherwise it does seem like we could sort of gradually drift > > apart, with no explicit intention to do so, and lose the benefits of > > shared tooling and process. Unless the ultimate outcome of this is > > "Fedora adopts issues.redhat.com for bug tracking" - which would be a > > possibility, but doesn't seem like a certainty - the result will be > > that we go from having a shared bug tracker, with the benefits of > > shared maintenance and being able to easily clone or reference bugs > > between Fedora and RHEL, to each maintaining our own bug tracker and > > not having those benefits. > > > > Of course, there would be sensitivities in developing such a process - > > it could look a lot like Red Hat telling Fedora how to do stuff, which > > I think isn't exactly the relationship we want to have. But at the same > > time I'm not sure "Red Hat or Fedora just deciding unilaterally to stop > > using this thing they'd previously both used" is always the best choice > > either. > > No, certainly not. I think it would have been nice if the tooling > discussion happened before RH decided to drop Bugzilla so that we can > all use a common tooling. However, I also know that in a business RHEL is choosing not to use Bugzilla for future versions of RHEL. I need to be clear in wording there, because Red Hat is a company, RHEL is one of its products, and we're only talking about newer versions of that product. I am not aware of any plans for Red Hat to drop Bugzilla. I am aware of plans for newer versions of RHEL to no longer use Bugzilla. > sometimes reaching such a consensus is everything but easy. It would > have been nice if someone at least tried though. Tried what, to be precise? If you mean try to find common tooling between Fedora and RHEL, well we have off and on for years.
Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 2:59 PM Dan Čermák wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > Adam Williamson writes: > > > snip > > > That could obviously have pretty significant consequences for Fedora. > > Bugzilla isn't only an issue tracker for Fedora; we run some > > significant processes through it, notably the Change process, the > > blocker/FE bug process, and the prioritized bug process. In A World > > Without Bugzilla all of those would need adapting (and their > > documentation updating). There's fairly tight integration between Bodhi > > and Bugzilla, which would need to be redesigned. Those are just things > > I can think of off the top of my head. There are also a couple of > > decades worth of internet links to Fedora issues on RH Bugzilla, of > > course. > > > > I guess the two big choices for Fedora if RH said "we're not > > maintaining Bugzilla any more" would be 1) take over maintaining > > Bugzilla or 2) switch to something else. 1) would probably be the path > > of least resistance, I guess. > > Short term it is the path of the least resistance, but at least what > I've heard from $dayjob, maintaining a Bugzilla instance is no easy > task, as they are often customized (via non-upstream patches) and this > all needs to be maintained. I cannot speak for our infra team, but I > really don't know if they'd like yet another huge service, because this > effectively means they'd have to take over maintenance of > bugzilla.redhat.com... > > > > > This does also kinda lead to a larger question for me, trying to wear > > both Red Hat and Fedora hats at the same time[0]. I wonder if we're > > kind of lacking a...mechanism, for want of a better word, to handle the > > *generic* case here. Let's rewind to Ye Olde Days, when "the Fedora > > project" first started. At that point Fedora and Red Hat shared a lot > > of tooling and infrastructure, and this was useful to both sides in > > many ways; it saves on development costs and it makes it easy for > > people to work in both worlds. With my Red Hat on, I think I'm allowed > > to say that internally we often talk about this being desirable - > > having consistency between how X is done in Fedora and how it's done > > for RHEL - and it obviously has benefits to Fedora too (it means we > > don't have to find the resources to do that same work at Fedora level). > > > > However, situations like this make me wonder if we might have an issue > > with keeping shared infra/tooling where it's desirable. It seems like > > this is a decision/conversation that's been happening within RH, about > > what makes sense for RH in terms of RHEL development. AFAIK this is the > > first time it's been formally talked about in a Fedora context, and the > > messaging is "RH has already decided to stop using Bugzilla for RHEL > > after 9". In other words, RH has decided on its own to move away from > > something that is part of the shared RH/Fedora "heritage way of doing > > things". > > > > I'm not saying that's wrong, but as I said it does make me wonder > > whether, if both sides do find shared tooling/approaches beneficial, we > > might want to approach this kind of potential change differently in > > future. Otherwise it does seem like we could sort of gradually drift > > apart, with no explicit intention to do so, and lose the benefits of > > shared tooling and process. Unless the ultimate outcome of this is > > "Fedora adopts issues.redhat.com for bug tracking" - which would be a > > possibility, but doesn't seem like a certainty - the result will be > > that we go from having a shared bug tracker, with the benefits of > > shared maintenance and being able to easily clone or reference bugs > > between Fedora and RHEL, to each maintaining our own bug tracker and > > not having those benefits. > > > > Of course, there would be sensitivities in developing such a process - > > it could look a lot like Red Hat telling Fedora how to do stuff, which > > I think isn't exactly the relationship we want to have. But at the same > > time I'm not sure "Red Hat or Fedora just deciding unilaterally to stop > > using this thing they'd previously both used" is always the best choice > > either. > > No, certainly not. I think it would have been nice if the tooling > discussion happened before RH decided to drop Bugzilla so that we can > all use a common tooling. However, I also know that in a business RHEL is choosing not to use Bugzilla for future versions of RHEL. I need to be clear in wording there, because Red Hat is a company, RHEL is one of its products, and we're only talking about newer versions of that product. I am not aware of any plans for Red Hat to drop Bugzilla. I am aware of plans for newer versions of RHEL to no longer use Bugzilla. > sometimes reaching such a consensus is everything but easy. It would > have been nice if someone at least tried though. Tried what, to be precise? If you mean try to find common tooling between Fedora and RHEL, well we have off and on for years.
[EPEL-devel] Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:12 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 12:44 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Hi Fedora, CentOS, and EPEL Communities! > > > > As part of our continued 3 year major Red Hat Enterprise Linux release > > cadence, RHEL 9 development is starting to wrap up with the spring > > 2022 release coming soon. That means planning for the next release > > will start in earnest in the very near future. As some of you may > > know, Red Hat has been using both Bugzilla and Jira via > > issues.redhat.com for RHEL development for several years. Our > > intention is to move to using issues.redhat.com only for the major > > RHEL releases after RHEL 9. > > > > What does this mean for Fedora and CentOS? This discussion is in part > > to figure that out. Based on some very brief analysis, the following > > should hold: > > > > - RHEL customers should continue to file support cases through the Red > > Hat Customer portal, which will remain consistent regardless of the > > backend tooling used. > > > > - There is no imminent retirement of the Red Hat Bugzilla instance > > being planned at this time. RHEL 7, 8, and 9 will continue to use > > bugzilla in some form and RHEL 9 has a very long lifecycle. > > > > - Fedora Linux and EPEL have their own Bugzilla product families and > > are not directly impacted in their own workflows by the choice to use > > only issues.redhat.com for RHEL. > > - There will be impacts on existing documentation that provide > > guidance on requesting things from RHEL in various places like EPEL. > > We will be happy to help adjust these. > > > > - CentOS Stream contribution and bug reporting workflows will be > > adjusted to use issues.redhat.com instead of bugzilla in the relevant > > places. This should apply to all versions of CentOS Stream for a > > unified contributor workflow. This will happen gradually as we > > discover the best workflow to use. > > > > If there are other impacts that you can think of, please raise them on > > this thread. We’d like to ensure we’re covering as much as possible > > as this rolls out. > > So if I'm understanding this correctly, the ultimate consequence here > is "Red Hat Bugzilla might go away, or stop being maintained, at > whatever point it's no longer needed for RHEL 9", right? I have no idea, to be honest. There's a lot of assumption in that statement and it certainly could be an outcome, but I'm not aware of any plans towards that directly. > That could obviously have pretty significant consequences for Fedora. > Bugzilla isn't only an issue tracker for Fedora; we run some > significant processes through it, notably the Change process, the > blocker/FE bug process, and the prioritized bug process. In A World > Without Bugzilla all of those would need adapting (and their > documentation updating). There's fairly tight integration between Bodhi > and Bugzilla, which would need to be redesigned. Those are just things > I can think of off the top of my head. There are also a couple of > decades worth of internet links to Fedora issues on RH Bugzilla, of > course. Those all sound like the things I'm familiar with. > I guess the two big choices for Fedora if RH said "we're not > maintaining Bugzilla any more" would be 1) take over maintaining > Bugzilla or 2) switch to something else. 1) would probably be the path > of least resistance, I guess. > > This does also kinda lead to a larger question for me, trying to wear > both Red Hat and Fedora hats at the same time[0]. I wonder if we're > kind of lacking a...mechanism, for want of a better word, to handle the > *generic* case here. Let's rewind to Ye Olde Days, when "the Fedora > project" first started. At that point Fedora and Red Hat shared a lot > of tooling and infrastructure, and this was useful to both sides in > many ways; it saves on development costs and it makes it easy for > people to work in both worlds. With my Red Hat on, I think I'm allowed > to say that internally we often talk about this being desirable - > having consistency between how X is done in Fedora and how it's done > for RHEL - and it obviously has benefits to Fedora too (it means we > don't have to find the resources to do that same work at Fedora level). Fedora and RHEL process and tooling has deviated significantly over the years. So much so that by the time I joined the RHEL team, it was already very different. That was almost 5 years ago, which means the individual decisions that led to it were even earlier. I don't really want to revisit those decisions because I wasn't around and can't speak to why they were made, but the connection between Fedora and RHEL via bugzilla is minimal at best. The commonality that brings the most shared benefit is the activities of our communities, the quality and rigor they bring into Fedora, and the sources we share. Tooling and process are orthogonal to those. Important, because they certainly lend themselves to aiding that quality and
Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:12 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 12:44 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Hi Fedora, CentOS, and EPEL Communities! > > > > As part of our continued 3 year major Red Hat Enterprise Linux release > > cadence, RHEL 9 development is starting to wrap up with the spring > > 2022 release coming soon. That means planning for the next release > > will start in earnest in the very near future. As some of you may > > know, Red Hat has been using both Bugzilla and Jira via > > issues.redhat.com for RHEL development for several years. Our > > intention is to move to using issues.redhat.com only for the major > > RHEL releases after RHEL 9. > > > > What does this mean for Fedora and CentOS? This discussion is in part > > to figure that out. Based on some very brief analysis, the following > > should hold: > > > > - RHEL customers should continue to file support cases through the Red > > Hat Customer portal, which will remain consistent regardless of the > > backend tooling used. > > > > - There is no imminent retirement of the Red Hat Bugzilla instance > > being planned at this time. RHEL 7, 8, and 9 will continue to use > > bugzilla in some form and RHEL 9 has a very long lifecycle. > > > > - Fedora Linux and EPEL have their own Bugzilla product families and > > are not directly impacted in their own workflows by the choice to use > > only issues.redhat.com for RHEL. > > - There will be impacts on existing documentation that provide > > guidance on requesting things from RHEL in various places like EPEL. > > We will be happy to help adjust these. > > > > - CentOS Stream contribution and bug reporting workflows will be > > adjusted to use issues.redhat.com instead of bugzilla in the relevant > > places. This should apply to all versions of CentOS Stream for a > > unified contributor workflow. This will happen gradually as we > > discover the best workflow to use. > > > > If there are other impacts that you can think of, please raise them on > > this thread. We’d like to ensure we’re covering as much as possible > > as this rolls out. > > So if I'm understanding this correctly, the ultimate consequence here > is "Red Hat Bugzilla might go away, or stop being maintained, at > whatever point it's no longer needed for RHEL 9", right? I have no idea, to be honest. There's a lot of assumption in that statement and it certainly could be an outcome, but I'm not aware of any plans towards that directly. > That could obviously have pretty significant consequences for Fedora. > Bugzilla isn't only an issue tracker for Fedora; we run some > significant processes through it, notably the Change process, the > blocker/FE bug process, and the prioritized bug process. In A World > Without Bugzilla all of those would need adapting (and their > documentation updating). There's fairly tight integration between Bodhi > and Bugzilla, which would need to be redesigned. Those are just things > I can think of off the top of my head. There are also a couple of > decades worth of internet links to Fedora issues on RH Bugzilla, of > course. Those all sound like the things I'm familiar with. > I guess the two big choices for Fedora if RH said "we're not > maintaining Bugzilla any more" would be 1) take over maintaining > Bugzilla or 2) switch to something else. 1) would probably be the path > of least resistance, I guess. > > This does also kinda lead to a larger question for me, trying to wear > both Red Hat and Fedora hats at the same time[0]. I wonder if we're > kind of lacking a...mechanism, for want of a better word, to handle the > *generic* case here. Let's rewind to Ye Olde Days, when "the Fedora > project" first started. At that point Fedora and Red Hat shared a lot > of tooling and infrastructure, and this was useful to both sides in > many ways; it saves on development costs and it makes it easy for > people to work in both worlds. With my Red Hat on, I think I'm allowed > to say that internally we often talk about this being desirable - > having consistency between how X is done in Fedora and how it's done > for RHEL - and it obviously has benefits to Fedora too (it means we > don't have to find the resources to do that same work at Fedora level). Fedora and RHEL process and tooling has deviated significantly over the years. So much so that by the time I joined the RHEL team, it was already very different. That was almost 5 years ago, which means the individual decisions that led to it were even earlier. I don't really want to revisit those decisions because I wasn't around and can't speak to why they were made, but the connection between Fedora and RHEL via bugzilla is minimal at best. The commonality that brings the most shared benefit is the activities of our communities, the quality and rigor they bring into Fedora, and the sources we share. Tooling and process are orthogonal to those. Important, because they certainly lend themselves to aiding that quality and
F36 buildroot broken on armv7hl
Hello! Has anyone else seen this? https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84213778 failed on armv7hl: Error: Problem 1: conflicting requests - nothing provides /bin/sh needed by dnf-4.10.0-2.fc36.noarch Problem 2: package dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch requires python3-dnf-plugins-core = 4.0.24-2.fc36, but none of the providers can be installed - conflicting requests - nothing provides python3-dbus needed by python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch - nothing provides python(abi) = 3.10 needed by python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch - nothing provides python3-hawkey >= 0.46.1 needed by python3-dnf-plugins-core-4.0.24-2.fc36.noarch (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10696 filed. The above task has also failed on aarch64 with what looks like a crash, but I'm unable to reproduce it either on aarch64-test01.fedorainfracloud.org or locally on a Pinebook Pro in mock with the same golang package in buildroot. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan ___ 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-34-20220315.0 compose check report
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-34-20220314.0): ID: 1175626 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175626 ID: 1175632 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175632 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
Fedora-Cloud-35-20220315.0 compose check report
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-35-20220314.0): ID: 1175218 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175218 ID: 1175224 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1175224 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
[Bug 2064175] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure [fedora-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064175 Marian Rehak changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||2064174 (CVE-2021-44962) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 [Bug 2064174] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064175 ___ 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 2064174] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 --- Comment #1 from Marian Rehak --- Created slic3r tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: fedora-all [bug 2064175] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 ___ 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: Donate 1 minute of your time to test upgrades from F35 to F36
On 3/12/22 04:43, Miroslav Suchý wrote: Do you want to make Fedora 36 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time and try to run: I've done 2 upgrades from 35 -> 36 (real, not tests) on native systems. On one, as explained earlier in this thread , I had to migrate VirtualBox from the Oracle version to the RPM Fusion version, and also ditch the RPM Fusion NVIDIA drivers which were preventing a boot to a graphical greeter (and also breaking the startx command), presumably because of a comparability issue with the 5.17 kernel. On the second system it just worked without fiddling. The systems were as follows: [1] Dell Precision T5610 2 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2603 v2 @ 1.80GHz (8 cores total) NVIDIA Corporation GK104 [GeForce GTX 760] (rev a1) [2] Dell Optiplex 3040 1 x Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-6100T CPU @ 3.20GHz Intel Corporation HD Graphics 530 (rev 06) Both systems are relatively legacy unfortunately, but still looking good here. -- Ian Laurie FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser TZ: Australia/Sydney ___ 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 2064175] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure [fedora-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064175 --- Comment #1 from Marian Rehak --- Use the following template to for the 'fedpkg update' request to submit an update for this issue as it contains the top-level parent bug(s) as well as this tracking bug. This will ensure that all associated bugs get updated when new packages are pushed to stable. = # bugfix, security, enhancement, newpackage (required) type=security # low, medium, high, urgent (required) severity=medium # testing, stable request=testing # Bug numbers: 1234,9876 bugs=2064174,2064175 # Description of your update notes=Security fix for [PUT CVEs HERE] # Enable request automation based on the stable/unstable karma thresholds autokarma=True stable_karma=3 unstable_karma=-3 # Automatically close bugs when this marked as stable close_bugs=True # Suggest that users restart after update suggest_reboot=False == Additionally, you may opt to use the bodhi web interface to submit updates: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/new -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064175 ___ 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 2064175] New: CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure [fedora-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064175 Bug ID: 2064175 Summary: CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure [fedora-all] Product: Fedora Version: 35 Status: NEW Component: slic3r Keywords: Security, SecurityTracking Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: mhron...@redhat.com Reporter: mre...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: mhron...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora This is an automatically created tracking bug! It was created to ensure that one or more security vulnerabilities are fixed in affected versions of fedora-all. For comments that are specific to the vulnerability please use bugs filed against the "Security Response" product referenced in the "Blocks" field. For more information see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/TrackingBugs When submitting as an update, use the fedpkg template provided in the next comment(s). This will include the bug IDs of this tracking bug as well as the relevant top-level CVE bugs. Please also mention the CVE IDs being fixed in the RPM changelog and the fedpkg commit message. NOTE: this issue affects multiple supported versions of Fedora. While only one tracking bug has been filed, please correct all affected versions at the same time. If you need to fix the versions independent of each other, you may clone this bug as appropriate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064175 ___ 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 2064174] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 Marian Rehak changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||2064175 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064175 [Bug 2064175] CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure [fedora-all] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 ___ 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 2064172] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 --- Comment #1 from Marian Rehak --- Created slic3r tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: fedora-all [bug 2064173] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 ___ 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 2064172] New: CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 Bug ID: 2064172 Summary: CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory Product: Security Response Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-t...@redhat.com Reporter: mre...@redhat.com CC: mhron...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Other A memory leakage flaw exists in the class PerimeterGenerator of Slic3r libslic3r 1.3.0 and Master Commit b1a5500. Specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory. An attacker can provide malicious files to trigger this vulnerability. Reference: https://hackmd.io/nDT_UKLyRQendxDwil9A4w -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 ___ 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 2064174] New: CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 Bug ID: 2064174 Summary: CVE-2021-44962 slic3r: specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure Product: Security Response Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-t...@redhat.com Reporter: mre...@redhat.com CC: mhron...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Other An out-of-bounds read vulnerability exists in the GCode::extrude() functionality of Slic3r libslic3r 1.3.0 and Master Commit b1a5500. A specially crafted stl file could lead to information disclosure. An attacker can provide a malicious file to trigger this vulnerability. Reference: https://hackmd.io/KSI1bwGfSyO7T8UCf0HeTw -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064174 ___ 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 2064173] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory [fedora-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064173 --- Comment #1 from Marian Rehak --- Use the following template to for the 'fedpkg update' request to submit an update for this issue as it contains the top-level parent bug(s) as well as this tracking bug. This will ensure that all associated bugs get updated when new packages are pushed to stable. = # bugfix, security, enhancement, newpackage (required) type=security # low, medium, high, urgent (required) severity=medium # testing, stable request=testing # Bug numbers: 1234,9876 bugs=2064172,2064173 # Description of your update notes=Security fix for [PUT CVEs HERE] # Enable request automation based on the stable/unstable karma thresholds autokarma=True stable_karma=3 unstable_karma=-3 # Automatically close bugs when this marked as stable close_bugs=True # Suggest that users restart after update suggest_reboot=False == Additionally, you may opt to use the bodhi web interface to submit updates: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/new -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064173 ___ 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 2064173] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory [fedora-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064173 Marian Rehak changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||2064172 (CVE-2021-44961) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 [Bug 2064172] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064173 ___ 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 2064173] New: CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory [fedora-all]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064173 Bug ID: 2064173 Summary: CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory [fedora-all] Product: Fedora Version: 35 Status: NEW Component: slic3r Keywords: Security, SecurityTracking Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: mhron...@redhat.com Reporter: mre...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: mhron...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora This is an automatically created tracking bug! It was created to ensure that one or more security vulnerabilities are fixed in affected versions of fedora-all. For comments that are specific to the vulnerability please use bugs filed against the "Security Response" product referenced in the "Blocks" field. For more information see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/TrackingBugs When submitting as an update, use the fedpkg template provided in the next comment(s). This will include the bug IDs of this tracking bug as well as the relevant top-level CVE bugs. Please also mention the CVE IDs being fixed in the RPM changelog and the fedpkg commit message. NOTE: this issue affects multiple supported versions of Fedora. While only one tracking bug has been filed, please correct all affected versions at the same time. If you need to fix the versions independent of each other, you may clone this bug as appropriate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064173 ___ 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 2064172] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 Marian Rehak changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||2064173 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064173 [Bug 2064173] CVE-2021-44961 slic3r: specially crafted stl files can exhaust available memory [fedora-all] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064172 ___ 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: Problem with cmake 3.23.0
On Monday, March 14, 2022 10:22:19 PM CET Thomas Rodgers wrote: > These are the CMake related issues I've encountered thus far - > > FlightCrew: FTBFS # CMake Error: The source directory > "/builddir/build/BUILD/FlightCrew-0.9.1/build" does not appear to contain > CMakeLists.txt. > csdiff: FTBFS # Make Error: The source directory > "/builddir/build/BUILD/csdiff-2.2.0/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu" does not appear > to contain CMakeLists.txt. I have fixed csdiff by syncing the spec file with upstream: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/csdiff/c/54d3e338 Kamil > ledger: FTBFS # Error: /builddir/build/BUILD/ledger-3.2.1/redhat-linux-build > is not a directory > liblas: FTBFS # Error: > /builddir/build/BUILD/libLAS-d76a061f33a69a36ab116cd939c5d444b301efd8/redhat-linux-build > is not a directory ___ 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: Problem with cmake 3.23.0
On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 12:18:02 AM CET Neal Gompa wrote:
> I bent over backwards to get the macros working all the way back to EPEL 7.
>
> I updated the cmake3 package in EPEL 7[1] and I got RHEL to update
> CMake[2] and sync the macros from Fedora[3] for RHEL 8.
>
> The only difference for EPEL 7 and EPEL 8 is that RHEL's default is to
> do in-source builds and you need to explicitly set it back in your
> spec file.
>
> [1]:
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cmake3/c/1e92b954226f002762fa98582367c080f267d449?branch=epel7
> [2]:
> https://git.centos.org/rpms/cmake/c/09b85a86fd26251b569658b4ecb5db9ace298606?branch=c8s
> [3]:
> https://git.centos.org/rpms/cmake/c/262fd084db691b092d1df3178adc357f2dcaef38?branch=c8s
>
Do you have any example of a spec file that builds in the buildroots
of EPEL-{7..9} and all supported releases of Fedora without additional
`%if...` macros?
Preferably something that builds the same source code multiple times,
like in the csdiff example I posted above:
https://github.com/csutils/csdiff/blob/2c3b7ce60f1bdd2bf42903dec290c6b775f1697a/make-srpm.sh#L74
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: Problem with SSL in Fedora 36
On Monday, 14 March 2022 16.53.18 WET José Abílio Matos wrote: > Thank you. > > I copied and pasted and while changing the option I left one of those rogue > characters, keeping always the preffix. :-( > > > I will try and see your suggestion. After a reboot: # update-crypto-policies --show LEGACY The error remains: The underlying socket is having troubles when processing connection to imap.xxx.xx.xx:993: Error during SSL handshake: error:0A0C0103:SSL routines::internal error Regards, -- José Abílio___ 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
