[EPEL-devel] Intent to retire containerd in EPEL 7 and co-maintainer request

[Maxwell G via epel-devel]

Hi everyone,

I have been de-facto maintaining containerd in Fedora as a member of the go-
sig for a little while now, as the previous maintainer no longer has time to 
do. In addition to the Fedora branches, this package also exists on EPEL 7. 
That branch has not been maintained for a while and has unpatched CVEs. I am 
not interested in maintaining it myself, so unless someone steps up to 
maintain it and fix the vulnerabilities, I will retire the package from EPEL 7 
in a week from today, on June 15th.

Additionally, I would appreciate co-maintainers to help with the Fedora 
branches of containerd, its unbundled go dependencies, and moby-engine 
(bundled go package). Long term, I'm not sure I'll have the time or the 
interest to maintain these packages. Note that on EPEL 7, containerd bundles 
its dependencies; moby-engine is not packaged there.

-- 
Thanks,

Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His

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

Intent to retire containerd in EPEL 7 and co-maintainer request

[Maxwell G via devel]

Hi everyone,

I have been de-facto maintaining containerd in Fedora as a member of the go-
sig for a little while now, as the previous maintainer no longer has time to 
do. In addition to the Fedora branches, this package also exists on EPEL 7. 
That branch has not been maintained for a while and has unpatched CVEs. I am 
not interested in maintaining it myself, so unless someone steps up to 
maintain it and fix the vulnerabilities, I will retire the package from EPEL 7 
in a week from today, on June 15th.

Additionally, I would appreciate co-maintainers to help with the Fedora 
branches of containerd, its unbundled go dependencies, and moby-engine 
(bundled go package). Long term, I'm not sure I'll have the time or the 
interest to maintain these packages. Note that on EPEL 7, containerd bundles 
its dependencies; moby-engine is not packaged there.

-- 
Thanks,

Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His

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

[Bug 2094836] perl-Graphics-TIFF-19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-081dbc30ed 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-2022-081dbc30ed`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-081dbc30ed

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=2094836
___
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: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> I guess it could be fixed with a clean-room reimplementation of the
> stripped parts of FDK-AAC.

Unfortunately, the concept of clean-room does not apply to patents, only to 
copyright. So it will not help here.

Kevin Kofler
___
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: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Not everyone. New users will not be aware of RPM Fusion, so I see much
> value in having things mostly work out-of-the-box. We just have to agree
> to disagree here.

It depends on where the new users are coming from. And if they really find 
Fedora but not RPM Fusion, then we need to do something about that. I guess 
getting errors on playing most multimedia files out of the box would 
actually help getting RPM Fusion known. It sure did in the past.

>> to allow browsers to easily download the Widevine blob.)
> 
> Not allowing users to make that decision would be taking away their
> freedom. Firefox doesn't download the blobs without asking the user
> first.

It does not matter that it asks the user. It still blatantly violates the 
rule that applications must not download executable code and execute it. 
(There are other offenders, e.g., the infamous HPLIP "plugin", but that does 
not make it any better.) Doing that bypasses the licensing policies of our 
repository in a pretty obvious way (by just shipping the proprietary blobs 
elsewhere).

In addition, that download offer actively promotes proprietary software, 
which used to be a no go in Fedora, but now (very sadly) even Fedora itself 
has started doing that by shipping pointers to all sorts of proprietary 
stuff ranging from NVidia drivers from RPM Fusion (whereas ironically the 
software in RPM Fusion that follows our licensing policies is considered off 
limits due to patents) to all sorts of proprietary Flatpaks. (It shall also 
be pointed out that it is disputed whether the NVidia drivers can even be 
legally distributed at all, because they are under a proprietary, GPL-
incompatible license and therefore arguably cannot be legally linked to the 
GPLv2-licensed Linux kernel. But basically nobody cares about that.)

Furthermore, keep in mind that such a "Do you want to install foo? Yes/No" 
prompt drives most users to just blindly click "Yes" without even reading 
what it says, let alone thinking the implications through. That user 
behavior is well-known, and, e.g., the reason why Firefox no longer uses 
this type of prompt for insecure HTTPS sites. That makes the "Firefox 
doesn't download the blobs without asking the user first." argument pretty 
fallacious.

I like the way QtWebEngine handles the DRM blobs: You *can* install them, 
but you have to manually unpack them to the directory given in the 
documentation, then QtWebEngine will pick them up. It will not download 
those proprietary blobs on its own. But this does not take away any freedom 
from the user because the blobs can be manually installed. They will just 
not be proactively offered; instead, the user gets an error and has to read 
the documentation and make their own decision.

>> > Unless you're a lawyer, the above statement is false. Red Hat legal
>> > says the modified FDK-AAC is free and GPL-compatible, so there's no
>> > violation of licenses here.
>> 
>> Red Hat Legal's interpretation is in direct contradiction to the FSF's
>> attestation that the FDK-AAC license is not compatible with the GPL.
> 
> And yet, that's the only interpretation that matters to Fedora. Please
> stop arguing over facts.

Different lawyers will have different opinions. A legal opinion is not a 
fact. The only way to get anything close to undisputable is to get a legal 
precedent from an appeal court or higher, and even that only in a particular 
jurisdiction, and only if the jurisdiction has a concept of case law at all 
to begin with. (As far as I know, for the jurisdiction to which Red Hat is 
bound, the concept exists, but requires a decision from an appeal court, a 
state supreme court, or the federal US Supreme Court.) As long as nobody 
actually litigates this in court, we just have to accept that there is no 
final position that cannot be argued over.

>> Red Hat
>> Legal's claim that a license can be GPL-compatible or not depending on
>> whether the code happens to implement some patents or not sounds highly
>> dubious to me, and that view does not seem to be shared by the FSF nor by
>> FFmpeg upstream, and it is their license (drafted by the FSF and applied
>> by FFmpeg upstream to their code) that we must comply with.
> 
> Again, this is irrelevant. If you have a problem with Red Hat's
> interpretation, I suggest you consult a lawyer.

I do not see how this is irrelevant, considering that the upstream copyright 
holders (and not Red Hat Legal) are the ones entitled to sue Fedora / Red 
Hat for violating the license. So if you do not want to get sued, surely 
their opinion matters.

>> It is particularly bizarre that Fedora is willing to put themselves at
>> risk of a lawsuit over divergent license interpretations as a result of
>> an effort, ironically, to ship something compliant with US law.
> 
> This is only your opinion and it's irrelevant from legal perspective.

I do not see how this is an opinion at all. Doing something that the 
copyright 

[Bug 2091242] perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091242

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1. |perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1.
   |fc37|fc37
   |perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1. |perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1.
   |fc36|fc36
   ||perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1.
   ||el8



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-e6c95c20ca has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091242
___
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 2091432] perl-Number-Tolerant-1.709 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091432

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version|perl-Number-Tolerant-1.709- |perl-Number-Tolerant-1.709-
   |1.fc37  |1.fc37
   ||perl-Number-Tolerant-1.709-
   ||1.fc36
Last Closed||2022-06-09 01:04:47



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-83353dfde5 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091432
___
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 2088880] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220528 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=200

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2
   ||0220528-1.fc36
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
Last Closed||2022-06-09 01:04:43



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-5b0d047ba9 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=200
___
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 2091242] perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091242

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version|perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1. |perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1.
   |fc37|fc37
   ||perl-Devel-REPL-1.003029-1.
   ||fc36
Last Closed||2022-06-09 01:04:41



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-b9f97ad65d has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091242
___
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: Hardware without AES-NI: use xchacha12/Adiantum instead of AES-XTS

[Casper]

Thanks for your answer Chris.

```
blackbird:~ # cryptsetup benchmark -c aes-xts-plain64 --key-size 512
# Tests approximatifs en utilisant uniquement la mémoire (pas de stockage E/S).
# Algorithme |   Clé | Chiffrement |Déchiffrement
aes-xts512b84,3 MiB/s83,5 MiB/s
```

I forgot to mention RaspberryPi4, 3, 2, does not have AES flag
too. Good to know a ticket has been already opened to Blivet.

Regards,
Casper

Christopher Klooz a écrit :
> The irony is that XTS uses two different keys for different parts of the
> operation. This means that AES-XTS-256 is AES128 and AES-XTS-512 is AES256
> (security is not increased by the second key).
> 
> So, you compared AES with 128 bit encryption with XChaCha with 256 bit. And
> despite the doubled key length, XChaCha is still 3 times faster I would be
> curious to see how it is about XChaCha 256b against AES 256b (which is 512
> in XTS) on your machine?
> 
> If you reduce an algorithm's security to its security margin, XChaCha12 (=12
> rounds of XChaCha) has still a higher security margin than AES256 (=
> AES-XTS-512), and XChaCha12 is obviously even faster than XChaCha20 (20
> rounds of XChaCha). So on hardware without AES-NI, the performance can be
> heavily increased. Google made a good job with Adiantum imho, and of course
> djb with ChaCha
> 
> The issue is already at Blivet:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077532
> 
> Regards,
> Chris
> 
> On 08/06/2022 04:18, Casper wrote:
> > I was curious to see if changes were significant on my old Asus laptop:
> > 
> > ```
> > blackbird:~ # cryptsetup benchmark -c xchacha20,aes-adiantum
> > # Tests approximatifs en utilisant uniquement la mémoire (pas de stockage 
> > E/S).
> > #Algorithme |   Clé | Chiffrement |Déchiffrement
> > xchacha20,aes-adiantum256b   327,8 MiB/s   345,0 MiB/s
> > blackbird:~ # cryptsetup benchmark -c aes-xts-plain64
> > # Tests approximatifs en utilisant uniquement la mémoire (pas de stockage 
> > E/S).
> > # Algorithme |   Clé | Chiffrement |Déchiffrement
> >  aes-xts256b   105,0 MiB/s   103,9 MiB/s
> > ```
> > 
> > Results on a SATA disk (no SSD), and no AES flag in cpuinfo.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Casper
> > 
> > py0xc3 a écrit :
> > > Good everning,
> > > 
> > > I just experienced that, when setting up a new Fedora, Anaconda (both
> > > "Custom" and "Advanced Custom (Blivet-GUI)") always uses aes-xts-plain64 
> > > for
> > > disk encryption, even if the hardware does not support AES-NI.
> > > 
> > > Does it make sense to use xchacha12,aes-adiantum-plain64 by default if 
> > > there
> > > is no AES-NI in the hardware?
> > > 
> > > For a general use case, the security advantages of Adiantum can be
> > > neglected; both aes-xts & chacha-adiantum are secure.
> > > 
> > > But there are big performance disadvantages of AES when there is no AES-NI
> > > (this was the major reason for merging Adiantum into the kernel).
> > > 
> > > Besides the use of system resources, netbooks and such may have strongly
> > > decreased battery life times with aes-xts (the issue is primarily aes, not
> > > xts).
> > > 
> > > I tested with Fedora 35, KDE spin; but as the issue is Anaconda-centric, I
> > > expect that other Workstation installations tend to the same behavior.
> > > 
> > > Adjustments would be limited to Anaconda.
> > > 
> > > Regards & stay safe,
> > > Chris
> > > ___
> > > 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
> ___
> 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 

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> An unfiltered version has recently been approved[1].
> 
> [1]: https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/300

I agree with the RPM Fusion developers that this is an absolutely ridiculous 
double standard, especially with statements like "and we retire Fedora 
flatpaks that would benefit from unrestricted multimedia codecs available on 
flathub (specifically Firefox and Totem)". I really do not see why doing 
that with Flathub is OK and not with RPM Fusion.

The user experience from Flathub is much worse because the packages are not 
in our native format, and because there are no rules at all on how and from 
what source code they are built. Anyone can upload any binary blob to 
Flathub.

Kevin Kofler
___
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 2041281] Please branch and build perl-Filesys-Df epel9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041281

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-723e366858 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing
repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-723e366858

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=2041281
___
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

fedpkg clone not working

[Mukundan Ragavan]

I am unable to clone repos from src.fpo since this morning.

$ fedpkg co xfce4-power-manager
Cloning into 'xfce4-power-manager'...
nonamed...@pkgs.fedoraproject.org: Permission denied (publickey).
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
Could not execute clone: Failed to execute command.

Same issue with other packages (e.g. htop)

$ ssh-add -l
256 SHA256:  nonamedotc@imladris/fedora (ED25519)

$ klist -A
Ticket cache: KEYRING:persistent:1000:1000
Default principal: nonamed...@fedoraproject.org

Valid starting   Expires  Service principal
06/08/2022 18:58:14  06/09/2022 18:58:08 
krbtgt/fedoraproject@fedoraproject.org

renew until 06/15/2022 18:58:08

I have even tried changing my ssh key ...

'fedpkg co -a' works fine. What else can I try? Help is appreciated.

Thanks,
Mukundan.


--
GPG Key: E5C8BC67


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

Re: Planned Outage - Bodhi upgrade - 2022-06-09 09:00 UTC

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 07:32:21PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> 
> Hey Mark,
> 
> will rawhide builds in Koji automatically create Bodhi updates after the
> outage is over, or is there some manual action that will be required?

I'm not Mark, but there shouldn't be any manual action needed. When the
old version stops, the messages about tagging go into it's fedora
messaging rabbitmq queue and when the new version starts it will read
any messages in that queue and act on them. :) 

So, in theory there shouldn't be any actions needed. 

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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Thoughts: epel-release auto-enable crb repo

[Maxwell G via epel-devel]

On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 2:54:51 PM CDT Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> without messing with config files (which I
> hate, because that means newer crb.repo changes won't be picked up).

I thought files marked `%config(noreplace)` don't get updated automatically 
even 
if the user didn't modify it all. Am I missing something or are we talking 
about different things?

-- 
Thanks,

Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His

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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Update pam_radius to v2.0

[Troy Dawson]

Thank you for asking.
Go for it.


On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 12:55 AM Iker Pedrosa  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'd like to update pam_radius from v1.4 to v2.0 in EPEL9 and 8. The newer
> version includes several patches to make the PAM module thread-safe.
>
> I've opened a ticket in the steering committee's repository (
> https://pagure.io/epel/issue/181) and I'd also like to hear the feedback
> from the broader community.
> ___
> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Wed, Jun 8 2022 at 10:49:51 PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 
 wrote:

I guess it could be fixed with a clean-room reimplementation of the
stripped parts of FDK-AAC.


Probably not. Aren't the stripped parts the parts that Fedora Legal 
does not want us to have? (They wouldn't be stripped otherwise, right? 
;)


Michael

___
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: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 08 June 2022 at 22:41, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 8 2022 at 09:47:53 PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
>  wrote:
> > The above is mostly correct. It's not about audio quality, but
> > correctness. Specifically, HE-AAC audio is decoded incorrectly.
> > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522#c22
> > for more details.
> 
> Looking at this... it seems your argument is that it would be better to use
> ffmpeg's AAC decoder instead. But I don't believe that implementation of AAC
> has been approved by Fedora Legal, so it's probably not an option for us?

That is correct.

> My understanding is that fdk-aac is the only permitted AAC implementation in
> Fedora, so it's a choice between that or no AAC at all.

fdk-aac-free, yes.

> Seems like fixing it would be better than removing it? :)

I guess it could be fixed with a clean-room reimplementation of the
stripped parts of FDK-AAC.

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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Wed, Jun 8 2022 at 09:47:53 PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 
 wrote:

The above is mostly correct. It's not about audio quality, but
correctness. Specifically, HE-AAC audio is decoded incorrectly.
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522#c22
for more details.


Looking at this... it seems your argument is that it would be better to 
use ffmpeg's AAC decoder instead. But I don't believe that 
implementation of AAC has been approved by Fedora Legal, so it's 
probably not an option for us?


My understanding is that fdk-aac is the only permitted AAC 
implementation in Fedora, so it's a choice between that or no AAC at 
all. Seems like fixing it would be better than removing it? :)


Michael

___
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: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Otto Urpelainen]

Martin Stransky kirjoitti 6.6.2022 klo 11.48:


You can get exact info by running Firefox with

MOZ_LOG="PlatformDecoderModule:5"

env variable.


Thank you, this is a good thing to know.
However, te problem was resolved by ffmpeg-free update,
so I do not need to delve into the output this produces now.
___
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: Thoughts: epel-release auto-enable crb repo

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

On Wed, 2022-06-08 at 15:06 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Michel Alexandre Salim 
> said:
> > This won't be ready until EPEL 10 or even 11, but one thing I've
> > discussed with the DNF maintainer is the possibility of having
> > something like /etc/yum.repos.d/reponame.repo.d/ where you can drop
> > overrides, similar to how you can drop overrides for systemd unit
> > files.
> 
> I've wanted (and suggested) something like this for ages, for a
> different reason: ability to drop-in local mirror configs, again
> without
> modifying the RPM-packaged config.
> 
Nice! Yeah, there seems to be multiple use cases for this - come to
think of it, we could use your use case in some of our internal systems
too.

I'll bring it up in our internal roadmap planning and try and allocate
some time for this for the next few months.

Best,

-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
identities:
https://keyoxide.org/5dce2e7e9c3b1cffd335c1d78b229d2f7ccc04f2


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

Re: VirtualBox and HOST kernel-5.17.12 weirdness

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 08 June 2022 at 22:11, Alexander G. M. Smith wrote:
> On 2022-06-08 15:52, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > 4xxx is not IvyBridge, it's Haswell.
> 
> You sure?  I was going by 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)#Desktop_processors
> 
> There would be a significant change between Ivy Bridge and Haswell, since
> it's a "tock" type of Intel development where the micro-architecture
> changes.  And that sort of change may affect the bug we're discussing. 
> Particularly if someone put in a fix for Haswell CPUs and mis-applied it to
> IvyBridge too :-)

No, you and Wikipedia are right and I was wrong. Intel's ARK page says
it's Ivy Bridge. I was under the impression that Intel numbering was
consistent, i.e. i3/5/7-3xxx was Ivy Bridge and i3/5/7-4xxx was Haswell,
but I was naive.

Thanks for making me double check.

I own an i5-3570K that calls itself Ivy Bridge and a couple of laptops
with i5/7-4xxx which both call themselves Haswell. So I extrapolated. :)

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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Otto Urpelainen]

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski kirjoitti 6.6.2022 klo 11.54:

On Saturday, 04 June 2022 at 00:05, Otto Urpelainen wrote:

I have discovered that installing the ffmpeg-free package degrades Firefox
video support. Without any kind of ffmpeg installed, Firefox is able to play
all the videos I want to watch. Installing RPM Fusion's ffmpeg package does
not change this. But, installing ffmpeg-free from Fedora repositories causes
some videos not to play.


Could it be https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2089986 ?

There's an update fixing it, so please test:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-e3c5f45422


Thank you for the pointer!
By the time I got around testing this update,
it was already stable and installed on my system.
The problem is now gone, so most probably it this bug.

I now have another failure,
but it is a corner case that involves disabling ffmpeg in Firefox
and rejecting YouTube cookies,
and is also fixed by page refresh,
so I am not sure if I have the energy to investigate that.
___
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 2095035] New: perl-Chart-2.402.0 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095035

Bug ID: 2095035
   Summary: perl-Chart-2.402.0 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Chart
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com,
st...@silug.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 2.402.0
Upstream release that is considered latest: 2.402.0
Current version/release in rawhide: 2.401.1-2.fc37
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Chart/

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/5871/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Chart


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095035
___
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: VirtualBox and HOST kernel-5.17.12 weirdness

[Alexander G. M. Smith]

On 2022-06-08 15:52, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> 4xxx is not IvyBridge, it's Haswell.

You sure?  I was going by 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)#Desktop_processors


There would be a significant change between Ivy Bridge and Haswell, 
since it's a "tock" type of Intel development where the 
micro-architecture changes.  And that sort of change may affect the bug 
we're discussing.  Particularly if someone put in a fix for Haswell CPUs 
and mis-applied it to IvyBridge too :-)


- Alex
___
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: Thoughts: epel-release auto-enable crb repo

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Michel Alexandre Salim  said:
> This won't be ready until EPEL 10 or even 11, but one thing I've
> discussed with the DNF maintainer is the possibility of having
> something like /etc/yum.repos.d/reponame.repo.d/ where you can drop
> overrides, similar to how you can drop overrides for systemd unit
> files.

I've wanted (and suggested) something like this for ages, for a
different reason: ability to drop-in local mirror configs, again without
modifying the RPM-packaged config.

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

[EPEL-devel] Re: Thoughts: epel-release auto-enable crb repo

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

On Sat, 2022-06-04 at 20:47 -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 at 18:54, Neal Gompa  wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 10:52 PM Troy Dawson 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > When I first created the EPEL issue to auto-enable crb repo[1] I
> > > was only thinking of CAN we do it.  I wasn't thinking SHOULD we
> > > do it.
> > > We've come to the point that we actually can do it.  But before
> > > we go down that road, I wanted to take a step back and ask,
> > > should we do it.
> > > 
> > > The more I think about it, the more I think we shouldn't auto-
> > > enable the crb repo for epel8 and epel9.  Here are my reasons
> > > why.
> > > 
> > > 1 - The need to auto-enable crb isn't as big as it was before.
> > > At the time that I wrote that issue, I was getting quite alot of
> > > bugs / pings / emails about  epel packages not being
> > > installable.  I think on average about 2 a month.
> > > With epel being in fedora-docs, and with Carl's re-write of how
> > > to enable epel, that number has dropped significantly.  I
> > > possibly still average one a month, but that's an average over a
> > > year, with most of them being last year.
> > > In short, I believe the documentation is better, and easier to
> > > find, allowing people to enable crb on their own, without
> > > automation.
> > > 
> > > 2 - crb isn't an epel repo
> > > We really shouldn't be messing with other repo's that we, epel,
> > > don't own.
> > > 
> > > 3 - We are taking the choice away from users
> > > After I stopped and thought about it, there are plenty of
> > > scenarios where people want epel for just one or two packages,
> > > which do not require crb.
> > > 
> > > 4 - All the many small side cases.
> > > auto-enabling crb will have bugs.  RHEL and it's clones are in
> > > too many odd places for us to not hit some odd use cases we
> > > didn't expect.  We'd have to keep fixing the scripts.
> > > 
> > > I could go into more explanation on each of those things, but in
> > > the end, I've talked myself out of wanting to auto-enable crb for
> > > epel8 and epel9.
> > > But I also wanted to get others' thoughts before I close the bug
> > > and pull request.
> > > 
> > > What do others think?
> > > 
> > 
> > Let me start with examples that I get *regularly*: Pagure fails to
> > install from EPEL on RHEL/CentOS/Alma/etc. because python3-markdown
> > is
> > not available. KDE Plasma fails to install because of a mass of
> > missing dependencies.
> > 
> > 
> > To be crystal clear, I would like this fixed for at least the
> > majority
> > of cases and gracefully fail when it can't be fixed.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> The issue is going to be that an RPM which changes outside
> subscriptions will probably be an auditable finding for a lot of
> sites. It is one of the reasons this has been considered bad form in
> the past and would probably cause a lot of requests that it be made
> optional, removed, OR epel black listed. It doesn't matter if we all
> think that would be a silly finding, changes like this are considered
> security issues at various sites especially if for the last 15 years,
> epel-release has not done something like that and so had been
> 'approved' for use. 
> 
> At best I could see an optional side package `epel-release-enable-
> other-repo` or some similar name which just has these changes and is
> not pulled in by default and requires epel-release. Thus you could
> tell people to install `epel-release-enable-crb` and would get
> packages and if people have reports of broken packages you tell them
> to install this which will do the correct repo changes. 
> 

This won't be ready until EPEL 10 or even 11, but one thing I've
discussed with the DNF maintainer is the possibility of having
something like /etc/yum.repos.d/reponame.repo.d/ where you can drop
overrides, similar to how you can drop overrides for systemd unit
files.

That would allow epel-release to just ship an override for crb.repo
that toggles enabled=1, without messing with config files (which I
hate, because that means newer crb.repo changes won't be picked up).

Best,

-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
identities:
https://keyoxide.org/5dce2e7e9c3b1cffd335c1d78b229d2f7ccc04f2


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

Re: VirtualBox and HOST kernel-5.17.12 weirdness

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 08 June 2022 at 21:00, Alexander G. M. Smith wrote:
> Ian Laurie wrote on Friday, 3 June 2022 at 11:17 p.m.:
> > Is anyone else seeing crashes and other strange events in VirtualBox
> > 6.1.34 (from RPMFusion) with Linux guests when the Linux host is running
> > Fedora 36 with kernel-5.17.12?
> 
> Same thing here.  Host is Fedora 35 with kernel 5.17.12, using VirtualBox
> 6.1.34.
> 
> Lots of odd things like "curl" bombing out, dnf upgrades complaining they
> can't write somewhere.  Restarting nginx+passenger only works a couple of
> times, then it stops responding.  It's very repeatable too.  Same snapshot
> works fine with kernel 5.17.11.
> 
> The weird thing is that it works on other CPUs, an AMD Athlon X2 and an
> Intel 10th generation i5-10500H.  Just my IvyBridge Intel i7-4820K has the

4xxx is not IvyBridge, it's Haswell.

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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Tuesday, 07 June 2022 at 16:25, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7 2022 at 03:11:41 PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
>  wrote:
> > You could say that about any software that we ship that's missing
> > features. FESCo decided it's better to include an incomplete or inferior
> > implementation that we can legally distribute than no implementation at
> > all. I don't necessarily agree with that decision (in case of AAC), but
> > they're the community-elected body empowered to make such decisions.
> > Any community member can register themselves as candidate and run for a
> > FESCo seat in the next election.
> 
> What's wrong with the decision to support AAC? I can play pretty much any
> MP4 video on Fedora and it works fine. I understand that theoretically some
> videos might have lower audio quality, but I don't notice or care. Without
> fdk-aac, almost all MP4 videos would have no audio at all.
> 
> Do I misunderstand something?

The above is mostly correct. It's not about audio quality, but
correctness. Specifically, HE-AAC audio is decoded incorrectly.
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522#c22
for more details.

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

Re: VirtualBox and HOST kernel-5.17.12 weirdness

[Alexander G. M. Smith]

Ian Laurie wrote on Friday, 3 June 2022 at 11:17 p.m.:
> Is anyone else seeing crashes and other strange events in VirtualBox
> 6.1.34 (from RPMFusion) with Linux guests when the Linux host is running
> Fedora 36 with kernel-5.17.12?

Same thing here.  Host is Fedora 35 with kernel 5.17.12, using 
VirtualBox 6.1.34.


Lots of odd things like "curl" bombing out, dnf upgrades complaining 
they can't write somewhere.  Restarting nginx+passenger only works a 
couple of times, then it stops responding.  It's very repeatable too.  
Same snapshot works fine with kernel 5.17.11.


The weird thing is that it works on other CPUs, an AMD Athlon X2 and an 
Intel 10th generation i5-10500H.  Just my IvyBridge Intel i7-4820K has 
the problem.  I did try the kernel boot parameter mitigations=off, in 
case the Spectre or other workarounds were wrong for IvyBridge, but it 
still didn't work.


You can run 5.17.12 inside the guest without problems.  Your host just 
needs to be 5.17.11.


So, what CPUs are other people with problems using?

- Alex
___
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: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 1:43 PM Maxwell G via devel
 wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 8:59:21 AM CDT Petr Pisar wrote:
> > The problem is that RPM Fusion only targets Fedora.
>
> It also targets RHEL, CentOS Stream, and the various RHEL rebuilds.
>

For all practical purposes, that is effectively Fedora, since they are
Fedora derivatives that honor Fedora's policies.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Maxwell G via devel]

On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 8:59:21 AM CDT Petr Pisar wrote:
> The problem is that RPM Fusion only targets Fedora.

It also targets RHEL, CentOS Stream, and the various RHEL rebuilds.

-- 
Thanks,

Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His

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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 08/06/2022 15:59, Petr Pisar wrote:

If Fedora linked to RPM
Fusion, then according some (U.S.) jurisdical frameworks Fedora and RPM Fusion
would form a unit and Fedora would become legally responsible for RPM Fusion.


I don't think so. RPM Fusion is a third party repository located and 
registered in France, and France doesn't honor US software patents.


--
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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Maxwell G via devel]

Jun 8, 2022 8:51:45 AM Matthew Miller :

> The differences outlined there result in different constraints.
I disagree that flathub flatpaks breaking our policies is incidental. The way 
it 
solves the "problem with Linux app distribution" is (in part) by allowing 
developers to package and distribute their own applications and thus bypass 
Linux distributions, their policies, and review processes.

I am not a lawyer, but even if it was "incidental," that seems like a pretty 
flimsy argument to me.

I, for one, am dissatisfied with the answer, and I'm not even part of the 
rpmfusion project. If the rpmfusion developers feel the need to resort to 
retaliatory measures (which I don't support, BTW) to have their voices heard, 
that demonstrates a serious problem that needs to be addressed by fully 
responding to their concerns.

I apologize if I was a little harsh, but I'm frustrated by how this has played 
out.
-- 
Thanks,

Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His

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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Vitaly Zaitsev via devel]

On 08/06/2022 15:31, Matthew Miller wrote:

The differences outlined there result in different constraints.



Flathub is a third-party repository which provides software for various
Linux distributions. It doesn't shape what software it carries around what
Fedora does not. It fundamentally exists to solve a problem with Linux app
distribution to which our policies around licensing, software freedom, and
etc., are incidental. This makes it a different case.


RPM Fusion is a third-party repository which provides software for 
various Linux distributions: Fedora Linux and Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

...

They still look the same.

--
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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Sun, Jun 05, 2022 at 08:02:21AM +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> 
> Il 05/06/22 09:37, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel ha scritto:
> > On 04/06/2022 22:43, Otto Urpelainen wrote:
> >> But the question is, what needs to be done so that ffmpeg-free will not
> >> suffer, either.
> > ffmpeg-free is a special stripped version. Popular codecs H.264 and
> > H.265 were removed due to the legal reasons. You should always use the
> > fully featured version from the RPM Fusion repository.
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely,
> > Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
> 
> **Rant mode on**
> so, the whole purpose of Fedora is to have a fully free software linux
> distribution...

There's nothing non-free about ffmpeg (or even h.264).  It's certain
countries' attitudes to software patents which cause the problems here.

> but we can't accomplish that in a working way, then we
> came out with all sort of workarounds to get things working (COPR,
> rpmfusion, flathub...).
>
> We should really start thinking about this.

This is conflating other stuff (some bad).  I'm not sure there's much
to think about here, except to work towards getting rid of overbroad
software patents.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
___
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: Planned Outage - Bodhi upgrade - 2022-06-09 09:00 UTC

[Miro Hrončok]

On 08. 06. 22 17:48, Mark O'Brien wrote:

Hi all,

Apologies for the very delayed notice on this. I should have sent this mail a 
lot earlier.


TL;DR there will be an outage of Bodhi tomorrow morning EU time for some 
upgrades

Planned Outage - Bodhi upgrade - 2022-06-09 09:00 UTC

There will be an outage starting at 2022-06-09 09:00 UTC,
which will last approximately 2 hours.

To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto 


or run:

date -d '2022-06-09 09:00 UTC'

Reason for outage:

Swtich to OpenID connect for authentication and more...

Affected Services:

Bodhi and any service which relies on it


Hey Mark,

will rawhide builds in Koji automatically create Bodhi updates after the outage 
is over, or is there some manual action that will be required?


--
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

jplesnik pushed to perl-Type-Tie (rawhide). "Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages"

[notifications]

Notification time stamped 2022-06-03 11:02:12 UTC

From 2f7eaf46de2a587c5b4f0a3155e6550685ae6e64 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jitka Plesnikova 
Date: Jun 03 2022 11:02:05 +
Subject: Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages


---

diff --git a/perl-Type-Tie.spec b/perl-Type-Tie.spec
index 82e3e32..f978fa5 100644
--- a/perl-Type-Tie.spec
+++ b/perl-Type-Tie.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Name:   perl-Type-Tie
 Version:0.015
-Release:7%{?dist}
+Release:8%{?dist}
 Summary:Tie a variable to a type constraint
 # cf. README
 License:GPL+ or Artistic
@@ -79,6 +79,9 @@ sed -i -e '/^inc\/.*$/d' MANIFEST
 %{_mandir}/man3/*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Jun 03 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 0.015-8
+- Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages
+
 * Wed Jun 01 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 0.015-7
 - Perl 5.36 rebuild
 



https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Type-Tie/c/2f7eaf46de2a587c5b4f0a3155e6550685ae6e64?branch=rawhide
___
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

jplesnik pushed to perl-Params-ValidationCompiler (rawhide). "Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages"

[notifications]

Notification time stamped 2022-06-03 10:30:44 UTC

From 08a42d654ec02839a7fa319ea36e20b15e4e1330 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jitka Plesnikova 
Date: Jun 03 2022 10:30:38 +
Subject: Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages


---

diff --git a/perl-Params-ValidationCompiler.spec 
b/perl-Params-ValidationCompiler.spec
index c615a4b..9af9a98 100644
--- a/perl-Params-ValidationCompiler.spec
+++ b/perl-Params-ValidationCompiler.spec
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 
 Name:  perl-Params-ValidationCompiler
 Version:   0.30
-Release:   15%{?dist}
+Release:   16%{?dist}
 Summary:   Build an optimized subroutine parameter validator once, use it 
forever
 License:   Artistic 2.0
 URL:   https://metacpan.org/release/Params-ValidationCompiler
@@ -87,6 +87,9 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Params::ValidationCompiler::Exceptions.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Jun 03 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 0.30-16
+- Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages
+
 * Wed Jun 01 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 0.30-15
 - Perl 5.36 rebuild
 



https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Params-ValidationCompiler/c/08a42d654ec02839a7fa319ea36e20b15e4e1330?branch=rawhide
___
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

jplesnik pushed to perl-Mail-Message (rawhide). "Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages"

[notifications]

Notification time stamped 2022-06-03 10:23:46 UTC

From 4e577520b04b10e9f5c557655d2bff9d6bf86805 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jitka Plesnikova 
Date: Jun 03 2022 10:23:39 +
Subject: Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages


---

diff --git a/perl-Mail-Message.spec b/perl-Mail-Message.spec
index 902472f..50ec935 100644
--- a/perl-Mail-Message.spec
+++ b/perl-Mail-Message.spec
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Name:  perl-Mail-Message
 Version:   3.012
-Release:   2%{?dist}
+Release:   3%{?dist}
 Summary:   MIME message handling
 License:   GPL+ or Artistic
 URL:   https://metacpan.org/release/Mail-Message
@@ -123,6 +123,9 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Mail::*.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Jun 03 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 3.012-3
+- Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages
+
 * Wed Jun 01 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 3.012-2
 - Perl 5.36 rebuild
 



https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Mail-Message/c/4e577520b04b10e9f5c557655d2bff9d6bf86805?branch=rawhide
___
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

jplesnik pushed to perl-Specio (rawhide). "Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages"

[notifications]

Notification time stamped 2022-06-03 10:14:03 UTC

From d6e1cf77e0fb9c8ba0cda4bbd12895743b2fb0a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jitka Plesnikova 
Date: Jun 03 2022 10:13:57 +
Subject: Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages


---

diff --git a/perl-Specio.spec b/perl-Specio.spec
index 9cca38c..6073271 100644
--- a/perl-Specio.spec
+++ b/perl-Specio.spec
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 
 Name:  perl-Specio
 Version:   0.47
-Release:   6%{?dist}
+Release:   7%{?dist}
 Summary:   Type constraints and coercions for Perl
 # lib/Specio/PartialDump.pm:   GPL+ or Artistic
 #  

@@ -162,6 +162,9 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Test::Specio.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Fri Jun 03 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 0.47-7
+- Perl 5.36 re-rebuild of bootstrapped packages
+
 * Wed Jun 01 2022 Jitka Plesnikova  - 0.47-6
 - Perl 5.36 rebuild
 



https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Specio/c/d6e1cf77e0fb9c8ba0cda4bbd12895743b2fb0a4?branch=rawhide
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Fedora-Rawhide-20220601.n.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

Missing expected images:

Minimal raw-xz armhfp

Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed

Failed openQA tests: 6/231 (x86_64), 13/161 (aarch64)

New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220531.n.0):

ID: 1286655 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286655
ID: 1286670 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286670
ID: 1286734 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso 
install_repository_hd_variation@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286734
ID: 1286765 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286765
ID: 1286772 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286772
ID: 1286786 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
desktop_update_graphical@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286786
ID: 1286787 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_terminal@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286787
ID: 1286796 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286796
ID: 1286822 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286822
ID: 1286963 Test: aarch64 universal install_european_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286963

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220531.n.0):

ID: 1286680 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_login
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286680
ID: 1286767 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286767
ID: 1286823 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_fprint
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286823
ID: 1286838 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade gnome_text_editor@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286838
ID: 1286841 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286841
ID: 1286842 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_printing@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286842
ID: 1286931 Test: aarch64 universal install_arabic_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286931
ID: 1286971 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286971
ID: 1287938 Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1287938

Soft failed openQA tests: 3/161 (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-20220531.n.0):

ID: 1286801 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286801
ID: 1287936 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso gnome_text_editor
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1287936

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220531.n.0):

ID: 1286652 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286652
ID: 1286698 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso evince
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286698
ID: 1286699 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso eog
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286699
ID: 1286704 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso desktop_browser
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286704
ID: 1286713 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286713
ID: 1286807 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286807
ID: 1286848 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade eog@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286848

Passed openQA tests: 218/231 (x86_64), 142/161 (aarch64)

New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220531.n.0):

ID: 1286591 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286591
ID: 1286728 Test: aarch64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286728
ID: 1286785 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286785
ID: 1286788 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz evince@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286788
ID: 1286789 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
desktop_printing_builtin@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286789
ID: 1286790 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz 
base_package_install_remove@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1286790
ID: 1286791 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz unwanted_packages@uefi
URL: 

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Petr Pisar]

V Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 09:31:34AM -0400, Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 09:35:15PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > On 07/06/2022 17:31, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > >https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/le...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/HYBZLG2X2G6GJKAE5VAK6UHQ4B3GNAJS/
> > There is no real answer there.
> 
> The differences outlined there result in different constraints.
> 
It would be great to expand this explanation.

I guess the problem for Fedora is not the existence of FlatHub and RPM Fusion.
The problem is that RPM Fusion only targets Fedora. If Fedora linked to RPM
Fusion, then according some (U.S.) jurisdical frameworks Fedora and RPM Fusion
would form a unit and Fedora would become legally responsible for RPM Fusion.
It's similar to various, e.g. antibribery and antitrust, acts which makes you
responsible for deeds proxied to "third-party" entities which effectively act
for your profit. It does not matter how much dispersed they are. The important
thing is that they act in accord. But that's only my laic theory. Maybe I'm
wrong and I only don't understand it.

-- Petr


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

Re: Installing ffmeg-free degrades firefox video support

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 09:35:15PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 07/06/2022 17:31, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/le...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/HYBZLG2X2G6GJKAE5VAK6UHQ4B3GNAJS/
> There is no real answer there.

The differences outlined there result in different constraints.

-- 
Matthew Miller

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

[Bug 2094836] perl-Graphics-TIFF-19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-081dbc30ed has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-081dbc30ed


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836
___
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 2094836] perl-Graphics-TIFF-19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-465b629fa6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-465b629fa6


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836
___
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 2094836] perl-Graphics-TIFF-19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Graphics-TIFF-19-1.fc3
   ||7



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
A bug-fix release suitable for all Fedoras.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836
___
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 2094836] perl-Graphics-TIFF-19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836
___
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 2091635] perl-Net-DNS-1.34 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091635

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Assignee|paul.wout...@aiven.io   |jples...@redhat.com
   Fixed In Version||perl-Net-DNS-1.34-1.fc37




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091635
___
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 2094836] New: perl-Graphics-TIFF-19 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836

Bug ID: 2094836
   Summary: perl-Graphics-TIFF-19 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-Graphics-TIFF
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 19
Upstream release that is considered latest: 19
Current version/release in rawhide: 18-4.fc37
URL: https://metacpan.org/release/Graphics-TIFF

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/15735/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Graphics-TIFF


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094836
___
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: are you using journalctl FSS consistency checks?

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 12:37:03PM +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> ** are you using 'journal --setup-keys' and 'journalctl --verify-key=…'?
> In no, feel free to ignore this.

I tried it back in the day (like, 10 years ago), and concluded that the
"just delete logs" hole made it not worth the trouble. It sounds like the
feature hasn't really evolved and is holding things back. I would also like
to find out if we have people relying on this, but my intuition is that we
don't.





-- 
Matthew Miller

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

[Bug 2094515] CVE-2022-23712 elasticsearch: DoS via a specifically formatted network request

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094515



--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar  ---
As far as I know, the only implementation of ECDSA in Perl packages is
perl-CryptX (it bundles a developmental version of libtomcrypt). Other Perl
packages should transitively use OpenSSL or perl-CryptX.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094515
___
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 2094395] F37FailsToInstall: perl-Apache-Session-Browseable

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094395
Bug 2094395 depends on bug 2094397, which changed state.

Bug 2094397 Summary: F37FailsToInstall: perl-Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094397

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094395
___
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 2094396] F37FailsToInstall: perl-Apache-Session-NoSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094396
Bug 2094396 depends on bug 2094397, which changed state.

Bug 2094397 Summary: F37FailsToInstall: perl-Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094397

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094396
___
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 2041281] Please branch and build perl-Filesys-Df epel9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041281



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-723e366858 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-723e366858


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041281
___
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 2091635] perl-Net-DNS-1.34 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091635



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-8e9caddb8b has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-8e9caddb8b


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091635
___
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 2094397] F37FailsToInstall: perl-Redis

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094397

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Redis-1.999-3.fc37
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2022-06-08 07:06:20



--- Comment #2 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
(In reply to Michal Josef Spacek from comment #1)
> I added provisional fix to upstream repository:
> https://github.com/PerlRedis/perl-redis/pull/156

Thanks for the fix. I applied the patch.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094397
___
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 2094515] CVE-2022-23712 elasticsearch: DoS via a specifically formatted network request

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094515

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ppi...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
Guilherme, I noticed you added plenty of contacts to this bug report. If this
is because you intend to use this bug to handle all implementation of ECDSA
which do not check R a S parameters of ECDSA for 0, then remove "elasticsearch"
from a summary of this bug report. Otherwise, I cannot see a reason why
perl-devel should be notified about a bug in a Java library.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094515
___
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

are you using journalctl FSS consistency checks?

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

Hi!

** are you using 'journal --setup-keys' and 'journalctl --verify-key=…'?
In no, feel free to ignore this.

** background story:

[A very simplified explanation of "Forward Secure Sealing":
public-private key pair is generated when setting up a journal, the
private key is copied off the device and stored somewhere, usually
using a QR code and a phone, and when the journal is being rotated the
key stored on the device is propagated in one-way fashion, so that new
private keys can be generated from the older ones, but not vice versa.
If somebody tried to generate a fake journal for past history, that would
not pass verification. But it is possible to just delete older journal
from the device, so FSS should prevent unnoticed modification, but
probably not deletion of logs.]

The code for FSS is old and clunky, and is the only thing that requires
libgcrypt in libsystemd.so and the systemd package itself. It's not widely
used, and I'm considering two options:
1. make that code a plugin a that is loaded if available. It could be
  packaged as a subpackage, so only users who use it would get libgcrypt.
2. just disable support for this in the Fedora package.

Hence the question in $subject… If nobody is using it, 2. would be the
easier option. Option 1. gives more flexiblity to users, but it isn't so
easy to create a "clean cut" and making this into a plugin would
require quite a bit of work, and I'm not sure if it's worth the
trouble to develop and maintain this.

FSS is implemented using libgcrypt's bignums. The code doesn't really
have tests and it's not clear how robust the verification is against
hostile data. Systemd has moved (almost completely with F36) from
using multiple crypto libraries to relying almost exclusively on
openssl. The code for FSS is the only thing that requires libgcrypt in
a normal systemd installation. It is also the only thing that requires
a crypto library in libsystemd.so, so it effectively pulls in libgcrypt
into anything that links to libsystemd.so, which is many things.
So option 2. gives us a nice reduction in code size and exposure.

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

[Bug 2041281] Please branch and build perl-Filesys-Df epel9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041281



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
I'm sorry for the delay. I forgot.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041281
___
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: Hardware without AES-NI: use xchacha12/Adiantum instead of AES-XTS

[Christopher Klooz]

The irony is that XTS uses two different keys for different parts of the 
operation. This means that AES-XTS-256 is AES128 and AES-XTS-512 is 
AES256 (security is not increased by the second key).


So, you compared AES with 128 bit encryption with XChaCha with 256 bit. 
And despite the doubled key length, XChaCha is still 3 times faster I 
would be curious to see how it is about XChaCha 256b against AES 256b 
(which is 512 in XTS) on your machine?


If you reduce an algorithm's security to its security margin, XChaCha12 
(=12 rounds of XChaCha) has still a higher security margin than AES256 
(= AES-XTS-512), and XChaCha12 is obviously even faster than XChaCha20 
(20 rounds of XChaCha). So on hardware without AES-NI, the performance 
can be heavily increased. Google made a good job with Adiantum imho, and 
of course djb with ChaCha


The issue is already at Blivet: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2077532


Regards,
Chris

On 08/06/2022 04:18, Casper wrote:

I was curious to see if changes were significant on my old Asus laptop:

```
blackbird:~ # cryptsetup benchmark -c xchacha20,aes-adiantum
# Tests approximatifs en utilisant uniquement la mémoire (pas de stockage E/S).
#Algorithme |   Clé | Chiffrement |Déchiffrement
xchacha20,aes-adiantum256b   327,8 MiB/s   345,0 MiB/s
blackbird:~ # cryptsetup benchmark -c aes-xts-plain64
# Tests approximatifs en utilisant uniquement la mémoire (pas de stockage E/S).
# Algorithme |   Clé | Chiffrement |Déchiffrement
 aes-xts256b   105,0 MiB/s   103,9 MiB/s
```

Results on a SATA disk (no SSD), and no AES flag in cpuinfo.

Regards,
Casper

py0xc3 a écrit :

Good everning,

I just experienced that, when setting up a new Fedora, Anaconda (both
"Custom" and "Advanced Custom (Blivet-GUI)") always uses aes-xts-plain64 for
disk encryption, even if the hardware does not support AES-NI.

Does it make sense to use xchacha12,aes-adiantum-plain64 by default if there
is no AES-NI in the hardware?

For a general use case, the security advantages of Adiantum can be
neglected; both aes-xts & chacha-adiantum are secure.

But there are big performance disadvantages of AES when there is no AES-NI
(this was the major reason for merging Adiantum into the kernel).

Besides the use of system resources, netbooks and such may have strongly
decreased battery life times with aes-xts (the issue is primarily aes, not
xts).

I tested with Fedora 35, KDE spin; but as the issue is Anaconda-centric, I
expect that other Workstation installations tend to the same behavior.

Adjustments would be limited to Anaconda.

Regards & stay safe,
Chris
___
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

___
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 2041281] Please branch and build perl-Filesys-Df epel9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041281

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Filesys-Df-0.92-45.el9
 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041281
___
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 2094396] F37FailsToInstall: perl-Apache-Session-NoSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094396

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
   Fixed In Version||perl-Apache-Session-NoSQL-0
   ||.2-21.fc37
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
Last Closed||2022-06-08 07:09:37




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094396
___
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 2094395] F37FailsToInstall: perl-Apache-Session-Browseable

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094395

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Apache-Session-Browsea
   ||ble-1.3.10-2.fc37
 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
Last Closed||2022-06-08 07:10:26




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094395
___
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