Bug 737387 and Fedora 14
Hi, Bug 737387 fixes a race condition that can cause fork() in a multithreaded program to lock up. I can confirm that the issue fixed in bug 737387 exists in Fedora 14 as well. Fedora 14 isn't at end of life just yet (though it's close!). Is there any chance of getting a glibc update for 14 with this fix? Thanks, David -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Should GnuPG 1.4.x be revived?
On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:22 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote: On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 18:42 +0200, Karel Klic wrote: On 07/13/2010 06:03 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote: This is why I'm so surprised to see gpg be deprecated in f13. Upstream is supporting both and the manpage even indicates that the binary should be gpg2. I don't see any reason for it to have been removed in f13, and am willing to help maintain it. We could also ask original maintainers of gnupg, if they are willing to co-maintain it. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/gnupg I am not interested in co-maintaining gnupg-1. However I do not oppose to revive it in koji. Forgive my ignorance of the process, but how can I help this happen? Aside from my own problems with the change, there are other reports of people upgrading to F13 only to find their GnuPG setup nonfunctional when their gnupg transformed into gnupg2: http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2010-June/038817.html David -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Should GnuPG 1.4.x be revived?
On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Brian C. Lane wrote: I am not interested in co-maintaining gnupg-1. However I do not oppose to revive it in koji. Forgive my ignorance of the process, but how can I help this happen? Aside from my own problems with the change, there are other reports of people upgrading to F13 only to find their GnuPG setup nonfunctional when their gnupg transformed into gnupg2: http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2010-June/038817.html My understanding is that someone needs to update the gnupg package and run it through the package review process again since it was deprecated, not just orphaned. How does this happen (i.e. who is the someone)? I'm happy to help in any way I can, but I'm not currently a Fedora contributor. I'm just an upstream GnuPG guy. gnupg2 needs to not obsolete gnupg in its .spec file And I would also prefer it if gnupg2 didn't overload the gnupg binaries, keeping things in line with upstream which meant for gnupg 1.x and 2.x to be installed in parallel. That brings up an additional problem in that now we have had users of f13 using gpg as gpg2, so a switch back might cause some friction -- but I think it is the right way to do things. I agree. It might cause friction, but of course the status quo is causing friction for some pre-f13 people using gpg when they upgrade to f13. David -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
