Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)
On 09/01/2024 18.53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 03:51:26PM +0100, Sjoerd Mullender wrote: On 08/01/2024 14.41, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:02:55AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney wrote: Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin I agree unifying the *programs* to a single directory makes sense. But I fail to see anything good come out of bringing all those system daemon executables into every users path. To clarify: they already *are* in every user's path, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Detailed_Description, third para. Not quite true: If you're using lightdm as display manager, the PATH is initialized to /usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin, at least on Fedora 39. Please open a bug against lightdm ;) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257618 -- Sjoerd Mullender -- ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)
On 08/01/2024 14.41, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:02:55AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney wrote: Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin I agree unifying the *programs* to a single directory makes sense. But I fail to see anything good come out of bringing all those system daemon executables into every users path. To clarify: they already *are* in every user's path, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Detailed_Description, third para. Not quite true: If you're using lightdm as display manager, the PATH is initialized to /usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin, at least on Fedora 39. This would seem like a good opportunity to move stuff that isn't supposed to be directly run as part of normal usage under /usr/libexec. I'm sure there are exceptions but as a rule of thumb, if it has a systemd service file then it should no longer be in %_sbindir. This was also mentioned by Matthew Miller on discussion.fp.o and I agree, but I think that that's an orthogonal issue. Individual maintainers should evaluate this and do the move if they really think that no one is calling the binary directly. This can be done before or after the proposed change. 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue -- Sjoerd Mullender -- ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: F37 kernel 6.0.16/6.0.18 breaking Python tests: Allows to bind a socket twice
On 11/01/2023 15.07, Justin Forbes wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 7:33 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 11. 01. 23 14:12, Justin Forbes wrote: Is this a bug that needs to be fixed or do the tests need to be changed not to assert this? The fact that 6.2.0 makes this go away makes me think this is a kernel bug but I am not sure. This does seem a bug. The big question, is does 6.1 make it go away? kernel-6.1.4-200.fc37 is available in koji. The 6.0 series is end of support for Fedora, and I expect 6.1.5 to be available as an update this week. Good news, 6.1.4-200.fc37.x86_64 fixes this. Thanks. I'll wait for the update than, no need to bisect and backport this. Perfect, thanks for testing! Justin -- Miro Hrončok See thread https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/us...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/VCFSB3YHGTJJSXGBTH2B5FB6OOAL3JLR/ on the Fedora user list where I raised this same problem. Somebody there suggested this commit [1] as being suspicious, and I totally agree, it looks very suspicious. If err is non-zero, it should be checked whether it is less than 0, and then it should be passed on, but if greater than 0, it should be set to -EADDRINFO like what happened before (in my opinion). [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/net/ipv6/af_inet6.c?id=7a7160edf1bfde25422262fb26851cef65f695d3 -- Sjoerd Mullender ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Mailman3 on Fedora 36
On 25/10/2022 18.58, Michael J Gruber wrote: Can you give a bit more context about what you are trying to achieve? I want to be able to continue to use Fedora on the system on which I run mailman for a bunch of mailing lists. Currently that system runs Fedora 35, but that will soon be end-of-life. So I need to upgrade to at least F36, but on F36 mailman, postorius and hyperkitty cannot be installed. With some fairly small fixes to the spec files from F36 I was able to port the whole suite to F36. A quick look at mailman3 and postorius in fedora dist-git reveals that they were retired from rawhide/f37 because they do not build against python 3.11. So, a minor update on f36 (which still has python 3.10) is not really what we need to keep them in fedora. Indeed, this is a problem. But at least, having mailman available in F36 gives me half a year. In any case, a pull request in dist-git is the usual way to suggest a package update which you are authoring, but this should build on top of the existing spec. [I hope f26 is a typo ...] Alternatively, feel free to file a bug against these packages. Indeed, 26 is a typo. I meant 36. The issue with installing mailman3 might be due to sqlalchemy, though: There is a 1.3 compat package but it conflicts with the update. If you want to "rescue" mailman3 in f36 even though it is retired in rawhide this might be an option. In my version, I indeed require sqlalchemy1.3. Another package with a potential problem is mistune where hyperkitty requires >= 2.0 and F36 comes with 0.8.4, and the two are not compatible. I think the other packages that needed to be updated are more-or-less backward compatible. -- Sjoerd Mullender ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Mailman3 on Fedora 36
I have created RPMs for mailman3 on Fedora 36. The current (in the repos) version cannot be installed, but my version, based on mailman 3.3.5 can. Also, I have RPMs for postorius and hyperkitty. These RPMs are based on the Fedora 26 source RPMs, but updated to later versions. Also, a whole bunch of other packages had to be updated. A full list is at the bottom. My question is, how do I proceed? Who can take this in order to push this (or something similar) to the repositories? I have not (yet?) been able to do this for Fedora 37 since the mailman suite doesn't yet play nice with Python 3.11. Here is the list of RPMs. Source RPMs are of course available. hyperkitty-1.3.5.9-1.fc36.noarch.rpm hyperkitty-doc-1.3.5.9-1.fc36.noarch.rpm mailman3-3.3.5-0.2.fc36.noarch.rpm postorius-1.3.6.9-1.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-django-compressor-4.1-0.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-django-haystack-3.2.1-0.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-django-mailman3-1.3.7.9-1.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-flufl-bounce-4.0-0.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-flufl-i18n-3.2-0.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-flufl-lock-5.1-0.1.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-mailmanclient-3.3.3-4.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-mailman-hyperkitty-1.2.1-0.1.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-mistune-2.0.4-0.fc36.noarch.rpm python3-rcssmin-1.1.0-0.fc36.x86_64.rpm python3-rjsmin-1.2.0-0.fc36.x86_64.rpm python-django-haystack-docs-3.2.1-0.fc36.noarch.rpm python-rjsmin-docs-1.2.0-0.fc36.x86_64.rpm -- Sjoerd Mullender ___ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
