Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

[Tomas Popela]

On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:06 PM Ernestas Kulik  wrote:

> On Fri, 2019-09-06 at 14:26 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I upgraded to F31 recently, and I now I noticed that the gnome top
> > bar is always black. I miss the old translucent blue bar that would
> > only go black if window was moved adjacent. I'm not sure though when
> > this changed...
>
>
> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/commit/9cfb51c106abd1f96012bf39f3d329cf060035cf


And there is a MR (with improved heuristics) that tries to bring it back -
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/404.
___
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

Re: Google Chrome Flash doesn't seem to work in F30

[Tomas Popela]

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 2:59 PM Tomas Popela  wrote:

> I will mail some Chromium devs to consider backporting it.
>

It has been merged to Chromium 75 (
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=956644#c16 ) and will
be released next week when the Chrome 75 will be promoted to stable -
https://www.chromestatus.com/features/schedule.

Bye,
Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Google Chrome Flash doesn't seem to work in F30

[Tomas Popela]

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 2:53 PM Tomas Popela  wrote:

> it's this bug -
> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=949312 . It will
> probably be fixed in Chrome 76+ (current stable is Chrome 74), so that
> means it will take few months (unless someone from Chromium team backports
> it).
>

Yes, it's as I said - it's fixed in 76 -
https://storage.googleapis.com/chromium-find-releases-static/114.html#11429f6b3ab962e68bc792e2af51c9858b383a76.
I will mail some Chromium devs to consider backporting it.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Google Chrome Flash doesn't seem to work in F30

[Tomas Popela]

Hi Brian,

it's this bug - https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=949312 .
It will probably be fixed in Chrome 76+ (current stable is Chrome 74), so
that means it will take few months (unless someone from Chromium team
backports it).

Tom

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 2:41 PM Brian (bex) Exelbierd 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've noticed that Flash doesn't seem to work in F30 in the upstream
> Google Chrome.  It works in F29.  As a test, I installed an F29 and an
> F30 Workstation VM.  I did nothing other than install Google Chrome
> from the upstream site.  The app I need and a test site work in F29
> but not in F30.
>
> I realize we don't package or distribute Google Chrome, but I was
> wondering if anyone could provide some advice on where/how to
> troubleshoot this?
>
> I have a flash application that I use as part of my work for the
> Fedora Project so this is a challenge for me.
>
> thank you.
>
> regards,
>
> bex
> --
> Brian "bex" Exelbierd (he/him/his)
> Fedora Community Action & Impact Coordinator
> @bexelbie | http://www.winglemeyer.org
> bexel...@redhat.com | b...@pobox.com
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora Media Writer isn't working on macOS

[Tomas Popela]

It was done by Patrick Uiterwijk (who's CC'ed).

Tom

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:09 AM Chris Murphy 
wrote:

> I filed a bug here:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1714062
>
> However since that assigns it to mbriza who doesn't do binary signing
> for Windows or macOS, I'm not certain that's the correct way to report
> it. Maybe websites or release engineering?
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Firefox with native Wayland backend at updates

[Tomas Popela]

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 8:23 PM, Simo Sorce  wrote:
>
> Is screen sharing [at least of its own window(s)] supposed to work ?
> If I share the screen with a screen sharing app all I get to send is a
> black background, sometimes with the mouse cursor visibile on it.
>

No, that won't work because there's only X11 support in WebRTC. But the
desktop team is working on bringing the Pipewire support to it and once
it's finished then it will work

Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4QU53DOXAR74UWDGX7BOIGNER5G6RHD2/

Rename of webkitgtk4 to webkit2gtk3

[Tomas Popela]

Hi everyone,

just a heads-up that we are going to rename the webkitgtk4 package to
webkit2gtk3 in the rawhide - please see [0]. I will take care of updating
the BR for the packages under gnome-sig myself and for others I will create
a PR.

$ dnf repoquery --whatrequires webkitgtk4 --arch x86_64
--releasever=rawhide --disablerepo=\*updates\*
anjuta-1:3.26.0-3.fc28.x86_64
atril-0:1.19.6-2.fc28.x86_64
atril-libs-0:1.19.6-2.fc28.x86_64
balsa-0:2.5.3-7.fc28.x86_64
bijiben-0:3.26.2-3.fc28.x86_64
cairo-dock-plug-ins-webkit-0:3.4.1-18.fc28.x86_64
capnet-assist-0:0.2.1-4.fc28.x86_64
devhelp-1:3.26.1-2.fc28.x86_64
devhelp-libs-1:3.26.1-2.fc28.x86_64
eclipse-swt-1:4.7.2-1.fc28.x86_64
emacs-1:25.3-3.fc28.x86_64
empathy-1:3.12.14-1.fc28.x86_64
epiphany-runtime-1:3.27.1-2.fc28.x86_64
evolution-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
evolution-bogofilter-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
evolution-data-server-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
evolution-data-server-tests-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
evolution-ews-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
evolution-mapi-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
evolution-pst-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
evolution-rspam-0:0.6.0-20.fc27.x86_64
evolution-rss-1:0.3.95-16.fc28.x86_64
evolution-spamassassin-0:3.27.4-1.fc28.x86_64
feedreader-0:2.0.2-1.fc26.x86_64
geary-0:0.12.0-1.fc28.x86_64
gnome-boxes-0:3.27.1-4.fc28.x86_64
gnome-builder-0:3.27.3-4.fc28.x86_64
gnome-documents-libs-0:3.26.1-2.fc28.x86_64
gnome-initial-setup-0:3.26.0-1.fc28.x86_64
gnome-online-accounts-0:3.27.3-2.fc28.x86_64
gthumb-1:3.6.0-2.fc28.x86_64
libgepub-0:0.5.2-1.fc27.x86_64
liferea-1:1.12.1-1.fc28.x86_64
midori-0:0.5.12-0.2.fc26.x86_64
nemo-preview-0:3.6.0-2.fc28.x86_64
nuvolaruntime-0:4.9.0-1.fc28.x86_64
osmo-0:0.4.2-2.fc28.x86_64
pantheon-online-accounts-0:0.3.0.1-5.20170417.git5a0270a.fc28.x86_64
pantheon-online-accounts-libs-0:0.3.0.1-5.20170417.git5a0270a.fc28.x86_64
pantheon-photos-0:0.2.4-3.fc28.x86_64
pix-0:1.6.1-3.fc28.x86_64
scratch-text-editor-0:2.4.1-7.fc28.x86_64
shotwell-0:0.27.2-1.fc28.x86_64
sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0:0.112-1.fc28.x86_64
surf-0:2.0-3.fc27.x86_64
sushi-0:3.24.0-3.fc27.x86_64
switchboard-plug-onlineaccounts-0:0.3.0.1-5.20170417.git5a0270a.fc28.x86_64
vfrnav-0:20160429-11.fc28.x86_64
vocal-0:2.1.0-2.fc28.x86_64
webkit2-sharp-0:0-0.3.20170219gita59fd76.fc28.x86_64
webkitgtk4-devel-0:2.19.5-1.fc28.x86_64
wxGTK3-webview-0:3.0.3-6.fc28.x86_64
xiphos-0:4.0.7-2.fc28.x86_64
xreader-0:1.6.2-1.fc28.x86_64
yelp-2:3.26.0-2.fc28.x86_64
yelp-libs-2:3.26.0-2.fc28.x86_64

[0] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533472

Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Reminder: upcoming retirement of webkitgtk and webkitgtk3 packages

[Tomas Popela]

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Sérgio Basto <ser...@serjux.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 12:58 +0100, Tomas Popela wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Sérgio Basto <ser...@serjux.com>
> > wrote:
> > > BTW , I checked debian package and they build webkit2gtk3 and
> > > webkit2gtk2 [1] and also his naming looks better ;) (webkit2gtk-
> > > 4.0) .
> > > So I would suggest webkit2gtk3-4.0 , webkit2gtk2-4.0 and
> > > webkit2gtk4-4.0
> > >
> >
> > Just a note - there is nothing like "webkit2gtk2-4.0" or
> > "webkit2gtk2" because WebKit2 is only for GTK+ 3. As I said I checked
> > the naming with upstream. If we want to change the name then we
> > should probably want to do it ASAP.
>
> Hum my point was that Debian have
> https://packages.debian.org/unstable/libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37-gtk2


Which is completely confusing - that's only a plugin process for GTK+ 2
based NPAPI plugins (like Flash)..
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Reminder: upcoming retirement of webkitgtk and webkitgtk3 packages

[Tomas Popela]

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Sérgio Basto  wrote:

> BTW , I checked debian package and they build webkit2gtk3 and webkit2gtk2
> [1] and also his naming looks better ;) (webkit2gtk-4.0) .
> So I would suggest webkit2gtk3-4.0 , webkit2gtk2-4.0 and webkit2gtk4-4.0
>

Just a note - there is nothing like "webkit2gtk2-4.0" or "webkit2gtk2"
because WebKit2 is only for GTK+ 3. As I said I checked the naming with
upstream. If we want to change the name then we should probably want to do
it ASAP.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Reminder: upcoming retirement of webkitgtk and webkitgtk3 packages

[Tomas Popela]

Hi,

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Neal Gompa  wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Sérgio Basto  wrote:
> > Thank you Michael , btw about package naming IMHO webkitgtk4 should be
> > called webkit2gtk3 and for gtk4 webkit2gtk4
> >
>
> The webkitgtk4-devel package already provides pkgconfig(webkit2gtk-4.0).
>
> The GNOME system for naming pkg-config files is
> -, so it's clearer with the pkgconfig name
> than the package name.
>
> The naming of the packages was especially dumb in Fedora. It might
> make sense to add some Provides that add sensible names, too.
>

The right name from upstream's POV (I talked to them when adding the
package to Fedora - and I was considering webkit2gtk3 as well) is
webkitgtk4 as the 4 on the ends means API version and it's not connected to
GTK+ version.

But during the last Web Engines Hackfest Michael was keen on renaming the
package to webkit2gtk3 (so we are ready for GTK+ 4 based WebKit).

Tom
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Chromium

[Tomas Popela]

On Thu, 2016-03-17 at 00:15 +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 16.03.2016 o 19:19, Tom Callaway pisze:
> > 
> > And of course:
> > 
> > chromium:https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270322
> qt5-qtwebengine contains chromium source code already so it may be good 
> to check how it was packaged.

Why do you think that Tom has to look at the qt5-qtwebengine package
when that package reuses our stuff from Chromium packaging?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: WebKitGTK+ security status

[Tomas Popela]

On Mon, 2015-12-28 at 14:24 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> This mail is in regards to WSA-2015-0002: http://webkitgtk.org/securi
> ty
> /WSA-2015-0002.html
> 
> In short, we have by my count:
> 
> * Zero CVEs affecting the webkitgtk4 package in F23
> * 40 CVEs affecting the webkitgtk4 package in F22
> * 129 CVEs affecting the webkitgtk and webkitgtk3 packages in F22/F23
> 
> The vast majority of these issues allow for "remote attackers to
> execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption
> and application crash) via a crafted web site."
> 
> My proposal is to update webkitgtk4 in F22 from 2.8.5 to 2.10.4 and
> hope that not much breaks. This is probably relatively safe, since
> 2.10.4 has been in F23 for a while, I'm not aware of any issues related
> to the upgrade, and it's API/ABI compatible. 2.8 -> 2.10 is a major
> upgrade encompassing six months of development on WebKit trunk (from
> February to August 2015). This means there will inevitably be
> regressions. Normally I don't advocate large version updates for stable
> Fedora releases, but web engines are special in that it's the only
> practical way to provide security support. We can't backport 40 patches
> to F22, so if we don't do this update, we should instead announce that
> security support for webkitgtk4 is provided only to the latest Fedora
> release.
> 
> Certainly it's not practical to provide security support for the
> webkitgtk or webkitgtk3 packages going forward. We can either remove
> them from the distro at some flag date (F25 branch point?), or ignore
> the problem like we do for qtwebkit. Probably the later is a better
> approach, since there is a lot that still depends on these packages.

As we already spoke about this on the Web Engines Hackfest I'm in favor
of doing the rebase. If no one will raise any objections until the end
of the week we will proceed with the rebase. 
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: WebKitGTK+ security status

[Tomas Popela]

Hi,

On Sat, 2016-01-02 at 16:16 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Looking over the list, most of the impacted software we could live
> without, or stands a good chance of being ported in time. Evolution is
> mostly ported upstream, as is Midori.

Evolution's WebKit 2 port is targeted to be finished for Evolution 3.22
(that will be part of Gnome 3.22 - that will be included in F25). 
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org