Compiling with AddressSanitizer

Hello, I have been using a library for awhile now and have been thinking of submitting it to Fedora. Part of what I have been doing with it was compiling it using -fsanitize=address and leak etc. I’m kinda wondering about how that is handled with Fedora packages. Are we able to / should we

[389-devel] Re: Do we still need sslVersionMax/sslVersionMin?

> On 17 Jul 2019, at 22:36, Mark Reynolds wrote: > > > On 7/17/19 3:01 AM, Matus Honek wrote: >> I think we cannot remove it. Setting the MIN version is a workaround >> for *old clients* not even supporting current NSS' default min. >> Setting up MAX version is a workaround for *broken

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2019-07-18 16:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2019-07-18 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Thursday == 2019-07-18 09:00 PDT US/Pacific 2019-07-18

[389-devel] 389 DS nightly 2019-07-18 - 95% PASS

https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/07/18/report-389-ds-base-1.4.1.5-20190717git76c0e75.fc30.x86_64.html ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 7 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing: Age URL 337 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-3c9292b62d condor-8.6.11-1.el7 112 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-d2c1368294 cinnamon-3.6.7-5.el7 78

[Bug 1730549] Upgrade perl-Regexp-Grammars to 1.052

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1730549 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #2 from

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On 7/17/19 10:40 AM, Timothée Floure wrote: > Hello, > > I do not think it would be good for apps.fp.o to simply disappear: although > outdated, it does a pretty good job improving human-discoverability of our > services. I understand that longtime or active contributors are not really > affected

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 2019-07-17 at 22:00 +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > My initial reaction is that the lists of applications in categories 1 and 2 > are very short. Category 1 is not a list. It says: "For completeness we are highlighting one example of a Category 1 application that we will always aim to

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

* Peter Robinson [17/07/2019 14:07] : > > It would be useful to have the CPE mission linked to directly, it's > mentioned a number of times in the post but I don't see a direct way > to get to it. It's in the first link on that page:

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

My initial reaction is that the lists of applications in categories 1 and 2 are very short. My second reaction is that this page doesn't sell me that I should use Python in any business-critical software... Is release-monitoring.org also maintained by the CPE? It's being broken for ages and I

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 08:33:02AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > > Good Morning, > > > > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to garner > > feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the Community

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 15:38, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2019-07-17 at 13:32 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > My frustration is that people who aren’t working at Red Hat have *no* > > avenue to help support the Project’s infrastructure. > > On what basis do you say this? The whole infra

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On 7/17/19 10:32 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > I don’t have a problem with you saying you can’t maintain everything > and focusing on stuff *to* maintain. But I have been trying for > *months* to try to help in various efforts as a member of the > community. There’s very little I can do because

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 14:10, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 1:22 PM Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 09:22, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > >> > > >> > >> There are two issues to unpack

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 2019-07-17 at 13:32 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > My frustration is that people who aren’t working at Red Hat have *no* > avenue to help support the Project’s infrastructure. On what basis do you say this? The whole infra process is set up to be a Fedora process, not an RH one. You don't use

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 20:10, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 1:22 PM Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 09:22, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > >> There are two issues to

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 13:46, Brian (bex) Exelbierd wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:44 PM Stephen John Smoogen > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 09:22, Neal Gompa wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > >> > > >> > >> There are two

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

Hello, I do not think it would be good for apps.fp.o to simply disappear: although outdated, it does a pretty good job improving human-discoverability of our services. I understand that longtime or active contributors are not really affected but I believe the index to be helpful for newcomers (as

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

> "FW" == Florian Weimer writes: FW> I strongly doubt this will be true indefinitely. I expect things FW> will change pretty quickly once partners can access and file bugs in FW> the other bug tracker. This is interesting in light of the fact that one reason given for not enabling Pagure

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 1:22 PM Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 09:22, Neal Gompa wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon >> wrote: >> > >> >> There are two issues to unpack here: >> >> 1. We use a weird custom backend and custom protocol

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:44 PM Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 09:22, Neal Gompa wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon >> wrote: >> > >> >> There are two issues to unpack here: >> >> 1. We use a weird custom backend and custom protocol

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 09:22, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon > wrote: > > > > There are two issues to unpack here: > > 1. We use a weird custom backend and custom protocol extensions. > > This should definitely be replaced if it makes sense. It’s more

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 4:13 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 10:09 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > * Peter Robinson: > > > > >> > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to > > >> > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the > > >> >

Re: Python 3 packages to be removed form EPEL 7 (provided by RHEL 7)

> "MH" == Miro Hrončok writes: MH> Are my assumptions correct? Yes, unless some major changes happened of which I was not aware, you cannot have any package name in EPEL7 (including a source package) which duplicates a package name in RHEL7 _on a particular architecture_. (There are

Fedora-Rawhide-20190717.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 5 of 47 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests: FAILED: compose.cloud.all Failed

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal: No More i686 Kernels

I cross graded a laptop from i686 to x86_64 yesterday using dnf and it went pretty well without a reinstall. It also ran fine using an x86_64 kernel with i686 user space during the transition. I noticed that at least with using --forcearch=x86_64 that installing two packages that had names

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20190717.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190716.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190717.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:5 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 1 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 87 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 519.87 KiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 10:09, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Peter Robinson: > > >> > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to > >> > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the > >> > Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering >

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 10:09 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Peter Robinson: > > >> > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to > >> > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the > >> > Community on the approach that we in Community Platform

[Bug 1730549] Upgrade perl-Regexp-Grammars to 1.052

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1730549 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED --- Comment #1 from

[389-devel] Re: Please review

@Mark Reynolds Thanks and welcome . Regards Anuj Borah On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 7:31 PM Mark Reynolds wrote: > > On 7/16/19 8:12 PM, Anuj Borah wrote: > > @Mark Reynolds > > @Mark Reynolds > > >>> The code itself looks fine to me, but I find it odd you are testing > matching rules by

[389-devel] Re: Please review

On 7/16/19 8:12 PM, Anuj Borah wrote: @Mark Reynolds @Mark Reynolds >>> The code itself looks fine to me, but I find it odd you are testing matching rules by creating COS entries in two of those PRs. Cos entries are used here as part of  ( objectclass:

[389-devel] Re: Do we still need sslVersionMax/sslVersionMin?

On 7/17/19 3:01 AM, Matus Honek wrote: I think we cannot remove it. Setting the MIN version is a workaround for *old clients* not even supporting current NSS' default min. Setting up MAX version is a workaround for *broken clients* thinking they can support something they announced but for some

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 03:20:34PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Peter Robinson: > > >> > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to > >> > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the > >> > Community on the approach that we in Community Platform

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

* Peter Robinson: >> > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to >> > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the >> > Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering >> > (CPE) are taking. >> >> Sunsetting Mailman sounds pretty

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning, > > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to garner > feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the Community on > the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering (CPE) are

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

> > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to > > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the > > Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering > > (CPE) are taking. > > Sunsetting Mailman sounds pretty harsh. Will Red Hat do the

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:46 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning, > > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to garner > feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the Community on > the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering (CPE) are

Re: Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

* Pierre-Yves Chibon: > We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to > garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the > Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering > (CPE) are taking. Sunsetting Mailman sounds pretty harsh. Will Red

[389-devel] Re: 389 DS nightly 2019-07-17 - 0% PASS

A fixing PR, for the record: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50503 On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 8:52 AM Matus Honek wrote: > > I guess not installing the initconfig breaks the ds-setup, sigh... > Looking into it. > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 1:24 AM wrote: > > > >

Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

Good Morning, We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering (CPE) are taking. [1]

Discussion around app retirements and categorizations by the CPE team

Good Morning, We posted this [1] blog today and want to open a mailing thread to garner feedback, field questions and get some thoughts from the Community on the approach that we in Community Platform Engineering (CPE) are taking. [1]

HEADS UP: /usr/bin/python is Python 3 in rawhide

Just a reminder that builds are currently running for python2 and python3 that change the meaning of /usr/bin/python from Python 2 to Python 3 in rawhide. For details, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python_means_Python3 I'll be sending e-mails later to package owners who still

Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Noi686Repositories (Ben is on vacation, so I announcing this on his behalf.) == Summary == Stop producing and distributing the Modular and Everything i686 repositories. == Owner == * Name: Kevin Fenzi * Email: ke...@scrye.com == Current status == *

[389-devel] Re: 389 DS nightly 2019-07-17 - 0% PASS

I guess not installing the initconfig breaks the ds-setup, sigh... Looking into it. On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 1:24 AM wrote: > > https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/07/17/report-389-ds-base-1.4.1.5-20190716git7466be3.fc30.x86_64.html >

[Bug 1730549] New: Upgrade perl-Regexp-Grammars to 1.052

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1730549 Bug ID: 1730549 Summary: Upgrade perl-Regexp-Grammars to 1.052 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Regexp-Grammars Assignee:

Re: Python 3 packages to be removed form EPEL 7 (provided by RHEL 7)

Hello. On 7/17/19 12:00 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hey, when RHEL 7.7 will be released, the following new components/packages will be provided (assuming from 7.7 beta): python3 - the Python 3.6 package This new RHEL7 component builds several subpackages, all