> Am 05.09.2021 um 15:07 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen :
>
> On Sun, 5 Sept 2021 at 07:12, Peter Boy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> ...
>>
>> I watch Distrowatch in an occasional way. It is certainly not the most
>> reliable indicator, unquestioningly. But is is one among others. Currently
>> Fedora
Hi folks,
We seem to have missed an announcement about the soname bump in gtest
from 1.10.0 to 1.11.0:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gtest/c/b290e7d10ed5fd24b4e1e45f46ad4c15848c18a5?branch=rawhide
We ran into this because it broke python-steps for us, may affect other
packages too:
https://b
On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 2:00 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 12:07 PM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 01:11:28PM +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> > > considered nearly "dead" and has suffered greatly under Novell. And if you
> > > look at sites like stackexchange
On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 04:43:01PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 10:47 AM Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > systemd-udev-settle.service is deprecated. Please fix
> > multipathd.service not to pull it in.
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001058
> >
> > This is not a
> Am 05.09.2021 um 14:40 schrieb Nico Kadel-Garcia :
>
> On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 4:10 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
>>
>> On 05/09/2021 09:19, Peter Boy wrote:
>>> Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years
>>> and the one why Fedora is falling further and
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 10:47 AM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> systemd-udev-settle.service is deprecated. Please fix
> multipathd.service not to pull it in.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2001058
>
> This is not a regression, it's been around for a while with bugs that
> get no action. I'm
On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 12:07 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 01:11:28PM +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> > considered nearly "dead" and has suffered greatly under Novell. And if you
> > look at sites like stackexchange or serverfault, it's very rarely about
> > Fedora.
>
> We're defi
Hello Antonio,
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 2:32 PM Antonio T. sagitter
wrote:
>
> Links of Copr projects to get srpms for testing:
>
> openbabel3-3.1.1:
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sagitter/Openbabel-3/
As expected, Molsketch had no problem with 3.1.1, it built fine.
I also played with
On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 01:11:28PM +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> considered nearly "dead" and has suffered greatly under Novell. And if you
> look at sites like stackexchange or serverfault, it's very rarely about
> Fedora.
We're definitely a long way behind Ubuntu in queries on these sites; the
vast
On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 09:19:20AM +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> I think it is urgent that Fedora Council starts an initiative here (and I
> would not hesitate to contribute, not just ask others to do something).
To be clear, the request is an initiative to get more per-package SELinux
policies? I thi
On 9/2/21 11:41 AM, Zebediah Figura wrote:
Hello all,
I'm a contributor to the Wine project. To summarize the following mail, Wine needs
special versions of some of its normal dependencies, such as libfreetype and
libgnutls, built using the MinGW cross-compiler, and I'm sending out a mail to
Missing expected images:
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
3 of 43 required tests failed, 1 result missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
MIS
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel writes:
On 05/09/2021 09:55, Philip Rhoades via devel wrote:
My response to situations in the past where resolving the SELinux issue was
opaque (usually to do with MTAs if I recall correctly) . . was just to
disable SELinux and move on . .
In over 10 years with Fed
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel writes:
On 05/09/2021 14:52, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
if only a great, overwhelming majority of Fedora package maintainers were
able to write policies for their own packages and maintain it themselves
because SELinux documentation was ample and easy to fllow
https://
On 05/09/2021 14:40, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
You're referring to CVE-2020-10188? Who that is sane runs telnetd
these days, or lets it past their firewalls? It's an unencrypted
protocol vulnerable to packet sniffing.
I know at least one who uses telnet to run an online BBS. SELinux saved
this
On 05/09/2021 14:52, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
if only a great, overwhelming majority of Fedora package maintainers
were able to write policies for their own packages and maintain it
themselves because SELinux documentation was ample and easy to fllow
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/7
On Sun, 5 Sept 2021 at 07:12, Peter Boy wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 05.09.2021 um 09:32 schrieb Samuel Sieb :
> >
> > On 2021-09-05 12:19 a.m., Peter Boy wrote:
> >> Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years
> >> and the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel writes:
On 05/09/2021 09:19, Peter Boy wrote:
Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years and
the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among
distributions. The problem overshadows all that many positive features that
oth
On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 4:10 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 05/09/2021 09:19, Peter Boy wrote:
> > Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years
> > and the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among
> > distributions. The problem overshadows
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210904.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210905.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 1
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 45
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 12.59 KiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
> Am 05.09.2021 um 10:09 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> :
>
> On 05/09/2021 09:19, Peter Boy wrote:
>> Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years and
>> the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among
>> distributions. The problem overshadows a
On 05/09/2021 13:11, Peter Boy wrote:
overloaded maintainers
Only a few packages (mostly different daemons) require a separate
SELinux policy. None of my 68 packages require this for example.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
_
On 05/09/2021 13:11, Peter Boy wrote:
I watch Distrowatch in an occasional way. It is certainly not the most reliable
indicator, unquestioningly.
Distrowatch will show you the weather on Mars. Nothing more.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
> Am 05.09.2021 um 09:32 schrieb Samuel Sieb :
>
> On 2021-09-05 12:19 a.m., Peter Boy wrote:
>> Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years and
>> the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among
>> distributions. The problem overshadows all that man
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20210904.0):
ID: 969595 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
On 05/09/2021 09:55, Philip Rhoades via devel wrote:
My response to situations in the past where resolving the SELinux issue
was opaque (usually to do with MTAs if I recall correctly) . . was just
to disable SELinux and move on . .
In over 10 years with Fedora, I've only had some SELinux probl
On 05/09/2021 09:19, Peter Boy wrote:
Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years and
the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among distributions.
The problem overshadows all that many positive features that otherwise
distinguish Fedora.
SELinux
Samuel,
On 2021-09-05 17:32, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 2021-09-05 12:19 a.m., Peter Boy wrote:
Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for
years and the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind
among distributions. The problem overshadows all that many positive
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210904.0):
ID: 969579 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
On 2021-09-05 12:19 a.m., Peter Boy wrote:
Much to my chagrin, you describe the biggest problem in Fedora for years and
the one why Fedora is falling further and further behind among distributions.
The problem overshadows all that many positive features that otherwise
distinguish Fedora.
How
> Am 05.09.2021 um 00:28 schrieb Sam Varshavchik :
>
> Miroslav Suchý writes:
>
>> Dne 04. 09. 21 v 17:28 Sam Varshavchik napsal(a):
>>> Are you a package maintainer? Ok: please write an selinux policy for your
>>> package. Let me know when that's done.
>>
>> https://pagure.io/copr/copr/blob/m
31 matches
Mail list logo
