Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 16. 09. 20 2:20, Neal Gompa wrote: Something that Mageia and openSUSE do sometimes is just not ship a -devel package if the library is only there for runtime backwards compatibility. That's something we could do for openssl1.0 and eventually openssl1.1. IIRC Tomas attempted to do this twice

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:11 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 16. 09. 20 2:20, Neal Gompa wrote: > > Something that Mageia and openSUSE do sometimes is just not ship a > > -devel package if the library is only there for runtime backwards > > compatibility. That's something we could do for openssl1.0

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 16. 09. 20 9:55, Peter Robinson wrote: On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:11 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: On 16. 09. 20 2:20, Neal Gompa wrote: Something that Mageia and openSUSE do sometimes is just not ship a -devel package if the library is only there for runtime backwards compatibility. That's someth

[Test-Announce] Fedora-IoT 33 RC 20200916.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

2020-09-16 Thread rawhide
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora-IoT 33 RC 20200916.0. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_pl

Fedora-IoT-33-20200916.0 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20200914.0): ID: 667624 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/te

Re: Giving away two of my package

2020-09-16 Thread Charalampos Stratakis
- Original Message - > From: "Andy Mender" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 10:38:20 PM > Subject: Re: Giving away two of my package > > On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 12:04, Charalampos Stratakis < cstra...@redhat.com > > wrote: > > >

Fedora-Cloud-32-20200916.0 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20200915.0): ID: 667701 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproj

NeuroFedora review swap: python-bokeh

2020-09-16 Thread Ankur Sinha
Hello, I'm working on packaging NetPyNE[1] for NeuroFedora next, a tool used for simulation and analysis of neuroscientific computational models using the NEURON simulator. It's first dependency is the python-bokeh web-visualisation library[2]. Would someone like to swap reviews please? https://b

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20200916.n.0 changes

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200915.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200916.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 3 Dropped packages:4 Upgraded packages: 198 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 200.41 KiB Size of dropped packages

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Tomas Mraz
On Tue, 2020-09-15 at 19:33 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 15. 09. 20 19:26, Tomas Mraz wrote: > > What is more important? Consistency between those two compat > > packages > > or strictly following the naming rules for the new package? > > Why not both? I.e. renaming compat-openssl10 to openssl1

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200916.0 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 7/7 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedorap

Fedora-Rawhide-20200916.n.0 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 3 of 43 required tests failed openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 21/181 (x86_64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20200915.n.1): ID:

[Test-Announce] Fedora 33 Branched 20200916.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

2020-09-16 Thread rawhide
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event for Fedora 33 Branched 20200916.n.0. Please help run some tests for this nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Simo Sorce
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 12:28 +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote: > On Tue, 2020-09-15 at 19:33 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 15. 09. 20 19:26, Tomas Mraz wrote: > > > What is more important? Consistency between those two compat > > > packages > > > or strictly following the naming rules for the new package

Fedora 33 compose report: 20200916.n.0 changes

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report
OLD: Fedora-33-20200915.n.0 NEW: Fedora-33-20200916.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:1 Upgraded packages: 3 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:56.08 MiB Size of

Fedora-IoT-34-20200916.0 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
Missing expected images: Iot dvd aarch64 Iot dvd x86_64 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20200913.0): ID: 668221 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL: https:

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Miro Hrončok
On 16. 09. 20 14:29, Simo Sorce wrote: Indeed compat-openssl10 really should go. If there are still packages depending on it they should be ported or dropped at this point. Openssl1.0.2 is unmaintained upstream and only critical security fixes are done in RHEL. But the team that handles them does

Fedora ELN chroots are available in Copr

2020-09-16 Thread Pavel Raiskup
Since the new mock-core-configs are in Fedora stable, it allowed us to enable fedora-eln- [1] buildroots in Fedora Copr. Feel free to try them. Note that Fedora ELN repositories aren't mirrored at this moment, and thus we can face some weird repo/package downloading issues (as e.g. discussed toda

Fedora-33-20200916.n.0 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 6/170 (x86_64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-33-20200915.n.0): ID: 668282 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/668282 ID: 668330 Test: x86_64 universal instal

Re: F34 Change proposal: Remove support for SELinux runtime disable (System-Wide Change)

2020-09-16 Thread Ondrej Mosnacek
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 6:05 PM Robbie Harwood wrote: > > Ondrej Mosnacek writes: > > > James Cassell wrote: > >> Ben Cotton wrote: > >> > >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_Support_For_SELinux_Runtime_Disable > >>> > >>> == Summary == > >>> Remove support for SELinux runtime disab

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Eric Sandeen
On 9/15/20 7:29 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:57 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: >> >> Daniel Pocock wrote: >>> One issue I've come across is that a btrfs filesystem can only be used >>> on hosts with the same page size as the host that created the filesystem >> >> Ewww! That alone shou

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Neal Gompa
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32 AM Eric Sandeen wrote: > > On 9/15/20 7:29 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:57 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> > >> Daniel Pocock wrote: > >>> One issue I've come across is that a btrfs filesystem can only be used > >>> on hosts with the same page size

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Benjamin Block
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 9/15/20 7:29 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:57 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> > >> Daniel Pocock wrote: > >>> One issue I've come across is that a btrfs filesystem can only be used > >>> on hosts with the same pag

Unresponsive packagers: ekulik, imcleod and lsun

2020-09-16 Thread Pierre-Yves Chibon
Good Morning Everyone, Since September 5th, we have been emailing daily the following users to notify that the email they have set in FAS does not correspond to a valid bugzilla account. This is a requirement for Fedora packagers. Does someone know how to contact these people? ekulik is main ad

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Eric Sandeen
On 9/16/20 10:22 AM, Benjamin Block wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:31:50AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: ... >> Sub-page block support in filesystems is not a wild, esoteric, unexpected >> feature. >> > > These kinds of problems are not really that rare across different > Filesystems. > > Try

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Simo Sorce
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 14:58 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 16. 09. 20 14:29, Simo Sorce wrote: > > Indeed compat-openssl10 really should go. > > If there are still packages depending on it they should be ported or > > dropped at this point. > > Openssl1.0.2 is unmaintained upstream and only critic

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Gwyn Ciesla via devel
I'm the compat-openssl10 owner. I've updated kqoauth-qt5 and sipp, but the rest are more involved. We need a plan for each package to be patched, updated to a version supporting modern openssl, or retired. --  Gwyn Ciesla she/her/hers   in your fe

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 33 Branched 20200916.n.0 nightly compose nominated for testing

2020-09-16 Thread Adam Williamson
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 12:12 +, rawh...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event > for Fedora 33 Branched 20200916.n.0. Please help run some tests for this > nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Simo Sorce
Do we need a more involved plan than filing bugs for those packages and let them drop if they do not react ? I mean they are using very old dependencies, there are probably many other ways in which they are broken at this point. Simo. On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 16:37 +, Gwyn Ciesla via devel wrot

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2020-09-16)

2020-09-16 Thread Clement Verna
Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2020-09-16/fesco.2020-09-16-14.00.html Minutes (text): https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2020-09-16/fesco.2020-09-16-14.00.txt Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2020-09-16/fesco.2020-09-16-14.00.log

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Simo Sorce
note that one of the dependencies is gnome-vfs2, itself a dependency for libgnome, which is a dependency for another dozen packages. All of them will likely go away because gnome-vfs2 is unlikely to be changed. Simo. On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 12:56 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > Do we need a more involv

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Michael Catanzaro
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:37 pm, Simo Sorce wrote: note that one of the dependencies is gnome-vfs2, itself a dependency for libgnome, which is a dependency for another dozen packages. All of them will likely go away because gnome-vfs2 is unlikely to be changed. I looked over the dependency tr

[Test-Announce] Fedora 33 Beta is NO-GO

2020-09-16 Thread Ben Cotton
Due to outstanding unresolved blockers, there is no release candidate for Fedora 33 Beta yet. I am cancelling tomorrow's Go/No-Go meeting. Please update the Release Readiness wiki page[1] with your team's readiness if appropriate. The Fedora 33 Beta Go/No-Go meeting[3] will be held at 1700 UTC on

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Tom Seewald
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:57 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: > > I hate to break it to you, but this problem is not just in > filesystems, it's in basically everything in the kernel. And we've had > variations of problems like this for years (endianness, page size, > pointer size, single bit vs multi-bi

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Neal Gompa
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 2:05 PM Tom Seewald wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:57 PM Kevin Kofler > wrote: > > > > I hate to break it to you, but this problem is not just in > > filesystems, it's in basically everything in the kernel. And we've had > > variations of problems like this for yea

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Daniel P . Berrangé
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 02:09:42PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > I'm annoyed in general that we still have problems like this, and I'm > even more annoyed that I basically have no way to even test or deal > with these things. We *still* do not have packager test machines, so I > can't even figure out

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Simo Sorce
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 12:41 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:37 pm, Simo Sorce wrote: > > note that one of the dependencies is gnome-vfs2, itself a dependency > > for libgnome, which is a dependency for another dozen packages. > > > > All of them will likely go away bec

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Gwyn Ciesla via devel
I don't mind doing so. Just for the first layer of dependencies? Does someone have the deeper tree handy? --  Gwyn Ciesla she/her/hers   in your fear, seek only peace  in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Neal Gompa
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 2:15 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 02:09:42PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > I'm annoyed in general that we still have problems like this, and I'm > > even more annoyed that I basically have no way to even test or deal > > with these things. We *sti

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Simo Sorce
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 18:26 +, Gwyn Ciesla wrote: > I don't mind doing so. Just for the first layer of dependencies? Does someone > have the deeper tree handy? I only have part of it from the gnome-vfs2 side: $ repoquery --releasever=33 --whatrequires gnome-vfs2 girl-0:10.0.0-10.fc33.x86_64 g

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Josef Bacik
On 9/14/20 3:31 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote: Given the plans to make btrfs the default, I'll share some of my own recent experiences, hopefully this can make it easier for the next person One issue I've come across is that a btrfs filesystem can only be used on hosts with the same page size as the

Re: compat-openssl11 vs openssl1.1

2020-09-16 Thread Gwyn Ciesla via devel
Ok, I'll just do the first layer and let the process work. I'll send an announcement to devel outside this thread. --  Gwyn Ciesla she/her/hers   in your fear, seek only peace  in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie Sent with ProtonMail Secure Ema

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Eugene Syromiatnikov
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 03:04:45PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > At the time we tied the fs blocksize to the > page size, because it was unlikely that a user would mkfs a fs on one arch > and move it over to another arch. But one doesn't need "another arch" for page size to change; many architecture

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Josef Bacik
On 9/16/20 3:18 PM, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote: On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 03:04:45PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: At the time we tied the fs blocksize to the page size, because it was unlikely that a user would mkfs a fs on one arch and move it over to another arch. But one doesn't need "another ar

Retirement: compat-openssl10

2020-09-16 Thread Gwyn Ciesla via devel
compat-openssl10 has just been retired. FTBFS bugs have just been filed against: dmg2img gnome-vfs2 gq httperf libwvstreams netty-tcnative samdump2 skipfish snownews sslscan stud telepathy-salut ucommon validns vtun They will need to be updated to use modern openssl, or retired. The dependency tr

Re: Self Introduction: Tom Yates

2020-09-16 Thread Bob Hepple
Welcome! FWIW I'm probably older and yes - I used to use RCS (and sccs, cvs, perforce, svn) and I still use ESR's SRC package (which is based on RCS) on a daily basis: https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/VersionControlAlways FAQ http://www.catb.org/~esr/src/FAQ.html resources http://www.catb.org/~esr

readelf seems broken in F33

2020-09-16 Thread Steve Grubb
Hello, I was doing some binary analysis of files in F33 and have run across something odd. readelf -s /usr/sbin/auditd | grep GLIBC produces a lot of output like: 182: 0 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT UND [...]@GLIBC_2.2.5 (3) 184: 0 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAU

Re: Release criteria proposal: first boot experience

2020-09-16 Thread majid hussain
hi, i'm no dev but i'm blind would functional include being accessible to orca the screen reader? after all to a blind person like me having an accessible setup experience is a requirement? or after I install the system, I would be in the dark? Majid On 15/09/2020 15:29, Kamil Paral wrote

Fedora-IoT-34-20200916.2 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20200916.0): ID: 668687 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/668687 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Test

Re: F34 Change: Reduce installation media size by improving the compression ratio of SquashFS filesystem (Self-Contained Change)

2020-09-16 Thread Kevin Kofler
Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > Some people download once, and install once. For > those, it is pay me now, or pay me later, and it may > be a wash, time wise, depending on your download > speeds, but it is also just a one time thing in any > case. Some people download once, and install lots > of times

Re: Release criteria proposal: first boot experience

2020-09-16 Thread Michael Catanzaro
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:55 pm, majid hussain wrote: hi, i'm no dev but i'm blind would functional include being accessible to orca the screen reader? after all to a blind person like me having an accessible setup experience is a requirement? or after I install the system, I would be i

Re: btrfs and default page sizes (4k vs 64k)

2020-09-16 Thread Kevin Kofler
Eric Sandeen wrote: > Block > page size is a different problem vs what is described in this > thread. Well, the thread is about block size ≠ page size, of which that is one of the two cases to handle. Though of course, if (as is the case for xfs), mkfs does not produce large block sizes by defa

Fedora-IoT-33-20200916.1 compose check report

2020-09-16 Thread Fedora compose checker
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-33-20200916.0): ID: 668703 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/668703 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64) (Test

Fixed: unable to push to f31 branches on dist-git

2020-09-16 Thread Mohan Boddu
Hello All, We had an issue today as some people were unable to push to dist-git f31 branches, it was caused by setting a wrong date in pdc. It has been fixed now and people can push to f31 branches. More info at https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9325 Sorry for the trouble that this h

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2020-09-17 16:00 UTC)

2020-09-16 Thread James Antill
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2020-09-17 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Thursday == 2020-09-17 09:00 PDT US/Pacific 2020-09-17 1

Re: Release criteria proposal: first boot experience

2020-09-16 Thread Adam Williamson
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 19:17 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:55 pm, majid hussain > wrote: > > hi, > > > > i'm no dev but > > > > i'm blind would functional include being accessible to orca the > > screen reader? > > > > after all to a blind person like me having a

LTO is broken in Rawhide/33 containers

2020-09-16 Thread Elliott Sales de Andrade
When using Fedora's containers, LTO appears to be broken. I'm not sure who to report this to, the container builder or gcc. $ podman run --pull=always --rm -it registry.fedoraproject.org/fedora:rawhide # dnf install -y gcc # echo 'int main(void) { int class=0; return class; }' > sanitycheck.c # gc