On 5/13/21 10:09 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Not everyone is installing a public facing server. On my isolated,
non-networked test instances I want to put up a short-lived VM with a
root password of "123456" quickly and no user account, and this option
lets me do that.
this^^ is a _very_
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 04:35:44PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Drop_Rootpw_SSH_From_Installer
I don't understand why you want to remove this, since it defaults to
off. Sure, add a warning if you like (probably there's one already?)
Not everyone is
Hello,
I have built rpkg-3.rc2 (package sources:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpkg-util) into rawhide yesterday.
It should be now available for installation.
It is a complete rewrite of version 2. It aims to be a tool with
minimal deps that allows people to easily transform git
Missing expected images:
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
1 of 43 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 10/194 (x86_64), 9/133 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in
On Thursday, 13 May 2021 15:11:19 EEST Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> > Make a plugin interface for adding additional methods to obtain public
> > keys as there are a lot different sources for those. Fedora itself has
> > tools for PKI and public key based security and it would be quite low
> > hanging
On Wed, 2021-05-12 at 16:35 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> == Benefit to Fedora ==
> This change makes the Fedora systems installed by Anaconda more secure
> from remote password guessing attacks targeting the root account as it
> would no longer be possible to configure a system that allows root to
>
On 5/13/21 12:13 PM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
Make a plugin interface for adding additional methods to obtain public keys as
there are a lot different sources for those. Fedora itself has tools for PKI
and public key based security and it would be quite low hanging fruit to fill
the gap between
On 5/13/21 10:48 AM, Juha Tuomala wrote:
Virtual machine installation is hopefully a special use case and majority of
installations are bare metal end users.
hardly.
here, for any given single bare-metal install, between cloud & local VMs, there
are typically *many*/*frequent* VM installs --
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:44 PM Matthew Miller
wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 12:32:00AM -0500, Greg Hellings wrote:
> > I may be hair-brained to do this, but I've put together an installer for
> > Fedora on WSL.
>
> Hi Greg! Not hair-brained at all -- this is awesome!
>
A couple of years
On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 12:32:00AM -0500, Greg Hellings wrote:
> I may be hair-brained to do this, but I've put together an installer for
> Fedora on WSL.
Hi Greg! Not hair-brained at all -- this is awesome!
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
Hello,
Can anyone help me figure out what's going on with this update?
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b8551abae2
It says that the side-tag is not among a bunch of other tags. It does
exist though.
What I did was build a package and its dependencies in side-tags for
F33, F34
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 9:46 AM Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2021-05-12 at 16:35 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > == Benefit to Fedora ==
> > This change makes the Fedora systems installed by Anaconda more secure
> > from remote password guessing attacks targeting the root account as it
> > would no
Hey folks!
Just wanted to flag up that, now the new Bodhi version has been
deployed to production, critpath updates are gated on openQA test
results. If any openQA test for your critpath update failed, the gating
status will be marked as 'failed' and you will not be able to push it
stable.
> Am 12.05.2021 um 22:35 schrieb Ben Cotton :
>
> == Summary ==
> Since 2019 the Anaconda installer GUI hosted an option called "Allow
> SSH root login with password", that made it possible to enable
> password based root logins over SSH on the installed system. ... And
> after two years of
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 10:09:32PM +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anyone help me figure out what's going on with this update?
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b8551abae2
>
> It says that the side-tag is not among a bunch of other tags. It does
> exist
> Hey folks!
>
> Just wanted to flag up that, now the new Bodhi version has been
> deployed to production, critpath updates are gated on openQA test
> results. If any openQA test for your critpath update failed, the gating
> status will be marked as 'failed' and you will not be able to push it
>
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 05:48:07PM +0300, Juha Tuomala wrote:
> Virtual machine installation is hopefully a special use case and majority of
> installations are bare metal end users.
Most likely the exact opposite of this, but I don't have the numbers.
(On _my_ systems it's likely to be 100:1
On Thu, 2021-05-13 at 19:29 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> > Hey folks!
> >
> > Just wanted to flag up that, now the new Bodhi version has been
> > deployed to production, critpath updates are gated on openQA test
> > results. If any openQA test for your critpath update failed, the
> >
hi,
On 5/13/21 6:06 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
mock -r fedora-34-x86_64 --rebuild
lua-resty-luajit2-git.HEAD-0.pgnd_20210513_212639.fc34.src.rpm
also fails in my machine, %forgesetup -z 0 is where it fails
hm. whereas a non-isolated, local rpmbuild works, as per my OP,
a *mock* build here
Hello,
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 2:19 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-05-13 at 19:29 +, Mattia Verga via devel wrote:
> > > Hey folks!
> > >
> > > Just wanted to flag up that, now the new Bodhi version has been
> > > deployed to production, critpath updates are gated on openQA test
>
I've a package .spec, that uses forgemeta macros, that builds locally just fine
on F34.
Same spec @ COPR, F34 chroot, fails.
Something's either missing on my end, or broken @COPR. Likely obvious pebkac,
but I'm not seeing it.
Any insights as to why the same spec, @COPR, is failing would be
Hi Kevin,
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 10:55 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> Did you by chance add them to the update during the upgrade this
> morning? (starting at 10UTC)? It doesn't look like bodhi did the right
> thing with the tagging here... I can try and correct things.
It was towards the end of
mock -r fedora-34-x86_64 --rebuild
lua-resty-luajit2-git.HEAD-0.pgnd_20210513_212639.fc34.src.rpm
also fails in my machine, %forgesetup -z 0 is where it fails, have you a
different or custom /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.forge ?
On Thu, 2021-05-13 at 17:43 -0400, PGNet Dev wrote:
I've a
Hi Neal,
Neal Gompa writes:
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:44 PM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 12:32:00AM -0500, Greg Hellings wrote:
>> > I may be hair-brained to do this, but I've put together an installer for
>> > Fedora on WSL.
>>
>> Hi Greg! Not hair-brained at all
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 12:22:46PM +0200, Michal Sekletar wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 1:25 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
> zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
>
> >
> > I agree. Plocate/mlocate is useful technology, but it's not important
> > enough to justify maintaining two or three different
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-33-20210512.0):
ID: 885628 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On Wednesday, 12 May 2021 23:35:44 EEST Ben Cotton wrote:
> * it has been suggested that making it easier to import SSH keys from
> popular code hosting platforms (Pagure, GitHub, GitLab, etc.) could
> provide a nice alternative to the dropped option -
Make a plugin interface for adding
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-32-20210512.0):
ID: 885644 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20210512.0):
ID: 885660 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/885660
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210512.n.2
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210513.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 2
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 12
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:230.11
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1926912
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917555
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
On Thu, 13 May 2021, Nick Howitt wrote:
On 13/05/2021 10:21, Nick Howitt wrote:
On 13/05/2021 09:55, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 10:21, Nick Howitt wrote:
Hi,
This app recently updated and I've noticed that it stomped on my
/etc/sysconfig/postrgey file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955451
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950383
--- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek ---
Request for branch: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/33949
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1947316
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1959553
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927663
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960396
Bug ID: 1960396
Summary: Upgrade perl-Test-Script to 1.29
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Test-Script
Assignee: rc040...@freenet.de
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960347
--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of
perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509-1.908-1.fc32.src.rpm for rawhide completed
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=67840744
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929021
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1921135
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960347
Bug ID: 1960347
Summary: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509-1.908 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509
Keywords:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1892743
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Upgrade perl-Type-Tiny to |Upgrade perl-Type-Tiny to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960398
Bug ID: 1960398
Summary: Upgrade perl-V to 0.15
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-V
Assignee: jvrom...@squirrel.nl
Reporter:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960398
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950798
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1958694
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960392
Bug ID: 1960392
Summary: Upgrade perl-File-Which to 1.27
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-File-Which
Assignee: spo...@gmail.com
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2021/05/14/report-389-ds-base-2.0.4-20210514git2a12316b7.fc34.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2021/05/13/report-389-ds-base-2.0.4-20210513git2a12316b7.fc34.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Hi,
This app recently updated and I've noticed that it stomped on my
/etc/sysconfig/postrgey file isn't this wrong? Looking at the spec file,
in the %files section it has:
%{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/postgrey
Shouldn't this be:
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/postgrey
Regards,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1959929
Michal Josef Spacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Doc Type|---
On 13/05/2021 09:55, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 10:21, Nick Howitt wrote:
Hi,
This app recently updated and I've noticed that it stomped on my
/etc/sysconfig/postrgey file isn't this wrong? Looking at the spec file, in
the %files section it has:
On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 10:21, Nick Howitt wrote:
> Hi,
> This app recently updated and I've noticed that it stomped on my
> /etc/sysconfig/postrgey file isn't this wrong? Looking at the spec file, in
> the %files section it has:
>
> %{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/postgrey
>
> Shouldn't this be:
>
On 13/05/2021 10:21, Nick Howitt wrote:
On 13/05/2021 09:55, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 10:21, Nick Howitt wrote:
Hi,
This app recently updated and I've noticed that it stomped on my
/etc/sysconfig/postrgey file isn't this wrong? Looking at the spec
56 matches
Mail list logo
