[Bug 2064808] Update perl to 5.34.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 --- Comment #13 from Paul Howarth --- polymake is now done: $ koji list-tagged f35-build-side-52326 Build Tag Built by perl-5.34.1-486.fc35 f35-build-side-52326 mspacek perl-PAR-Packer-1.052-5.fc35 f35-build-side-52326 pghmcfc polymake-4.5-2.fc35 f35-build-side-52326 pghmcfc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[EPEL-devel] slowing down the stalled request process
EPEL has a stalled request policy [0] that allows packagers to get themselves added as collaborators on epel* branches. Prior to this policy being implemented, requests to add Fedora packages to EPEL would often go unanswered for long periods of time. Packagers wanting to help had only one option to force action: Fedora's non-responsive maintainer policy [1]. This was view by many as overkill, as it results in all of the non-responsive maintainer's packages being orphaned or transferred to the requester. The stalled request policy is much friendlier and enables greater collaboration. However, despite the good intentions, I've observed some frustrations among Fedora packagers when collaborators are added via this process. We do not want maintainers to feel rushed or circumvented. That said, I am firmly of the opinion that nobody "owns" Fedora packages, we maintain them. Packagers wanting to take action on EPEL requests should have a way to do that if the existing maintainers have not taken action within a reasonable amount of time. What I would like to discuss is what amount of time is reasonable. The current process allows a collaborator to be added after a two week period. When the stalled policy was implemented I was a fan of this duration, but now I think it is too short. Extending it slightly would be a good compromise to give maintainers a bit more time to respond while still allowing the request to eventually be completed. I have two suggestions for alternative steps for the process. Current process (two bugzilla pings, two weeks total time): - 1st request - one week goes by - 2nd request - one week goes by - releng ticket to be added as a collaborator Proposal A (three bugzilla pings, three weeks total time): - 1st request - one week goes by - 2nd request - one week goes by - 3rd request - one week goes by - releng ticket to be added as a collaborator Proposal B (two bugzilla pings, four weeks total time): - 1st request - two weeks go by - 2nd request - two weeks go by - releng ticket to be added as a collaborator I also think we can improve the process by having the last bugzilla comment include setting the needsinfo flag. Please share your thoughts on these alternative process steps. [0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy/#stalled_epel_requests [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/ -- Carl George ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2069471] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.19 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069471 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-703ae91b32 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-703ae91b32` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-703ae91b32 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069471 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2065327] perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.62 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065327 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.62 |perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.62 |-463.fc35 |-463.fc35 ||perl-Scalar-List-Utils-1.62 ||-464.fc36 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065327 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064808] Update perl to 5.34.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-5.34.1-486.fc36 Last Closed||2022-03-30 01:33:42 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064642] F37FailsToInstall: perl-PAR-Packer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064642 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-PAR-Packer-1.054-2.fc3 |perl-PAR-Packer-1.054-2.fc3 |7 |7 ||perl-PAR-Packer-1.054-3.fc3 ||6 Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed|2022-03-18 11:42:55 |2022-03-30 01:33:39 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-cea638ebd4 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064642 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2066103] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220320 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066103 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |0220320-2.fc36 |0220320-2.fc36 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |0220320-1.fc34 |0220320-1.fc34 ||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 ||0220320-1.fc35 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-b53acf99d2 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066103 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064353] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064353 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |0313-1.fc36 |0313-1.fc36 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |0320-1.fc34 |0320-1.fc34 ||perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 ||0320-1.fc35 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-ecae81d9c8 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064353 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2066104] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20220320 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066104 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |0320-2.fc36 |0320-2.fc36 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |0320-1.fc34 |0320-1.fc34 ||perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 ||0320-1.fc35 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-ecae81d9c8 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066104 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2061310] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |0220313-1.fc36 |0220313-1.fc36 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |0220320-1.fc34 |0220320-1.fc34 ||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 ||0220320-1.fc35 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-b53acf99d2 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: [IPP-over-USB printers/scanners] Expected breakage when ipp-usb+a driver are installed
(removing us...@lists.fedoraproject.org)... On Wed, Mar 23 2022 at 01:58:33 PM +0100, Zdenek Dohnal wrote: Unfortunately there is no clean upgrade path to solve the migration automatically because of unrealistic requirements such as: - the USB device would have needed to be plugged in and turned on during the update - %post scriptlets don't work the same way on immutable Fedoras as on Fedora Linux, and other upgrade possibilities such as Leapp don't support Fedora upgrades AFAIK, the fix has to be done manually. Hi Zdenek, First, thanks for your work on preparing Fedora for CUPS 3.0 and driverless printing, and for helping me with the printer and scanner bug reports I reported after I discovered this broke my printer after upgrading to F36: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066528 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069277 Hopefully my experience after removing my old print queue and switching to the CUPS temporary queue is an anomaly. I know we don't *expect* users to have this much trouble. That said, even if everything goes as expected, requiring users to remove the original broken print queue is unfortunate. Leaving a broken scanner device around is too. I understand it is difficult to seamlessly upgrade users from F35 -> F36 due to the intrusive nature of these changes. That said, I think it's worth discussing whether a smoother upgrade is possible, because otherwise I expect a large number of complaints from users. An installed one-shot systemd service would avoid the need for any %post scriplets, for example. Alternatively, could we find a way to disable the classic drivers if the printer supports ipp-usb? > - the USB device would have needed to be plugged in and turned on during the update I understand the problem is you don't know whether the printer supports ipp-usb unless it's on, right? Therefore, a one-time upgrade script has no way to know whether the print queue should be deleted or not? Perhaps it would be possible to delete the print queue that uses the traditional driver whenever support for ipp-usb is detected? I don't know enough about printing to say whether that is a reasonable suggestion or a ridiculous one. Just brainstorming. Michael ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064353] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064353 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |0313-1.fc36 |0313-1.fc36 ||perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 ||0320-1.fc34 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-47dc52c0c4 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064353 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2061310] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220313 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |0220313-1.fc36 |0220313-1.fc36 ||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 ||0220320-1.fc34 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-fb075cc995 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2061310 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2066104] perl-Module-CoreList-5.20220320 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066104 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 |0320-2.fc36 |0320-2.fc36 ||perl-Module-CoreList-5.2022 ||0320-1.fc34 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-47dc52c0c4 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066104 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2066103] perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.20220320 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066103 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 |0220320-2.fc36 |0220320-2.fc36 ||perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-5.2 ||0220320-1.fc34 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-fb075cc995 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066103 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Landing a larger-than-release change (distrusting SHA-1 signatures)
FWIW Alexander's plan sounds reasonable to me. On Tue, Mar 29 2022 at 03:34:49 PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Well, we just shipped beta today, so I think it's too late to land any f36 changes at this point. This is a non-default configuration that I strongly suspect nobody or almost nobody uses, except for testing. Changing this prior to F36 stable release seems like no big deal. Michael ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-36-20220329.n.1 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 6/229 (x86_64), 6/161 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220328.n.0): ID: 1202569 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso anaconda_help URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202569 ID: 1202672 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202672 ID: 1202680 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202680 ID: 1202698 Test: aarch64 Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz base_reboot_unmount@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202698 ID: 1202739 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202739 ID: 1202763 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz gnome_text_editor@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202763 ID: 1202905 Test: aarch64 universal install_blivet_software_raid@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202905 ID: 1202950 Test: aarch64 universal install_shrink_ntfs@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202950 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-36-20220328.n.0): ID: 1202664 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202664 ID: 1202796 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202796 ID: 1202884 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202884 ID: 1202943 Test: aarch64 universal install_asian_language@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202943 Soft failed openQA tests: 5/161 (aarch64), 6/229 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-36-20220328.n.0): ID: 1202777 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202777 ID: 1202778 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz eog@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202778 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-36-20220328.n.0): ID: 1202632 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202632 ID: 1202636 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202636 ID: 1202647 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso eog URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202647 ID: 1202657 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202657 ID: 1202688 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202688 ID: 1202782 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202782 ID: 1202790 Test: x86_64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202790 ID: 1202812 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade desktop_browser@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202812 ID: 1202825 Test: aarch64 Workstation-upgrade eog@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202825 Passed openQA tests: 150/161 (aarch64), 205/229 (x86_64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-36-20220328.n.0): ID: 1202732 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202732 ID: 1202737 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_database_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202737 ID: 1202743 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202743 ID: 1202748 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso server_database_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202748 ID: 1202760 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202760 ID: 1202761 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz base_service_manipulation@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202761 ID: 1202762 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_printing@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202762 ID: 1202764 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz base_package_install_remove@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202764 ID: 1202765 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_printing_builtin@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202765 ID: 1202766 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz desktop_update_graphical@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202766 ID: 1202767 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz base_selinux@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202767 ID: 1202768 Test: aarch64 Workstation-raw_xz-raw.xz unwanted_packages@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202768 ID: 1202769 Test: aarch64
[EPEL-devel] [HEADS UP] ImageMagick side-tag for epel8
Hi, ImageMagick 6.9.12.x have a bunch security fixes since 6.9.10.x . I'd like update ImageMagick (IM) on epel8 with soname bump . ImageMagick-6.9.10 last version, have almost 2 years and keep it and just pull security patches, it would have a lot more work in my opinion. so in epel8-build-side-52356 repo (sidetag) we got now ImageMagick-6.9.12.44-1.el8 I will rebuild these 24 packages [1] calculated with find_unblocked_orphans.py from https://pagure.io/releng/blob/main/f/scripts [2] Best regards, [1] Depending packages (epel8) (24): conky-manager converseen darktable digikam dvdauthor ettercap gnokii keepass latex2rtf lyx mediainfo openbabel perl-GD-SecurityImage perl-PAR-Packer playonlinux purple-discord putty stb stellarium tango-icon-theme w3m xemacs-packages-extra xfig xforms [2] ./find_unblocked_orphans.py --release epel8 --skip-orphans --max_deps 0 ImageMagick conky-manager (maintained by: orphan) conky-manager-2.3.4-11.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86- 1.el8 converseen (maintained by: marionline) converseen-0.9.8.1-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick-c++-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8, ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 converseen-0.9.8.1-1.el8.x86_64 requires libMagick++- 6.Q16.so.8()(64bit), libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) darktable (maintained by: asn, germano, kalev, madko) darktable-tools-noise-3.8.0-5.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 digikam (maintained by: dvratil, kde-sig, kwizart, nucleo, rdieter, than, tuxbrewr, vjancik) digikam-6.4.0-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick-c++-devel = 6.9.10.86- 1.el8, ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 digikam-6.4.0-4.el8.x86_64 requires libMagick++-6.Q16.so.8()(64bit), libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) digikam-libs-6.4.0-4.el8.x86_64 requires libMagick++- 6.Q16.so.8()(64bit), libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) dvdauthor (maintained by: hobbes1069, sergiomb) dvdauthor-0.7.2-14.el8.src requires ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 dvdauthor-0.7.2-14.el8.x86_64 requires libMagickCore- 6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) ettercap (maintained by: limb) ettercap-0.8.3.1-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 gnokii (maintained by: limb, robert, snirkel) gnokii-0.6.31-29.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 keepass (maintained by: mavit, tpokorra) keepass-2.45-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 latex2rtf (maintained by: cicku, yselkowitz) latex2rtf-2.3.18-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 latex2rtf-2.3.18-4.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 lyx (maintained by: jamatos, rdieter) lyx-2.3.6-2.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 mediainfo (maintained by: ivanromanov, vascom) mediainfo-21.09-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 openbabel (maintained by: alexpl, jussilehtola, rathann, sagitter, scitech_sig) openbabel-3.1.1-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 perl-GD-SecurityImage (maintained by: eseyman) perl-GD-SecurityImage-1.75-4.el8.noarch requires perl(Image::Magick) perl-GD-SecurityImage-1.75-4.el8.src requires perl(Image::Magick) perl-PAR-Packer (maintained by: jplesnik, ppisar) perl-PAR-Packer-1.052-2.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 playonlinux (maintained by: robert) playonlinux-4.4-2.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 purple-discord (maintained by: xvitaly) purple-discord-0-33.20210928gitb7ac723.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 putty (maintained by: jskarvad, olysonek, zaniyah) putty-0.76-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 stb (maintained by: churchyard, music) stb-0-0.7.20211022gitaf1a5bc.el8.src requires /usr/bin/convert stellarium (maintained by: limb, s4504kr) stellarium-0.20.1-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 tango-icon-theme (maintained by: cottsay, mavit) tango-icon-theme-0.8.90-24.el8.src requires ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 w3m (maintained by: pnemade, robert) w3m-img-0.5.3-50.git20210102.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 xemacs-packages-extra (maintained by: jjames, stevetraylen) xemacs-packages-extra-20191207-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 xfig (maintained by: jwrdegoede, stevetraylen) xfig-3.2.7b-3.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 xforms (maintained by: rdieter, robert) xforms-1.2.4-14.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 -- Sérgio M. B. ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-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/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[HEADS UP] ImageMagick side-tag for epel8
Hi, ImageMagick 6.9.12.x have a bunch security fixes since 6.9.10.x . I'd like update ImageMagick (IM) on epel8 with soname bump . ImageMagick-6.9.10 last version, have almost 2 years and keep it and just pull security patches, it would have a lot more work in my opinion. so in epel8-build-side-52356 repo (sidetag) we got now ImageMagick-6.9.12.44-1.el8 I will rebuild these 24 packages [1] calculated with find_unblocked_orphans.py from https://pagure.io/releng/blob/main/f/scripts [2] Best regards, [1] Depending packages (epel8) (24): conky-manager converseen darktable digikam dvdauthor ettercap gnokii keepass latex2rtf lyx mediainfo openbabel perl-GD-SecurityImage perl-PAR-Packer playonlinux purple-discord putty stb stellarium tango-icon-theme w3m xemacs-packages-extra xfig xforms [2] ./find_unblocked_orphans.py --release epel8 --skip-orphans --max_deps 0 ImageMagick conky-manager (maintained by: orphan) conky-manager-2.3.4-11.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86- 1.el8 converseen (maintained by: marionline) converseen-0.9.8.1-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick-c++-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8, ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 converseen-0.9.8.1-1.el8.x86_64 requires libMagick++- 6.Q16.so.8()(64bit), libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) darktable (maintained by: asn, germano, kalev, madko) darktable-tools-noise-3.8.0-5.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 digikam (maintained by: dvratil, kde-sig, kwizart, nucleo, rdieter, than, tuxbrewr, vjancik) digikam-6.4.0-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick-c++-devel = 6.9.10.86- 1.el8, ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 digikam-6.4.0-4.el8.x86_64 requires libMagick++-6.Q16.so.8()(64bit), libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) digikam-libs-6.4.0-4.el8.x86_64 requires libMagick++- 6.Q16.so.8()(64bit), libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) dvdauthor (maintained by: hobbes1069, sergiomb) dvdauthor-0.7.2-14.el8.src requires ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 dvdauthor-0.7.2-14.el8.x86_64 requires libMagickCore- 6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) ettercap (maintained by: limb) ettercap-0.8.3.1-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 gnokii (maintained by: limb, robert, snirkel) gnokii-0.6.31-29.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 keepass (maintained by: mavit, tpokorra) keepass-2.45-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 latex2rtf (maintained by: cicku, yselkowitz) latex2rtf-2.3.18-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 latex2rtf-2.3.18-4.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 lyx (maintained by: jamatos, rdieter) lyx-2.3.6-2.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 mediainfo (maintained by: ivanromanov, vascom) mediainfo-21.09-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 openbabel (maintained by: alexpl, jussilehtola, rathann, sagitter, scitech_sig) openbabel-3.1.1-4.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 perl-GD-SecurityImage (maintained by: eseyman) perl-GD-SecurityImage-1.75-4.el8.noarch requires perl(Image::Magick) perl-GD-SecurityImage-1.75-4.el8.src requires perl(Image::Magick) perl-PAR-Packer (maintained by: jplesnik, ppisar) perl-PAR-Packer-1.052-2.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 playonlinux (maintained by: robert) playonlinux-4.4-2.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 purple-discord (maintained by: xvitaly) purple-discord-0-33.20210928gitb7ac723.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 putty (maintained by: jskarvad, olysonek, zaniyah) putty-0.76-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 stb (maintained by: churchyard, music) stb-0-0.7.20211022gitaf1a5bc.el8.src requires /usr/bin/convert stellarium (maintained by: limb, s4504kr) stellarium-0.20.1-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 tango-icon-theme (maintained by: cottsay, mavit) tango-icon-theme-0.8.90-24.el8.src requires ImageMagick-devel = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 w3m (maintained by: pnemade, robert) w3m-img-0.5.3-50.git20210102.el8.x86_64 requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 xemacs-packages-extra (maintained by: jjames, stevetraylen) xemacs-packages-extra-20191207-1.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 xfig (maintained by: jwrdegoede, stevetraylen) xfig-3.2.7b-3.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 xforms (maintained by: rdieter, robert) xforms-1.2.4-14.el8.src requires ImageMagick = 6.9.10.86-1.el8 -- Sérgio M. B. ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora 36 compose report: 20220329.n.1 changes
OLD: Fedora-36-20220328.n.0 NEW: Fedora-36-20220329.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 4 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 161 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 814.09 KiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 6.81 GiB Size of downgraded packages: 3.96 MiB Size change of upgraded packages: 19.12 MiB Size change of downgraded packages: -895 B = ADDED IMAGES = = DROPPED IMAGES = = ADDED PACKAGES = Package: asahi-scripts-20220318.1-1.fc36 Summary: Miscellaneous admin scripts for Asahi Linux RPMs:update-vendor-firmware Size:9.67 KiB Package: gnome-console-42~beta-1.fc36 Summary: Simple user-friendly terminal emulator for the GNOME desktop RPMs:gnome-console gnome-console-nautilus Size:707.86 KiB Package: rust-fontconfig-parser-0.5.0-1.fc36 Summary: Fontconfig file parser in pure Rust RPMs:rust-fontconfig-parser+default-devel rust-fontconfig-parser+serde-devel rust-fontconfig-parser+serialize-devel rust-fontconfig-parser-devel Size:66.43 KiB Package: rust-rustls-pemfile-0.3.0-1.fc36 Summary: Basic .pem file parser for keys and certificates RPMs:rust-rustls-pemfile+default-devel rust-rustls-pemfile-devel Size:30.14 KiB = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = Package: adwaita-icon-theme-42.0-1.fc36 Old package: adwaita-icon-theme-42~beta-1.fc36 Summary: Adwaita icon theme RPMs: adwaita-cursor-theme adwaita-icon-theme adwaita-icon-theme-devel Size: 4.80 MiB Size change: 193.76 KiB Changelog: * Mon Mar 21 2022 David King - 42.0-1 - Update to 42.0 Package: apostrophe-2.6.1-1.fc36 Old package: apostrophe-2.6-1.fc36 Summary: Distraction free Markdown editor for GNU/Linux made with GTK+ RPMs: apostrophe Size: 2.54 MiB Size change: 2.83 KiB Changelog: * Sun Mar 27 2022 Artem Polishchuk - 2.6.1-1 - chore(update): 2.6.1 Package: arpwatch-14:3.2-6.fc36 Old package: arpwatch-14:3.2-4.fc36 Summary: Network monitoring tools for tracking IP addresses on a network RPMs: arpwatch Size: 1.60 MiB Size change: 8.58 KiB Changelog: * Thu Mar 24 2022 Benjamin A. Beasley 14:3.2-5 - Switch OUI URL from HTTP to HTTPS * Thu Mar 24 2022 Benjamin A. Beasley 14:3.2-6 - Generate ethercodes.dat from latest oui.csv Package: at-spi2-core-2.44.0-1.fc36 Old package: at-spi2-core-2.42.0-2.fc36 Summary: Protocol definitions and daemon for D-Bus at-spi RPMs: at-spi2-core at-spi2-core-devel Size: 1.84 MiB Size change: 5.01 KiB Changelog: * Fri Mar 18 2022 David King - 2.44.0-1 - Update to 2.44.0 Package: baobab-42.0-1.fc36 Old package: baobab-42~rc-1.fc36 Summary: A graphical directory tree analyzer RPMs: baobab Size: 1.90 MiB Size change: 1.26 KiB Changelog: * Mon Mar 21 2022 David King - 42.0-1 - Update to 42.0 Package: bluez-5.64-1.fc36 Old package: bluez-5.63-3.fc36 Summary: Bluetooth utilities RPMs: bluez bluez-cups bluez-deprecated bluez-hid2hci bluez-libs bluez-libs-devel bluez-mesh bluez-obexd Size: 10.90 MiB Size change: 62.35 KiB Changelog: * Mon Mar 21 2022 Peter Robinson - 5.64-1 - Update to 5.64 Package: bout++-4.4.1-1.fc36 Old package: bout++-4.4.0-6.fc36 Summary: Library for the BOUndary Turbulence simulation framework RPMs: bout++-common bout++-doc bout++-mpich bout++-mpich-devel bout++-openmpi bout++-openmpi-devel python3-bout++ python3-bout++-mpich python3-bout++-openmpi Size: 18.29 MiB Size change: 99.17 KiB Changelog: * Tue Jan 25 2022 David Bold - 4.4.1-1 - Update to 4.4.1 Package: cairo-1.17.6-1.fc36 Old package: cairo-1.17.4-7.fc36 Summary: A 2D graphics library RPMs: cairo cairo-devel cairo-gobject cairo-gobject-devel cairo-tools Size: 5.99 MiB Size change: 387.95 KiB Changelog: * Fri Mar 18 2022 David King - 1.17.6-1 - Update to 1.17.6 Package: camorama-0.21.2-2.fc36 Old package: camorama-0.21-1.fc36 Summary: Gnome webcam viewer RPMs: camorama Size: 1.69 MiB Size change: 27.21 KiB Changelog: * Sat Mar 19 2022 Mauro Carvalho Chehab - 0.21.1 - Bump to Version 0.21.1: fix image capture regression * Thu Mar 24 2022 Mauro Carvalho Chehab - 0.21.2 - Bump to Version 0.21.2: better handle controls and sliders * Thu Mar 24 2022 Mauro Carvalho Chehab - 0.21.2-1 - Fix a crash when device is changed while control window is open Package: cfn-lint-0.58.4-1.fc36 Old package: cfn-lint-0.58.2-1.fc36 Summary: CloudFormation Linter RPMs: cfn-lint Size: 2.04 MiB Size change: 20.79 KiB Changelog: * Tue Mar 08 2022 Benjamin A. Beasley 0.58.3-1 - Update to 0.58.3 (close RHBZ#2061852) * Tue Mar 22 2022 Benjamin A. Beasley 0.58.4-1 - Update to 0.58.4 (close RHBZ#2066498) Package
Re: Landing a larger-than-release change (distrusting SHA-1 signatures)
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 08:12:47PM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> "You know these lights in the theaters that go out gradually?
> When the guy ve-ery slo-o-owly pulls the plug out?"
> - a joke from my childhood.
>
>
> Hello, it's been quiet for a while, and I've been busy
> but kept thinking about all the useful feedback you folks gave me.
> Not that it made me flesh out a perfect plan,
> but hopefully at least a less terrible one.
>
> Regarding smudging the change in time,
> how does the following three-phaser sound?
Might work. :) A few comments inline...
> Phase 1 ("Wake-up Call"):
> In Fedora 37, disable SHA-1 signatures verification/creation
> in FUTURE policy, i.e. opt-in only.
> Come up with some logging solution;
> I'd prefer something non-invasive like eBPF USDT probes [2],
> but maybe even stderr could work, you've been moderately convincing.
> (FUTURE change is *maybe* doable in F36, but not logging.)
Well, we just shipped beta today, so I think it's too late to land any
f36 changes at this point.
> Announce it as a system-wide change anyway for visibility,
> call for Test Days to report which apps/workflows rely on SHA-1 signatures
> either from the logs
> or from opting into blocking operations and seeing what starts failing hard.
> That'd have to be very actively called for to make an impact,
> impact that'd mostly be just maintainers thinking what will they do in
Just a related note here, FUTURE also breaks installing anything via dnf
with the default metalink setup. This is because digicert (where we get
our *.fedoraproject.org wildcard cert) seems to always issue certs from
it's 2048bit CA. :( (If anyone knows how to get them to issue from a
newer CA that works please let me know)
> Phase 2 ("Jump Scare"):
> As soon as f37 branch-off happens,
> disable signature verification in DEFAULT in *38 rawhide*.
> Cue an influx of bugreports because things get broken for all testers
> and not just the ones who opt in.
> I anticipate this to be the most eye-opening step
> even if we test a lot in the previous phase, so to smooth it out more
> we then *revert* the change in 38 before the release,
> so the released Fedora behaves just like in 37
> and whatever wasn't sorted out in time gets an extra cycle.
Right before the release?
Or right before Beta?
or ?
People kind of expect the beta will be something they can test and will
behave as the final, so changing things after beta seems like a bad idea
in general. That said, shipping beta with it would get a lot more
exposure.
> A second Fedora change should be filed for visibility,
> but clearly stating this will not affect f38 released.
>
> Phase 3 ("Return of the Panik"):
> And then Fedora 39 comes, where the revert hasn't happened,
> goes through the whole release cycle,
> but this time the change goes through and reaches stable.
> Again, a system-wide change, a third one for the same thing.
>
> With the 37-38-39 numbers, that'd mean the change
> reaching the users in autumn 2023, with lead times of:
> ~ 3.5 cycles for the most proactive developers to see this thread and panic
> ~ 3 cycles for the testers to proactively report bugs (logging/opting in)
> ~ 2 cycles to address everything else coming from rawhide testing
> before it reaches stable by either
> switching to some other algorithm,
> making the users explicitly opt into trusting SHA-1 signatures somehow,
> or, in the most high-profile cases,
> having a widely publicised exception (and some plan for the future).
>
> Questions:
> * Do you find this smudging reasonable?
I think it's probibly the best we can do.
> * The usual tightening of the other less controversial algorithms,
> should it follow the same smudging/reverting plan
> since we're going through all that hassle anyway?
I don't think they would need to have this long a runway.
> * Does the 37-38-39 timeframe feel right?
> * Do I need to first run this contraption of a plan
> by FESCo or some other smart folks?
Well, I think run it by everyone on this list.
I don't think people will hold back. ;)
> * Is there a better signalling mechanism than filing 3 system-wide changes?
> * What'd be the right mechanism for others to take the wheel if everything
> goes sideways and the need arises to revise the plan mid-execution?
I wonder if it would make sense to have a checkpoint before the revert
in f38, and if things look substantually less broken than we fear, we
just don't revert it and let it go out in f38. But that might muddy up
the communications.
> Other kinds of input are, of course, also appreciated.
> Even the calls to magically attain the mutually exclusive goals
> of offering secure defaults while not breaking insecure workflows
> that don't offer actual solutions might serve as a useful mood check.
> I know it ain't the best plan. Let's figure out the right thing to do.
Thanks for
Re: Looking for provenpackager to update rapid-photo-downloader package
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 05:57:52PM -, Damon Lynch wrote: > Greetings Fedora community, I am the developer of Rapid Photo Downloader. The > package for it in Fedora is about two years old, and crashes during start-up > under Python 3.10. > > As the subject says, I'm looking for a provenpackager to update the package. > I'm posting this message here at the suggestion of a fellow PyQt developer > who unlike myself is a Fedora expert. > > I filed a bug report last year but the maintainer has been unable to work on > it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031866 > Meanwhile, two months ago Neal Gompa made this pull request to update it: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapid-photo-downloader/pull-request/3 > I'm a provenpackager, but so is Neal, so I just pinged him to see if he wants to merge and push an update. > Unfortunately I'm unable to volunteer my time because I managed to injure my > hands while working on the code earlier this year. Serious typing injuries > are not fun. :-( > (I'm dictating this using a voice recognition program under Windows.) > Ouch, hope you recover soon! Also, I'm hugely impressed by how well the email is formatted, I hope you didn't have to do that much correction by hand. Best regards, -- Michel Alexandre Salim identities: https://keyoxide.org/5dce2e7e9c3b1cffd335c1d78b229d2f7ccc04f2 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Looking for provenpackager to update rapid-photo-downloader package
I submitted "showinflemanager" as a package to fedora any review are welcomed. URL: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2069851 Regards, Onuralp Sezer (he/him/his) ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: [rawhide][approaching SONAME bump][gpgme] libqgpgme.so.7 -> libqgpgme.so.15
On Tuesday, 29 March 2022 at 21:29, Jiri Kucera wrote: > Hello, > > I am working on a gpgme update from 1.17.0 to 1.17.1 (bz#2061192). Since > the update changes libqgpgme SONAME from libqgpgme.so.7 to libqgpgme.so.15, > I requested the side tag f37-build-side-52334 and do a build in it: [...] > Eventually the list of libqgpgme.so.7 consumers (have no idea why there are > only *.i686 on the list): > $ dnf --repofrompath=frawhide, > http://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/ > --disablerepo='*' --enablerepo='frawhide' --refresh repoquery --whatdepends > libqgpgme.so.7 libqgpgme.so.7 is a 32-bit dependency. The 64-bit one is: libqgpgme.so.7()(64bit). You'll get 64-bit consumers if you query for that one. Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Looking for provenpackager to update rapid-photo-downloader package
On 3/29/22 13:57, Damon Lynch wrote: > Greetings Fedora community, I am the developer of Rapid Photo Downloader. The > package for it in Fedora is about two years old, and crashes during start-up > under Python 3.10. > > As the subject says, I'm looking for a provenpackager to update the package. > I'm posting this message here at the suggestion of a fellow PyQt developer > who unlike myself is a Fedora expert. > > I filed a bug report last year but the maintainer has been unable to work on > it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031866 > Meanwhile, two months ago Neal Gompa made this pull request to update it: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapid-photo-downloader/pull-request/3 > > The current release is 0.9.33. Compared to the Fedora version, it requires a > new package in Fedora: https://github.com/damonlynch/showinfilemanager > > Unfortunately I'm unable to volunteer my time because I managed to injure my > hands while working on the code earlier this year. Serious typing injuries > are not fun. :-( > (I'm dictating this using a voice recognition program under Windows.) I hope you get better soon! Also I really wish there were better Linux speech recognition options. -- Sincerely, Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers) OpenPGP_0xB288B55FFF9C22C1.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rawhide][approaching SONAME bump][gpgme] libqgpgme.so.7 -> libqgpgme.so.15
Hello, I am working on a gpgme update from 1.17.0 to 1.17.1 (bz#2061192). Since the update changes libqgpgme SONAME from libqgpgme.so.7 to libqgpgme.so.15, I requested the side tag f37-build-side-52334 and do a build in it: - commit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gpgme/c/b46b5db21813b39584eb1046239dfba7bb40571e?branch=rawhide - build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84893999 The list of dependent packages that possibly need to be rebuild in f37-build-side-52334 side tag is: $ dnf --repofrompath=frawhide, http://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/ --disablerepo='*' --enablerepo='frawhide' --refresh repoquery --whatdepends qgpgme Added frawhide repo from http://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/ frawhide 187 kB/s | 6.1 kB 00:00 isoimagewriter-0:0.8-8.fc36.x86_64 kdepim-addons-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kdepim-addons-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kf5-libkleo-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kf5-libkleo-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kf5-mailcommon-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kf5-mailcommon-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kf5-messagelib-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kf5-messagelib-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kget-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kget-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kleopatra-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kleopatra-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kleopatra-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kmail-account-wizard-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 kmail-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kmail-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.x86_64 qgpgme-devel-0:1.17.0-2.fc37.i686 qgpgme-devel-0:1.17.0-2.fc37.x86_64 trojita-0:0.7.0.1-0.13.20220117git266c757.fc36.x86_64 Eventually the list of libqgpgme.so.7 consumers (have no idea why there are only *.i686 on the list): $ dnf --repofrompath=frawhide, http://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/ --disablerepo='*' --enablerepo='frawhide' --refresh repoquery --whatdepends libqgpgme.so.7 Added frawhide repo from http://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/ frawhide 5.1 kB/s | 6.1 kB 00:01 kdepim-addons-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kf5-libkleo-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kf5-mailcommon-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kf5-messagelib-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kget-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kleopatra-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 kmail-libs-0:21.12.3-1.fc37.i686 qgpgme-devel-0:1.17.0-2.fc37.i686 The major difference between 1.17.0 and 1.17.1 is this commit: https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=gpgme.git;a=commit;h=ad3aabdd8a64156c7e3a75d695ae1ab2c4bec841 fixing the virtual table layout. I have a plea to maintainers of these packages (or proven packagers) to build their dependent packages against the f37-build-side-52334 side tag and then let me know when the build is ready. Thanks in advance Jiri ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Landing a larger-than-release change (distrusting SHA-1 signatures)
On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 7:40 PM Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
>
> Hello, community, I need your wisdom for planning a disruptive change.
>
> Fedora 28 had https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StrongCryptoSettings
> Fedora 33 had https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StrongCryptoSettings2
> I believe we should start planning
> for the next cryptographic defaults tightening.
> And next time it's gonna be even more disruptive because of SHA-1 (again).
>
> SHA-1 is a hash function from 1995,
> which collision resistance is no longer to be relied upon for security [1].
> At the same time, it's not like software has successfully migrated off it,
> not even close.
> It's not a question of "if" the world should migrate from it,
> sooner or later we must part ways with it.
> (Technically, some acute energy crisis or a collapse of civilization
> forever raising the costs of computations thousandfold would also do,
> but let's agree that migrating to a more modern hash is the way =)
>
> We've been disabling it in TLS, but its usage is much wider than TLS.
> The next agonizing step is to restrict its usage for signatures
> on the cryptographic libraries level, with openssl being the scariest one.
>
> Good news is, RHEL-9 is gonna lead the way
> and thus will take a lot of the hits first.
> Fedora doesn't have to pioneer it.
> Bad news is, Fedora has to follow suit someday anyway,
> and this brings me to how does one land such a change.
>
> ---
>
> Fedora is a large distribution with short release cycles, and
> the only realistic way to weed out its reliance on SHA-1 signatures
> from all of its numerous dark corners is to break them.
> Make creation and verification fail in default configuration.
> But it's unreasonable to just wait for, say, Fedora 37 branch-off
> and break it in Rawhide for Fedora 38.
> The fallout will just be too big.
>
> Maintainers need time to get bugs, look into them, think,
> analyze, react and test --- and that's just if it fails correctly!
> Unfortunately, it's not just that the error paths are as dusty as they get
> because the program counter has never set foot on them before.
> Some maintainers might even find that
> picking a different hash function renders their code non-interoperable,
> or even that protocols they implement have SHA-1 hardcoded in the spec.
> Or that everything is ready, but real world deployments need another decade.
> Or that on-disk formats are just hard to change and migrate.
> Took git years to migrate from SHA-1, and some others haven't even started.
> There are gonna be investigations, planning, exceptions, upstream changes,
> opt-out mechanisms, arguing, compromises, waiting out, all kinds of things.
> It's gonna be big. Too big for a single release cycle.
>
> ---
>
> But how does one land something and give the distribution
> the extra cycles needed to react? That's not really clear to me.
>
> An obvious thing is to announce it in one cycle and land in another one.
> The downsides are well-documented
> in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy":
> announcements are one weak measure, and then it's too late.
>
> A second scheme I can come up with is a "jump scare".
> Break the functionality in Fedora 37 Rawhide,
> make most of the affected people realize the depth of the problem,
> then unbreak it. Break again for Fedora 38 and never fix.
>
> This could also be extended into "let one stable release slide'.
> Break in 37 Rawhide, unbreak on branched off 37,
> but never in Rawhide.
>
> But these are all rather... crude?
> Sure there should be better ways,
> preferably something explored before.
> I'm all for pulling this tooth out smoothly,
> but I need hints on how to do it.
> I hope that together we can devise a better plan than these.
>
> So, how does one land a change that's bigger than a release cycle?
>
> [1] https://eprint.iacr.org/2020/014
"You know these lights in the theaters that go out gradually?
When the guy ve-ery slo-o-owly pulls the plug out?"
- a joke from my childhood.
Hello, it's been quiet for a while, and I've been busy
but kept thinking about all the useful feedback you folks gave me.
Not that it made me flesh out a perfect plan,
but hopefully at least a less terrible one.
Regarding smudging the change in time,
how does the following three-phaser sound?
Phase 1 ("Wake-up Call"):
In Fedora 37, disable SHA-1 signatures verification/creation
in FUTURE policy, i.e. opt-in only.
Come up with some logging solution;
I'd prefer something non-invasive like eBPF USDT probes [2],
but maybe even stderr could work, you've been moderately convincing.
(FUTURE change is *maybe* doable in F36, but not logging.)
Announce it as a system-wide change anyway for visibility,
call for Test Days to report which apps/workflows rely on SHA-1 signatures
either from the logs
or from opting into blocking operations and seeing what starts failing hard.
That'd have to be very actively called for to make an impact,
impact that'd mostly be
Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2022-03-29)
Meeting started at the wrong time and was cancelled because of lack of quorum. See you next week, one hour earlier. Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-29/fesco.2022-03-29-18.00.html Minutes (text): https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-29/fesco.2022-03-29-18.00.txt Log: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2022-03-29/fesco.2022-03-29-18.00.log.html Zbyszek ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Looking for provenpackager to update rapid-photo-downloader package
Greetings Fedora community, I am the developer of Rapid Photo Downloader. The package for it in Fedora is about two years old, and crashes during start-up under Python 3.10. As the subject says, I'm looking for a provenpackager to update the package. I'm posting this message here at the suggestion of a fellow PyQt developer who unlike myself is a Fedora expert. I filed a bug report last year but the maintainer has been unable to work on it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2031866 Meanwhile, two months ago Neal Gompa made this pull request to update it: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rapid-photo-downloader/pull-request/3 The current release is 0.9.33. Compared to the Fedora version, it requires a new package in Fedora: https://github.com/damonlynch/showinfilemanager Unfortunately I'm unable to volunteer my time because I managed to injure my hands while working on the code earlier this year. Serious typing injuries are not fun. :-( (I'm dictating this using a voice recognition program under Windows.) Fun fact: Fedora was the first distro to package Rapid Photo Downloader. ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Please use side tags for backwards-incompatible bumps of major packages, not buildroot overrides
Il 24/03/22 09:12, Petr Pisar ha scritto: > V Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 05:40:28PM +, Mattia Verga via devel napsal(a): >> So, now that we have side-tags to perform this kind of builds, does the >> buildroot override existence still make sense? Is there any use case >> that still requires BR overrides and cannot be done with side-tags? >> > I use overrides pretty extensively when populating new EPEL. If you have > a deep dependency tree and the packages are scattered among many maintainers, > it's much faster to use an override than to block depending packages for > a week. Side tags also do not work there because every new package would reset > the testing period. And if I'm not mistaken non-proven packagers cannot edit > other's updates. And I don't count communication overhead. People would end up > mixing various side tags and crosstagging builds. > Maybe BR overrides usage should be restricted only to users with special needs (users in provenpackager or releng groups), while "normal" users should be forced to take the side-tag way? Mattia ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #5: Fix detection of openssl library (bug #2069748)
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following: `` Fix detection of openssl library (bug #2069748) `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/5 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2069748] Fix functionality of Crypt::OpenSSL::Guess in Makefile.PL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069748 Michal Josef Spacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|wjhns...@hardakers.net |mspa...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069748 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #4: Fix detection of openssl library (bug #2069748)
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following: `` Fix detection of openssl library (bug #2069748) `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/4 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2069748] New: Fix functionality of Crypt::OpenSSL::Guess in Makefile.PL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069748 Bug ID: 2069748 Summary: Fix functionality of Crypt::OpenSSL::Guess in Makefile.PL Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10 Assignee: wjhns...@hardakers.net Reporter: mspa...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, wjhns...@hardakers.net Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Description of problem: Bad OpenSSL library detection via Crypt::OpenSSL::Guess in Makefile.PL Main issue is missing openssl tool which is required for guess Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.19-1.fc37 perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.19-1.fc36 How reproducible: Build package and look to build.log Actual results: + perl Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor Checking if your kit is complete... Looks good Warning: NAME must be a package name Warning: Guessing NAME [Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] from current directory name. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value $exec in -x at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 47. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value in subroutine entry at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 167. Use of uninitialized value $exec in -x at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Crypt/OpenSSL/Guess.pm line 21. Checking if your kit is complete... Expected results: Without warnings and with right detection of openssl library. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069748 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
> On Tue, 2022-03-29 at 14:38 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being > > > > > > proposed? > > > > > > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: > > > > > https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs > > > > > > > > For reference it's under scope where I mentioned the > > > > implementation > > > > and clearly forgot to add the link. > > > > > > > > > > This is pretty neat! What kind of stuff can be done with this > > > onboarding system? > > > > It's designed to be small and straight forward, do one job securely > > Where is the security part coming from ? > Does this require devices to be pre-registred/pre-seeded with some root > of trust? > Or is it TOFU ? > > Or something else? It uses a RoT/chain of trust, details are in the spec: https://fidoalliance.org/specs/FDO/FIDO-Device-Onboard-RD-v1.1-20211214/FIDO-device-onboard-spec-v1.1-rd-20211214.html ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Tue, 2022-03-29 at 14:38 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being > > > > > proposed? > > > > > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... > > > > > > > > Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: > > > > https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs > > > > > > For reference it's under scope where I mentioned the > > > implementation > > > and clearly forgot to add the link. > > > > > > > This is pretty neat! What kind of stuff can be done with this > > onboarding system? > > It's designed to be small and straight forward, do one job securely Where is the security part coming from ? Does this require devices to be pre-registred/pre-seeded with some root of trust? Or is it TOFU ? Or something else? > and succinctly. It's extendable by SIMs (Service Information Modules) > and ATM we have a small set of SIMs to do things like add a > user/ssh-key, add a file and run a command. We'll be adding > functionality like the ability to specify OTA update URLs. > ___ > 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 > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure -- Simo Sorce RHEL Crypto Team Red Hat, Inc ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 3:45 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:38 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > > > > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed? > > > > > > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: > > > > > https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs > > > > > > > > For reference it's under scope where I mentioned the implementation > > > > and clearly forgot to add the link. > > > > > > > > > > This is pretty neat! What kind of stuff can be done with this onboarding > > > system? > > > > It's designed to be small and straight forward, do one job securely > > and succinctly. It's extendable by SIMs (Service Information Modules) > > and ATM we have a small set of SIMs to do things like add a > > user/ssh-key, add a file and run a command. We'll be adding > > functionality like the ability to specify OTA update URLs. > > Just to check my understanding here, we can basically bootstrap users, > download a script, and run it? And in the future we can configure > RPM-OSTree update remotes? Basically yes, the OTA is intended to be generic as part of the standard so we're still working out how exactly to make that generic, hence why it's not there yet, but the other three are essentially correct. This is the first phase of getting it into Fedora IoT so interested parties can start to play. It's evolving and under active development and there will be new features coming that will likely be part of different Change proposals but are not part of this one. This is about the core functionality. ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting (2022-03-29)
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo meeting Tuesday at 17:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2022-03-29 17:00 UTC' Links to all issues to be discussed can be found at: https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda = Discussed and Voted in the Ticket = Nonresponsive maintainer: Samuel Rakitničan srakitnican https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2771 APPROVED (self-approved) Change proposal: Encourage Dropping Unused / Leaf Packages on i686 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2773 APPROVED (+4,0,-0) provenpackager for frantisekz https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2775 APPROVED (+8, 0, -0) provenpackager for tpopela https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2776 APPROVED (+12, 0, -0) = Followups = #2766 Change proposal: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2766 = New business = #2774 provenpackager for trodgers https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2774 = Open Floor = For more complete details, please visit each individual issue. The report of the agenda items can be found at https://pagure.io/fesco/report/meeting_agenda If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new issue at https://pagure.io/fesco, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:38 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed? > > > > > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... > > > > > > > > Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: > > > > https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs > > > > > > For reference it's under scope where I mentioned the implementation > > > and clearly forgot to add the link. > > > > > > > This is pretty neat! What kind of stuff can be done with this onboarding > > system? > > It's designed to be small and straight forward, do one job securely > and succinctly. It's extendable by SIMs (Service Information Modules) > and ATM we have a small set of SIMs to do things like add a > user/ssh-key, add a file and run a command. We'll be adding > functionality like the ability to specify OTA update URLs. Just to check my understanding here, we can basically bootstrap users, download a script, and run it? And in the future we can configure RPM-OSTree update remotes? -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
> > > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed? > > > > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... > > > > > > Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: > > > https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs > > > > For reference it's under scope where I mentioned the implementation > > and clearly forgot to add the link. > > > > This is pretty neat! What kind of stuff can be done with this onboarding > system? It's designed to be small and straight forward, do one job securely and succinctly. It's extendable by SIMs (Service Information Modules) and ATM we have a small set of SIMs to do things like add a user/ssh-key, add a file and run a command. We'll be adding functionality like the ability to specify OTA update URLs. ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:29 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 3:26 PM Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 3:25 PM Simo Sorce wrote: > > > > > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed? > > > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... > > > > Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: > > https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs > > For reference it's under scope where I mentioned the implementation > and clearly forgot to add the link. > This is pretty neat! What kind of stuff can be done with this onboarding system? -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Source-git SIG
Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Fedora Source-git SIG on 2022-03-30 from 14:30:00 to 15:30:00 GMT At meet.google.com/mic-otnv-kse The meeting will be about: Meeting of the Fedora source-git SIG Agenda: https://pagure.io/fedora-source-git/sig/issues?tags=meeting=Open SIG Info: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git Source: https://calendar.fedoraproject.org//meeting/10164/ ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 3:26 PM Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 3:25 PM Simo Sorce wrote: > > > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed? > > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... > > Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: > https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs For reference it's under scope where I mentioned the implementation and clearly forgot to add the link. > > On Tue, 2022-03-29 at 09:50 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FIDODeviceOnboarding > > > > > > == Summary == > > > Package and enable the > > > [https://fidoalliance.org/fido-alliance-creates-new-onboarding-standard-to-secure-internet-of-things-iot/ > > > FIDO Device Onboarding] software stack for Zero Touch Onboarding on > > > Fedora IoT. > > > > > > == Owner == > > > * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] > > > * Email: [mailto:pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org| > > > pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org] > > > * Name: [[User:runcom| Antonio Murdaca]] > > > * Email: [mailto:amurd...@redhat.com| amurd...@redhat.com] > > > > > > > > > == Detailed Description == > > > > > > The ability for an IoT or Edge device to be plugged in and > > > automatically onboard itself with zero user interaction is critical to > > > be able to scale IoT/Edge to millions of devices. To do this in a > > > secure way with open standards across the industry is even more > > > critical. The FIDO IoT working group has worked with leaders in the > > > silicon industry such as Intel and Arm to produce the FIDO Device > > > onboarding spec which allows a device credential, a root and chain of > > > trust to ensure the secure onboarding of a device without the need of > > > stored credentials. > > > > > > == Benefit to Fedora == > > > > > > The benefit to Fedora is to allow the IoT Edition to demonstrate the > > > use of leading edge open industry protocols for onboarding IoT and > > > Edge devices. > > > > > > == Scope == > > > * Proposal owners: > > > ** Package the rust implementation of the FIDO device onboarding stack > > > including client, rendezvous service, owner onboarding service and > > > prototype manufacturing service. > > > ** Enable the client service by default for IoT Edition > > > ** Add the client service to the IoT Edition deliverables > > > > > > * Other developers: > > > ** No impact > > > > > > * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10720 #10720] > > > * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > > * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) > > > > > > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > > > There is no upgrade impact. FIDO FDO is a single use onboarding > > > protocol and will not impact existing IoT user systems. > > > > > > == How To Test == > > > > > > * Test with FDO all-in-one services. Documentation will be available > > > for testing. > > > > > > == User Experience == > > > > > > No impact to non IoT Edition users. > > > > > > The user experience for the IoT Edition is still evolving and this > > > will be updated as things fall into place later in Spring and early > > > Summer 2022. > > > > > > == Dependencies == > > > N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > > > > > == Contingency Plan == > > > > > > * Contingency mechanism: Not shipping FDO as a package in Fedora or > > > including it in the IoT Edition > > > * Contingency deadline: GA > > > * Blocks release? No. > > > * Blocks product? No. > > > > > > == Documentation == > > > N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > > > > > == Release Notes == > > > Fedora IoT Edition supports the FIDO Device Onboarding 1.1 > > > specification for zero touch onboarding of IoT and Edge devices. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Ben Cotton > > > He / Him / His > > > Fedora Program Manager > > > Red Hat > > > TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis > > > ___ > > > 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 > > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > > > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > > > -- > > Simo Sorce > > RHEL Crypto Team > > Red Hat, Inc > > > > > > > > ___ > > 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 > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > >
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 3:25 PM Simo Sorce wrote: > > Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed? > The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... Yes, that was an oversight, for reference: https://github.com/fedora-iot/fido-device-onboard-rs > On Tue, 2022-03-29 at 09:50 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FIDODeviceOnboarding > > > > == Summary == > > Package and enable the > > [https://fidoalliance.org/fido-alliance-creates-new-onboarding-standard-to-secure-internet-of-things-iot/ > > FIDO Device Onboarding] software stack for Zero Touch Onboarding on > > Fedora IoT. > > > > == Owner == > > * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] > > * Email: [mailto:pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org| pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org] > > * Name: [[User:runcom| Antonio Murdaca]] > > * Email: [mailto:amurd...@redhat.com| amurd...@redhat.com] > > > > > > == Detailed Description == > > > > The ability for an IoT or Edge device to be plugged in and > > automatically onboard itself with zero user interaction is critical to > > be able to scale IoT/Edge to millions of devices. To do this in a > > secure way with open standards across the industry is even more > > critical. The FIDO IoT working group has worked with leaders in the > > silicon industry such as Intel and Arm to produce the FIDO Device > > onboarding spec which allows a device credential, a root and chain of > > trust to ensure the secure onboarding of a device without the need of > > stored credentials. > > > > == Benefit to Fedora == > > > > The benefit to Fedora is to allow the IoT Edition to demonstrate the > > use of leading edge open industry protocols for onboarding IoT and > > Edge devices. > > > > == Scope == > > * Proposal owners: > > ** Package the rust implementation of the FIDO device onboarding stack > > including client, rendezvous service, owner onboarding service and > > prototype manufacturing service. > > ** Enable the client service by default for IoT Edition > > ** Add the client service to the IoT Edition deliverables > > > > * Other developers: > > ** No impact > > > > * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10720 #10720] > > * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) > > > > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > > There is no upgrade impact. FIDO FDO is a single use onboarding > > protocol and will not impact existing IoT user systems. > > > > == How To Test == > > > > * Test with FDO all-in-one services. Documentation will be available > > for testing. > > > > == User Experience == > > > > No impact to non IoT Edition users. > > > > The user experience for the IoT Edition is still evolving and this > > will be updated as things fall into place later in Spring and early > > Summer 2022. > > > > == Dependencies == > > N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > > > == Contingency Plan == > > > > * Contingency mechanism: Not shipping FDO as a package in Fedora or > > including it in the IoT Edition > > * Contingency deadline: GA > > * Blocks release? No. > > * Blocks product? No. > > > > == Documentation == > > N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > > > == Release Notes == > > Fedora IoT Edition supports the FIDO Device Onboarding 1.1 > > specification for zero touch onboarding of IoT and Edge devices. > > > > > > -- > > Ben Cotton > > He / Him / His > > Fedora Program Manager > > Red Hat > > TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis > > ___ > > 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 > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > -- > Simo Sorce > RHEL Crypto Team > Red Hat, Inc > > > > ___ > 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 > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ 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:
F37 Change: Build Fedora IoT Artifacts with osbuild (Self-Contained Change)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/IoTArtifactsWithOSBuild == Summary == Build the key Fedora IoT artifacts such as the raw images and the traditional anaconda installer with osbuild. == Owner == * Name: [[User:pwhalen| Paul Whalen]] * Email: [mailto:pwha...@redhat.com| pwha...@redhat.com] * Name: [[User:obudai| Ondřej Budai]] * Email: [mailto:obu...@redhat.com| ond...@budai.cz] * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] * Email: [mailto:pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org| pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org] == Detailed Description == The intention for Fedora IoT was to always use osbuild for building release artifacts but it wasn't initially ready to do that. With the work being done as part of "RHEL for Edge" the Fedora IoT deliverables now sadly trail behind the features and functionality of the downstream. This will move all existing deliverable artifacts over to being created with osbuild which will allow us to bring Fedora IoT back to being the true upstream for RHEL for Edge and allow us to use the leading edge that is Fedora to continue to innovate in the Edge and IoT space. == Benefit to Fedora == The benefit to Fedora is to allow the IoT Edition to go back to being the true upstream for RHEL for Edge and for Fedora to be where all the cool new innovation on the edge is being done. == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Test building IoT artifacts with osbuild to ensure they're consistent with the existing ones ** Update to Fedora IoT profiles in osbuild ** Update to pungi configs to move over the artefact creation * Other developers: ** No impact * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10722 #10722] * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) == Upgrade/compatibility impact == There is no upgrade impact. Existing IoT users will upgrade as before as only new release artifacts will use the new mechanism. The deployment of the artifacts should not initially change with them being created with osbuild. There may well be new enhancements in the future but those are out of scope of this change. == How To Test == * All Fedora IoT artifacts should be consumable and testable as before. == User Experience == There should be no IoT users, there is no impact to non IoT Edition users. == Dependencies == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Roll back to the current means of generating images. * Contingency deadline: Beta * Blocks release? No. * Blocks product? No. == Documentation == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Release Notes == N/A -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora CoreOS next stream rebased to Fedora Linux 36
Fedora Linux 36 Beta was released today [1]. Our Fedora CoreOS `next` stream has been migrated to Fedora Linux 36 content. Existing nodes on the `next` stream will update as normal over the following days. In addition to the Fedora Project accepted changes for Fedora 36 [2], there are a few Fedora CoreOS recent announcements to consider with this update: - Fedora CoreOS moving to podman v4 [3] - Fedora CoreOS moving to iptables-nft [4] Please test out the `next` stream over the coming month and report any issues in our issue tracker [5]. Thank you to everyone helping find issues by running the `next` stream! The Fedora CoreOS Team [1] https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-36-beta/ [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/36/ChangeSet [3] https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-coreos-moving-to-podman-v4/37303/2 [4] https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-coreos-moving-to-iptables-nft/37302/2 [5] https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
Can we get a link to the actual software stack being proposed? The link in this proposal is a marketing post ... On Tue, 2022-03-29 at 09:50 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FIDODeviceOnboarding > > == Summary == > Package and enable the > [https://fidoalliance.org/fido-alliance-creates-new-onboarding-standard-to-secure-internet-of-things-iot/ > FIDO Device Onboarding] software stack for Zero Touch Onboarding on > Fedora IoT. > > == Owner == > * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] > * Email: [mailto:pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org| pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org] > * Name: [[User:runcom| Antonio Murdaca]] > * Email: [mailto:amurd...@redhat.com| amurd...@redhat.com] > > > == Detailed Description == > > The ability for an IoT or Edge device to be plugged in and > automatically onboard itself with zero user interaction is critical to > be able to scale IoT/Edge to millions of devices. To do this in a > secure way with open standards across the industry is even more > critical. The FIDO IoT working group has worked with leaders in the > silicon industry such as Intel and Arm to produce the FIDO Device > onboarding spec which allows a device credential, a root and chain of > trust to ensure the secure onboarding of a device without the need of > stored credentials. > > == Benefit to Fedora == > > The benefit to Fedora is to allow the IoT Edition to demonstrate the > use of leading edge open industry protocols for onboarding IoT and > Edge devices. > > == Scope == > * Proposal owners: > ** Package the rust implementation of the FIDO device onboarding stack > including client, rendezvous service, owner onboarding service and > prototype manufacturing service. > ** Enable the client service by default for IoT Edition > ** Add the client service to the IoT Edition deliverables > > * Other developers: > ** No impact > > * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10720 #10720] > * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) > * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) > > == Upgrade/compatibility impact == > There is no upgrade impact. FIDO FDO is a single use onboarding > protocol and will not impact existing IoT user systems. > > == How To Test == > > * Test with FDO all-in-one services. Documentation will be available > for testing. > > == User Experience == > > No impact to non IoT Edition users. > > The user experience for the IoT Edition is still evolving and this > will be updated as things fall into place later in Spring and early > Summer 2022. > > == Dependencies == > N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > == Contingency Plan == > > * Contingency mechanism: Not shipping FDO as a package in Fedora or > including it in the IoT Edition > * Contingency deadline: GA > * Blocks release? No. > * Blocks product? No. > > == Documentation == > N/A (not a System Wide Change) > > == Release Notes == > Fedora IoT Edition supports the FIDO Device Onboarding 1.1 > specification for zero touch onboarding of IoT and Edge devices. > > > -- > Ben Cotton > He / Him / His > Fedora Program Manager > Red Hat > TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis > ___ > 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 > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure -- Simo Sorce RHEL Crypto Team Red Hat, Inc ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
F37 Change: Build Fedora IoT Artifacts with osbuild (Self-Contained Change)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/IoTArtifactsWithOSBuild == Summary == Build the key Fedora IoT artifacts such as the raw images and the traditional anaconda installer with osbuild. == Owner == * Name: [[User:pwhalen| Paul Whalen]] * Email: [mailto:pwha...@redhat.com| pwha...@redhat.com] * Name: [[User:obudai| Ondřej Budai]] * Email: [mailto:obu...@redhat.com| ond...@budai.cz] * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] * Email: [mailto:pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org| pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org] == Detailed Description == The intention for Fedora IoT was to always use osbuild for building release artifacts but it wasn't initially ready to do that. With the work being done as part of "RHEL for Edge" the Fedora IoT deliverables now sadly trail behind the features and functionality of the downstream. This will move all existing deliverable artifacts over to being created with osbuild which will allow us to bring Fedora IoT back to being the true upstream for RHEL for Edge and allow us to use the leading edge that is Fedora to continue to innovate in the Edge and IoT space. == Benefit to Fedora == The benefit to Fedora is to allow the IoT Edition to go back to being the true upstream for RHEL for Edge and for Fedora to be where all the cool new innovation on the edge is being done. == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Test building IoT artifacts with osbuild to ensure they're consistent with the existing ones ** Update to Fedora IoT profiles in osbuild ** Update to pungi configs to move over the artefact creation * Other developers: ** No impact * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10722 #10722] * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) == Upgrade/compatibility impact == There is no upgrade impact. Existing IoT users will upgrade as before as only new release artifacts will use the new mechanism. The deployment of the artifacts should not initially change with them being created with osbuild. There may well be new enhancements in the future but those are out of scope of this change. == How To Test == * All Fedora IoT artifacts should be consumable and testable as before. == User Experience == There should be no IoT users, there is no impact to non IoT Edition users. == Dependencies == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Roll back to the current means of generating images. * Contingency deadline: Beta * Blocks release? No. * Blocks product? No. == Documentation == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Release Notes == N/A -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora 36 Beta Release Announcement
Fedora Linux 36 Beta Released -- The Fedora Project is pleased to announce the immediate availability of Fedora 36 Beta, the next step towards our planned Fedora 36 release at the end of April. Download the prerelease from our Get Fedora site: * Get Fedora 36 Beta Workstation: https://getfedora.org/workstation/download/ * Get Fedora 36 Beta Server: https://getfedora.org/server/download/ * Get Fedora 36 IoT: https://getfedora.org/iot/download/ Or, check out one of our popular variants, including KDE Plasma, Xfce, and other desktop environments, as well as images for ARM devices: * Get Fedora 36 Beta Spins: https://spins.fedoraproject.org/prerelease * Get Fedora 36 Beta Labs: https://labs.fedoraproject.org/prerelease * Get Fedora 36 Beta ARM: https://arm.fedoraproject.org/prerelease ## Beta Release Highlights * Fedora 36 Workstation Beta includes GNOME 42 * Update of programming languages and libraries: LXQt 1.0, Golang 1.18, Ruby 3.1 For more details about the release, read the full announcement at * https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-36-beta/ or look for the prerelease pages in the download sections at * https://getfedora.org/ Since this is a Beta release, we expect that you may encounter bugs or missing features. To report issues encountered during testing, contact the Fedora QA team via the t...@lists.fedoraproject.org mailing list or in #fedora-qa on Libera Chat or the #qa:fedoraproject.org Matrix room. Regards, Tomas Hrcka Fedora Release Engineering. ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora 36 Beta Release Announcement
Fedora Linux 36 Beta Released -- The Fedora Project is pleased to announce the immediate availability of Fedora 36 Beta, the next step towards our planned Fedora 36 release at the end of April. Download the prerelease from our Get Fedora site: * Get Fedora 36 Beta Workstation: https://getfedora.org/workstation/download/ * Get Fedora 36 Beta Server: https://getfedora.org/server/download/ * Get Fedora 36 IoT: https://getfedora.org/iot/download/ Or, check out one of our popular variants, including KDE Plasma, Xfce, and other desktop environments, as well as images for ARM devices: * Get Fedora 36 Beta Spins: https://spins.fedoraproject.org/prerelease * Get Fedora 36 Beta Labs: https://labs.fedoraproject.org/prerelease * Get Fedora 36 Beta ARM: https://arm.fedoraproject.org/prerelease ## Beta Release Highlights * Fedora 36 Workstation Beta includes GNOME 42 * Update of programming languages and libraries: LXQt 1.0, Golang 1.18, Ruby 3.1 For more details about the release, read the full announcement at * https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-36-beta/ or look for the prerelease pages in the download sections at * https://getfedora.org/ Since this is a Beta release, we expect that you may encounter bugs or missing features. To report issues encountered during testing, contact the Fedora QA team via the t...@lists.fedoraproject.org mailing list or in #fedora-qa on Libera Chat or the #qa:fedoraproject.org Matrix room. Regards, Tomas Hrcka Fedora Release Engineering. ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FIDODeviceOnboarding == Summary == Package and enable the [https://fidoalliance.org/fido-alliance-creates-new-onboarding-standard-to-secure-internet-of-things-iot/ FIDO Device Onboarding] software stack for Zero Touch Onboarding on Fedora IoT. == Owner == * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] * Email: [mailto:pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org| pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org] * Name: [[User:runcom| Antonio Murdaca]] * Email: [mailto:amurd...@redhat.com| amurd...@redhat.com] == Detailed Description == The ability for an IoT or Edge device to be plugged in and automatically onboard itself with zero user interaction is critical to be able to scale IoT/Edge to millions of devices. To do this in a secure way with open standards across the industry is even more critical. The FIDO IoT working group has worked with leaders in the silicon industry such as Intel and Arm to produce the FIDO Device onboarding spec which allows a device credential, a root and chain of trust to ensure the secure onboarding of a device without the need of stored credentials. == Benefit to Fedora == The benefit to Fedora is to allow the IoT Edition to demonstrate the use of leading edge open industry protocols for onboarding IoT and Edge devices. == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Package the rust implementation of the FIDO device onboarding stack including client, rendezvous service, owner onboarding service and prototype manufacturing service. ** Enable the client service by default for IoT Edition ** Add the client service to the IoT Edition deliverables * Other developers: ** No impact * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10720 #10720] * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) == Upgrade/compatibility impact == There is no upgrade impact. FIDO FDO is a single use onboarding protocol and will not impact existing IoT user systems. == How To Test == * Test with FDO all-in-one services. Documentation will be available for testing. == User Experience == No impact to non IoT Edition users. The user experience for the IoT Edition is still evolving and this will be updated as things fall into place later in Spring and early Summer 2022. == Dependencies == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Not shipping FDO as a package in Fedora or including it in the IoT Edition * Contingency deadline: GA * Blocks release? No. * Blocks product? No. == Documentation == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Release Notes == Fedora IoT Edition supports the FIDO Device Onboarding 1.1 specification for zero touch onboarding of IoT and Edge devices. -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
F37 Change: Support FIDO Device Onboarding (Self-Contained Change proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FIDODeviceOnboarding == Summary == Package and enable the [https://fidoalliance.org/fido-alliance-creates-new-onboarding-standard-to-secure-internet-of-things-iot/ FIDO Device Onboarding] software stack for Zero Touch Onboarding on Fedora IoT. == Owner == * Name: [[User:pbrobinson| Peter Robinson]] * Email: [mailto:pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org| pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org] * Name: [[User:runcom| Antonio Murdaca]] * Email: [mailto:amurd...@redhat.com| amurd...@redhat.com] == Detailed Description == The ability for an IoT or Edge device to be plugged in and automatically onboard itself with zero user interaction is critical to be able to scale IoT/Edge to millions of devices. To do this in a secure way with open standards across the industry is even more critical. The FIDO IoT working group has worked with leaders in the silicon industry such as Intel and Arm to produce the FIDO Device onboarding spec which allows a device credential, a root and chain of trust to ensure the secure onboarding of a device without the need of stored credentials. == Benefit to Fedora == The benefit to Fedora is to allow the IoT Edition to demonstrate the use of leading edge open industry protocols for onboarding IoT and Edge devices. == Scope == * Proposal owners: ** Package the rust implementation of the FIDO device onboarding stack including client, rendezvous service, owner onboarding service and prototype manufacturing service. ** Enable the client service by default for IoT Edition ** Add the client service to the IoT Edition deliverables * Other developers: ** No impact * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10720 #10720] * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) == Upgrade/compatibility impact == There is no upgrade impact. FIDO FDO is a single use onboarding protocol and will not impact existing IoT user systems. == How To Test == * Test with FDO all-in-one services. Documentation will be available for testing. == User Experience == No impact to non IoT Edition users. The user experience for the IoT Edition is still evolving and this will be updated as things fall into place later in Spring and early Summer 2022. == Dependencies == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Not shipping FDO as a package in Fedora or including it in the IoT Edition * Contingency deadline: GA * Blocks release? No. * Blocks product? No. == Documentation == N/A (not a System Wide Change) == Release Notes == Fedora IoT Edition supports the FIDO Device Onboarding 1.1 specification for zero touch onboarding of IoT and Edge devices. -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064808] Update perl to 5.34.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(p...@city-fan.org | |) | --- Comment #11 from Paul Howarth --- @mspa...@redhat.com perl-PAR-Packer is done, I have kicked off polymake build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84887018 $ koji list-tagged f35-build-side-52326 Build Tag Built by perl-5.34.1-486.fc35 f35-build-side-52326 mspacek perl-PAR-Packer-1.052-5.fc35 f35-build-side-52326 pghmcfc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064808] Update perl to 5.34.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 --- Comment #10 from Michal Josef Spacek --- Perl build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84883465 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2064808] Update perl to 5.34.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 Michal Josef Spacek changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(p...@city-fan.org ||) --- Comment #9 from Michal Josef Spacek --- @p...@city-fan.org There is side tag 'f35-build-side-52326' for f35 Perl 5.34.1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064808 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2069471] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.19 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069471 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-703ae91b32 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-703ae91b32 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069471 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2069430] F36FailsToInstall: perl-PPIx-Regexp
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069430 Michal Josef Spacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Michal Josef Spacek --- I think that best way is wait to 5.34.1 in f36. There were my mistake with build (without side-tag). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069430 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl] PR #5: 5.34.1 bump
mspacek merged a pull-request against the project: `perl` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 5.34.1 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/5 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #3: 0.19 bump
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 0.19 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/3 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #2: 0.19 bump
jplesnik merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following. Merged pull-request: `` 0.19 bump `` https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/2 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #3: 0.19 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following: `` 0.19 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/3 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10] PR #2: 0.19 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10` that you are following: `` 0.19 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10/pull-request/2 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 2069471] perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10-0.19 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069471 Michal Josef Spacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mspa...@redhat.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Assignee|wjhns...@hardakers.net |mspa...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Michal Josef Spacek --- Changes: 0.19 Mon Mar 28 16:37:16 PDT 2022 - Fix #120728 (thanks Michal Josef Špaček) Fixed two segfaults, error messages, diacritics in Changes file For f36, rawhide -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2069471 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Troubleshooting building Swift on Fedora, take 2; assembly language is not my friend
On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 16:43 -0500, Ron Olson wrote: > Hey all- > I’m unable to build Swift on Fedora 36 and Rawhide while it does > build on F35. I’ve been able to condense the entire issue down to the > following sample code that demonstrates the problem: > nothing.S: > #define ASM_TYPE_FUNCTION(symbol) .type symbol, %function > #define ASM_SIZE(symbol) .size symbol, .-symbol > #define ASM_SYMBOL(symbol) symbol > #define ASM_WRAPPER_NAME(symbol) _interceptor##symbol > .comm _ZN14__interception10real_vforkE,8,8 > .globl ASM_WRAPPER_NAME(vfork) > ASM_TYPE_FUNCTION(ASM_WRAPPER_NAME(vfork)) > ASM_WRAPPER_NAME(vfork): > // Commenting out the line below makes it work > call *_ZN14__interception10real_vforkE(%rip) > ASM_SIZE(vfork) > And compiling this code with: > clang++ -fPIC -shared ./nothing.S > Results in the error: > /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/fun-1b3a0d.o: warning: relocation against > _ZN14__interception10real_vforkE' in read-only section .text' > /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/fun-1b3a0d.o: relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against > symbol `_ZN14__interception10real_vforkE' can not be used when making > a shared object; recompile with -fPIC > /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: bad value https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304277#c3 "relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against undefined symbol" happens when LDFLAGS are set with hardening and CFLAGS not . maybe is an effect of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SetBuildFlagsBuildCheck have you tried %undefine _auto_set_build_flags ? > The issue is that I’m explicitly passing -fPIC but it seems to either > be ignored or overridden somehow. I’m not well versed on assembly to > make any kind of educated guess about what might be the > problem/solution so I’m hoping someone more familiar might be able to > shed some light on the issue. > Thanks! > Ron > ___ > 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 > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure -- Sérgio M. B. ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Non-responsive maintainer check for szeth
Hi Ivan, Thanks for replying and starting to work on the issue. I see that you built for F36 but still no build for rawhide. Please remember to build it for rawhide as well! Best, Fale On Mon, Mar 28, 2022, at 15:50, Ivan Savciuc wrote: > Hi Fabio, > > Thanks for reaching out, by some reason all the bugzile emails were filtered > out and I completely missed it (will do something about it now). > > I just pushed the update to Bodhi, but have no clues how to give permissions > to the golang-sig. > > Have a great day, > Ivan > > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 10:55 AM Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote: >> __ >> Sorry, adding in CC the maintainer. >> >> On Sat, Mar 26, 2022, at 09:49, Fabio Alessandro Locati wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> As per: >>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/ >>> Bug link: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068720 >>> >>> Does anyone know how to reach Ivan Savciuc (szeth)? >>> I've opened a bug with NEEDINFO more than a week ago >>> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2065054) but there is no >>> reply, and it seems like szeth have no activity for more than a month. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Fale >>> -- >>> Fabio Alessandro Locati >>> fale.io >>> >>> ___ >>> 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 >>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: >>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure >>> >> >> -- >> Fabio Alessandro Locati >> fale.io -- Fabio Alessandro Locati fale.io ___ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[rpms/perl] PR #5: 5.34.1 bump
mspacek opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl` that you are following: `` 5.34.1 bump `` To reply, visit the link below https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl/pull-request/5 ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-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/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Fedora-Cloud-35-20220329.0 compose check report
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-35-20220327.0): ID: 1202012 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202012 ID: 1202021 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1202021 Passed openQA tests: 7/8 (x86_64), 7/8 (aarch64) -- 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.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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Orphaned packages (incl. go-rpm-macros) looking for new maintainers
I already claimed go-rpm-macros. On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 10:53 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they > are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure > that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life > > Note: If you received this mail directly you (co)maintain one of the affected > packages or a package that depends on one. Please adopt the affected package > or > retire your depending package to avoid broken dependencies, otherwise your > package will fail to install and/or build when the affected package gets > retired. > > Request package ownership via the *Take* button in he left column on > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ > > Full report available at: > https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2022-03-28.txt > grep it for your FAS username and follow the dependency chain. > > For human readable dependency chains, > see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/ > For all orphaned packages, > see https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/orphan > > Package (co)maintainers Status > Change > > augeas-vala orphan 4 weeks ago > beanstalk-client orphan 3 weeks ago > gela-asis orphan, reznik 1 weeks ago > go-rpm-macros eclipseo, go-sig, jcajka,0 weeks ago >orphan, qulogic > gocl orphan 4 weeks ago > golang-github-influxdata- go-sig, orphan 0 weeks ago > influxdb > golang-github-mdlayher-wifi go-sig, orphan 2 weeks ago > lua-ldap orphan 3 weeks ago > mcrouter dcavalca, filbranden, orphan 0 weeks ago > python-aiohttp-cors orphan, python-sig 3 weeks ago > python-aiohttp-negotiate orphan 3 weeks ago > python-fastimport orphan 3 weeks ago > python-hkdf orphan 4 weeks ago > python-lrparsing orphan 3 weeks ago > python-magic-wormhole orphan 4 weeks ago > python-magic-wormhole-mailbox-orphan 4 weeks ago > server > python-magic-wormhole-transit-orphan 4 weeks ago > relay > python-ofxparse orphan 3 weeks ago > python-plyvel orphan 3 weeks ago > python-pystalkorphan 3 weeks ago > python-spake2 orphan 4 weeks ago > python-txtorcon orphan 4 weeks ago > qcommandline orphan 3 weeks ago > qt5-qtcanvas3dkde-sig, orphan 1 weeks ago > qt5-qtenginio kde-sig, lupinix, orphan 1 weeks ago > rubygem-database_cleaner orphan 5 weeks ago > rust-diffus orphan, rust-sig 1 weeks ago > rust-diffus-deriveorphan, rust-sig 1 weeks ago > rust-newsblur_api orphan, rust-sig 1 weeks ago > rust-opml orphan, rust-sig 1 weeks ago > rust-xmltree orphan, rust-sig 1 weeks ago > sems orphan 1 weeks ago > yecht orphan 2 weeks ago > > The following packages require above mentioned packages: > Depending on: go-rpm-macros (1957), status change: 2022-03-22 (0 weeks ago) > Too many dependencies for go-rpm-macros, not all listed here > See https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/orphans-2022-03-28.txt > > Depending on: golang-github-mdlayher-wifi (1), status change: 2022-03-11 (2 > weeks ago) > golang-github-prometheus-node-exporter (maintained by: eclipseo, > go-sig) > golang-github-prometheus-node-exporter-1.3.1-6.fc36.src > requires > golang(github.com/mdlayher/wifi) = 0-0.12.20200729git84f0b94.fc36 > > golang-github-prometheus-node-exporter-devel-1.3.1-6.fc36.noarch requires > golang(github.com/mdlayher/wifi) = 0-0.12.20200729git84f0b94.fc36 > > Depending on: python-aiohttp-cors (1), status change: 2022-03-02 (3 weeks ago) > gns3-server (maintained by:
