[Test-Announce] 2022-02-21 @ 17:00 UTC - Fedora 36 Blocker Review Meeting

# F36 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2022-02-21 # Time: 17:00 UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.libera.chat Hi folks! We have 4 proposed Beta blockers and 8 proposed Final blockers to review, so let's have a review meeting on Monday. Note I will not be around to lead it, Frantisek

Self Introduction: Yunmei Li

Hi All: I am Yunmei Li and I am working at Zilliz as a DevOps engineer. I am an active contributor to the Milvus Vector Database project. Zilliz is an open-source software company dedicated to unstruc___ devel mailing list --

[Bug 2055982] New: perl-Sereal-Encoder-4.021 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055982 Bug ID: 2055982 Summary: perl-Sereal-Encoder-4.021 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Sereal-Encoder Keywords: FutureFeature,

Fedora-Rawhide-20220217.n.1 compose check report

(same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220217.n.0): ID: 1134484 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 base_update_cli@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1134484 ID: 1134728 Test: aarch64 universal upgrade_realmd_client@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1134728

[Bug 2055977] New: perl-Sereal-4.021 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055977 Bug ID: 2055977 Summary: perl-Sereal-4.021 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Sereal Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

Fedora-36-20220217.n.1 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 14/229 (x86_64), 17/161 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220216.n.0): ID: 1133953 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1133953 ID: 1133974 Test: x86_64

[Bug 2055954] perl-Business-ISSN-1.005 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055954 --- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- Scratch build failed. Details bellow: GenericError: File upload failed: cli-build/1645152516.071939.oDBfJsdM/perl-Business-ISSN-1.005-1.fc34.src.rpm Traceback: File

[Bug 2055954] New: perl-Business-ISSN-1.005 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055954 Bug ID: 2055954 Summary: perl-Business-ISSN-1.005 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Business-ISSN Keywords: FutureFeature,

[Bug 2055412] perl-File-Find-utf8-0.014 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055412 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-b7f8b51ef2 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing: Age URL 5 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-ba28d36d05 radare2-5.6.0-1.el8 0 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-f2ae791306 xpra-4.3.2-1.el8 The following builds have been

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220217.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220217.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220217.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:7 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 6 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 118 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 10.59 MiB Size of dropped packages:0

[Bug 2052036] perl-experimental-0.027 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2052036 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-experimental-0.027-1.f |perl-experimental-0.027-1.f

[Bug 2055942] New: perl-Test-PostgreSQL-1.29 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055942 Bug ID: 2055942 Summary: perl-Test-PostgreSQL-1.29 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Test-PostgreSQL Keywords: FutureFeature,

[Bug 2055412] perl-File-Find-utf8-0.014 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055412 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #4 from

[Bug 2052036] perl-experimental-0.027 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2052036 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In

[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2022-02-21 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting on Monday. It's a public holiday where I live, so I won't be around to run the meeting. I'll plan for one the following week. If you think there is something important to discuss this week, you can volunteer to run the meeting by sending out an

[Bug 2055936] New: perl-XML-Generator-1.08 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055936 Bug ID: 2055936 Summary: perl-XML-Generator-1.08 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-XML-Generator Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

why opencv Python package doesn't provide python3dist(opencv-python) ?

Hi, Can someone help me ? https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/opencv/blob/rawhide/f/opencv.spec have py_provides but https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2054951 Thank you . -- Sérgio M. B. ___ python-devel mailing list --

Fedora 36 compose report: 20220217.n.1 changes

OLD: Fedora-36-20220216.n.0 NEW: Fedora-36-20220217.n.1 = SUMMARY = Added images:16 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 13 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 187 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 32.21 MiB Size of dropped packages:0 B Size

[Bug 2055608] Perl 5.32.1 Incorrectly Processes Hash Key Existence in Two-Dimensional Hashes

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055608 --- Comment #3 from BZ --- Thanks for that. Even though semantically it seems like it SHOULD be a bug, for better or worse at least it's not something unexpected. I just didn't find any reference to that behavior in the documents I checked.

Re: F37 Change: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Thu, 2022-02-17 at 15:29 -0500, Owen Taylor wrote: > > I just tried this, actually, for giggles. Two reasons it's a non- > > starter: it prompts for the root password, not for my user password (my > > user is an 'admin' so far as sudo etc. are concerned, but apparently > > not an 'admin' so

Re: Review requests

On 17.02.22 18:36, Mattia Verga via devel wrote: Il 15/02/22 11:15, Sandro Mani ha scritto: Hi I've submitted the two packages which are missing dependencies for review, which I'd appreciate if someone could review, as mingw-python-requests and mingw-python-OWSLib are currently

Fedora-Rawhide-20220217.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 24 of 43 required tests failed, 17 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 106/231 (x86_64), 64/161 (aarch64) New failures

Re: F37 Change: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:17:41 -0800 Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 12:12 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/polkit_recommends_pkla_pkexec > > > > == Summary == > > Split `pkexec` from the polkit package and make it a recommended > > only

Re: F37 Change: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:14 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/polkit_recommends_pkla_pkexec > [..] > `pkexec` and `pkla-compat` > ([https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/polkit-pkla-compat package]) are > legacy tools that are no longer needed on a desktop and increase

Re: F37 Change: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 6:01:48 PM EST Adam Williamson wrote: > I just tried this, actually, for giggles. Two reasons it's a non- > starter: it prompts for the root password, not for my user password > (my user is an 'admin' so far as sudo etc. are concerned, but > apparently not an

Re: F37 Change: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 2:28 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 13:55 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:38 PM Lennart Poettering > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mi, 16.02.22 12:12, Ben Cotton (bcot...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > > > > `pkexec` and `pkla-compat` > >

Re: F37 Change: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 13:55 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:38 PM Lennart Poettering > wrote: > > > > On Mi, 16.02.22 12:12, Ben Cotton (bcot...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > > `pkexec` and `pkla-compat` > > > ([https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/polkit-pkla-compat package])

Re: strange ppc64le failures

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 20:06:48 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote: > * Peter Lemenkov: > > > I've got a very suspiciously looking compilation issues while building > > PSPP package. All other arches are good except for ppc64le. Just grep > > for "error:" in the log attached. > > > > *

Re: strange ppc64le failures

* Peter Lemenkov: > I've got a very suspiciously looking compilation issues while building > PSPP package. All other arches are good except for ppc64le. Just grep > for "error:" in the log attached. > > * https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=82939449 > *

Fedora-Cloud-34-20220217.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (aarch64), 1/8 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20220216.0): ID: 1133009 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi URL:

Fedora-Cloud-35-20220217.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Cloud-35-20220216.0): ID: 1133606 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1133606 Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (aarch64)

strange ppc64le failures

[resent w/o 500+ kBytes file attached] Hello, I've got a very suspiciously looking compilation issues while building PSPP package. All other arches are good except for ppc64le. Just grep for "error:" in the build log. * https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=82939449 *

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

On Thu, 2022-02-17 at 19:22 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:51:13PM -0500, Stephen Snow wrote: > > On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 09:13 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 11:21 -0500, Stephen Snow wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I don't mean to

Re: Review swap - python-specfile

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 4:09 AM Nikola Forró wrote: > Hello, > > is there anybody willing to review python-specfile [1]? Your email made me look at this upstream (https://github.com/packit/specfile). It looks interesting! I wonder if we could use it more broadly (like for pyrpkg). It reminds me

Fedora-IoT-37-20220217.1 compose check report

Missing expected images: Iot dvd aarch64 Iot dvd x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 2/15 (aarch64), 3/16 (x86_64) ID: 1133200 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1133200 ID: 1133260 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis URL:

Re: Do we have any policy for disabling inactive users

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:51:13PM -0500, Stephen Snow wrote: > On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 09:13 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 11:21 -0500, Stephen Snow wrote: > > > Hello, > > > I don't mean to jump in the midle here, and I am just tossing out > > > an > > > idea for

Re: Review requests

Il 15/02/22 11:15, Sandro Mani ha scritto: > Hi > > I've submitted the two packages which are missing dependencies for review, > which I'd appreciate if someone could review, as mingw-python-requests and > mingw-python-OWSLib are currently FailsToInstall: > >

Re: F36 Beta blocker status summary

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:27 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > Now that we've reached the branch point, it's time to start doing > weekly blocker summaries again! Beta freeze begins on 22 February and > the current target Beta release date is 15 March. > > Action summary > > > Accepted

[Bug 2053914] perl-Dist-Milla-1.0.21 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2053914 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-76a296a3a3 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing

Re: F36 Beta blocker status summary

As a reminder: Beta freeze begins on 22 February and the current target Beta release date is 15 March. Action summary Accepted blockers - 1. anaconda — When running anaconda on Wayland with two keyboard layouts configured, hitting any modifier key with the

Re: CVE's and older versions of software

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:26:54 -0500 "Steven A. Falco" wrote: > On 2/17/22 09:58 AM, Ben Beasley wrote: > > This is covered by the Updates Policy[1]. There is quite a bit written > > there about why an incompatible update might or might not be allowed in a > > stable release. It also

[EPEL-devel] Re: Plea: Take a moment before you branch everything for EPEL 9

Am 17.02.22 um 13:52 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen: The working assumption has been that the Fedora package is already cleaned up and dependencies are there because the main packager thought they were needed. I and other EPEL packagers have spent enough time 'cleaning up' a package and then

Re: Packaging scrcpy with a precompiled APK dependency.

On 2/16/22 15:57, Diego Herrera wrote: > Hi. I was checking if the scrcpy software [1] could get packaged, but to > continue I need to know how to package an APK package file. For context, > this project consists on a Linux client and an Android server app that is > uploaded as an APK package by

Re: CVE's and older versions of software

On 2/17/22 09:58 AM, Ben Beasley wrote: This is covered by the Updates Policy[1]. There is quite a bit written there about why an incompatible update might or might not be allowed in a stable release. It also specifically addresses security updates[2], and describes how you can petition FESCo

Re: CVE's and older versions of software

This is covered by the Updates Policy[1]. There is quite a bit written there about why an incompatible update might or might not be allowed in a stable release. It also specifically addresses security updates[2], and describes how you can petition FESCo for an exception, either for a

[Bug 2055633] perl-Sereal-4.020 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055633 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|---

[EPEL-devel] Re: Plea: Take a moment before you branch everything for EPEL 9

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 6:03 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 17. 02. 22 13:52, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 07:11, Miro Hrončok > > wrote: > > > > Hello EPEL packagers. > > > > I get it that you want as much as possible packages

Re: CVE's and older versions of software

On 2/17/22 06:46 AM, Stephen Snow wrote: On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 22:50 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote: On 2/16/22 18:05, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 14:20 -0500, Steven A. Falco wrote: On 2/16/22 01:58 PM, Dan Horák wrote: On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 13:53:04 -0500 "Steven A. Falco"

Re: Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Thank you very much! I will not let you down! Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022, à 09 h 04, Ben Beasley a écrit : > Thank you for contributing to Fedora. At the request[1] of Christopher > King (FAS bunnyapocalypse), I have sponsored you to the packager group > as a co-maintainer[2] for the lutris package.

Re: Self-Introduction: Steve Cossette

Thank you for contributing to Fedora. At the request[1] of Christopher King (FAS bunnyapocalypse), I have sponsored you to the packager group as a co-maintainer[2] for the lutris package. Welcome, and happy packaging! [1] https://pagure.io/packager-sponsors/issue/522 [2]

[EPEL-devel] Re: Plea: Take a moment before you branch everything for EPEL 9

On 17. 02. 22 13:52, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 07:11, Miro Hrončok > wrote: Hello EPEL packagers. I get it that you want as much as possible packages available in EPEL 9, but before you blindly branch all the dependencies of

[Bug 2055632] perl-Sereal-Encoder-4.020 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055632 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|NEW

[Bug 2055631] perl-Sereal-Decoder-4.020 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055631 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|---

[EPEL-devel] Re: Plea: Take a moment before you branch everything for EPEL 9

And of course sending emails like this do not help make things better for either party. My apologies and I am going to cut back on sending email without a 24 hour "Did you really want to send this timeout?" On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 07:52, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > > Finally. There is NO

Re: Packaging scrcpy with a precompiled APK dependency.

On 16/02/2022 21:57, Diego Herrera wrote: I was checking if the scrcpy software [1] could get packaged, but to continue I need to know how to package an APK package file. All Fedora packages must be build from sources. You can't package and redistribute precompiled APK/JAR files. It must be

[EPEL-devel] Re: Plea: Take a moment before you branch everything for EPEL 9

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 07:11, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hello EPEL packagers. > > I get it that you want as much as possible packages available in EPEL 9, > but > before you blindly branch all the dependencies of the packages you care > about, > could you maybe take a step back and consider for a

Re: F37 Change: Enable read only /sysroot for Fedora Silverblue & Kinoite (Self-Contained Change proposal)

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:12:59PM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > == Summary == > > This change is about enabling an opt-in ostree feature that re-mounts > `/sysroot` as read only to avoid accidental changes. > > Users and administrators are not expected to directly interact with > the content

[EPEL-devel] Re: Plea: Take a moment before you branch everything for EPEL 9

+1 I'd like to highlight python3-nose and python3-mock. If your package depends on one of these you should really fix your package and/or code upstream. Felix ___ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

[Bug 2055631] New: perl-Sereal-Decoder-4.020 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055631 Bug ID: 2055631 Summary: perl-Sereal-Decoder-4.020 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Sereal-Decoder Keywords: FutureFeature,

[Bug 2055633] New: perl-Sereal-4.020 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055633 Bug ID: 2055633 Summary: perl-Sereal-4.020 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Sereal Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged

[Bug 2055632] New: perl-Sereal-Encoder-4.020 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055632 Bug ID: 2055632 Summary: perl-Sereal-Encoder-4.020 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: perl-Sereal-Encoder Keywords: FutureFeature,

[EPEL-devel] Plea: Take a moment before you branch everything for EPEL 9

Hello EPEL packagers. I get it that you want as much as possible packages available in EPEL 9, but before you blindly branch all the dependencies of the packages you care about, could you maybe take a step back and consider for a few minutes if all the dependencies actually make sense? The

Re: Preventing .build-id file conflicts between pypy3.7-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64 and pypy3.8-libs-7.3.7-1.fc34.x86_64

On Sun, 2022-02-13 at 14:11 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Hey, > apparently some ELF files are identical between Fedora's pypy3.7-libs > and > pypy3.8-libs packages. > > On Fedora 34, this leads to installation conflict: > > Error: Transaction test error: >    file

[Bug 2055608] Perl 5.32.1 Incorrectly Processes Hash Key Existence in Two-Dimensional Hashes

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055608 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Doc Type|---

Re: CVE's and older versions of software

On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 22:50 -0500, Demi Marie Obenour wrote: > On 2/16/22 18:05, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2022-02-16 at 14:20 -0500, Steven A. Falco wrote: > > > On 2/16/22 01:58 PM, Dan Horák wrote: > > > > On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 13:53:04 -0500 > > > > "Steven A. Falco" wrote: > > > > >

[Bug 2055608] Perl 5.32.1 Incorrectly Processes Hash Key Existence in Two-Dimensional Hashes

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055608 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar --- This feature is called "autovivification". See perlref POD. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055608

[Bug 2055608] New: Perl 5.32.1 Incorrectly Processes Hash Key Existence in Two-Dimensional Hashes

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055608 Bug ID: 2055608 Summary: Perl 5.32.1 Incorrectly Processes Hash Key Existence in Two-Dimensional Hashes Product: Fedora Version: 34 Hardware: x86_64 OS:

Re: Packaging scrcpy with a precompiled APK dependency.

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 10:00 PM Diego Herrera wrote: > > Hi. I was checking if the scrcpy software [1] could get packaged, but to > continue I need to know how to package an APK package file. For context, this > project consists on a Linux client and an Android server app that is uploaded >

Re: F37 Change: Enable read only /sysroot for Fedora Silverblue & Kinoite (Self-Contained Change proposal)

Thanks a lot for creating this. It wasn't nice experience after running `restorecon -Rv /` -- yeah, now I know you shouldn't do that on SB. Jirka Dne 16. 02. 22 v 18:12 Ben Cotton napsal(a): https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Silverblue_Kinoite_readonly_sysroot == Summary == This change

[Bug 2055412] perl-File-Find-utf8-0.014 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055412 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-1268123a5b has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-1268123a5b -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug 2055412] perl-File-Find-utf8-0.014 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055412 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2022-b7f8b51ef2 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-b7f8b51ef2 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug 2055412] perl-File-Find-utf8-0.014 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055412 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version|

[Bug 2055412] perl-File-Find-utf8-0.014 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055412 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Doc Type|---

Re: F37 Change: Make pkexec and pkla-compat optional (Self-Contained Change proposal)

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/polkit_recommends_pkla_pkexec > See in progress PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/polkit/pull-request/2 From a comment in the PR: > IMHO making polkit-pkla-compat optional is seriously risky. The > configuration can contain “if user=foo deny”