Hello team,
What is the way to disable `-mss2 for aarch64 build in embree?
Spec file:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/embree/blob/rawhide/f/embree.spec
Scratch build result:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=88867571
Thanks in advance.
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101193
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2100791
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-300cb2b824 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing
repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101385
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #2 from
On Tuesday, June 28, 2022 4:30:14 PM CDT Robbie Harwood wrote:
> I have started the responsive maintainer process due to lack of contact
> through bugzilla mail. Specifically, this is about an epel9 branch,
> which has been repeatedly requested since March (including an offer to
> maintain the
I'm looking to see if anyone wants to review swap with me:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2090823
Thanks!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
On Tue, 2022-06-28 at 22:00 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > That's part of what makes it hard to discuss things with you:
> > the proposal _explicitly_ says that only some libraries will be bundled.
> > (There's a separate section about this!)
> > So
One thing I forgot in my previous reply to this post:
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> As you say, it's "SHOULD", and the maintainers argue that it'll be much
> easier for them to do it in this way.
I believe that the rationale for doing the opposite of a SHOULD ought to be
much stronger
Alex Chernyakhovsky writes:
> I just replied on bugzilla. No one has attempted to contact me before.
Well... as a Fedora maintainer, there's an expectation that you'll read
your bugzilla email from time to time :) I know stuff happens, and from
your bz comment it sounds like there was some
A key on an encrypted disk can still prevent evil maid attacks, though an
attacker with local access can still compromise the system. In the current
system, an attacker with permissions required to read kernel memory can just
ask the shim to boot their modified kernel.
Hi Alex + Fedora,
I'm trying to contact Alex Chernyakhovsky, the maintainer of mosh. Does
anyone know how to contact them?
I have started the responsive maintainer process due to lack of contact
through bugzilla mail. Specifically, this is about an epel9 branch,
which has been repeatedly
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101943
Bug ID: 2101943
Summary: perl-Text-Bidi-2.17 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-Text-Bidi
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> That's part of what makes it hard to discuss things with you:
> the proposal _explicitly_ says that only some libraries will be bundled.
> (There's a separate section about this!)
> So it's not "all-bundled" but "some of the low-level libs are bundled".
I am
Sharpened Blade via devel wrote:
> It would be stored with permissions for only root to read it, and you disk
> should be encrypted, or none of this matters.
It doesn't matter if your disk is encrypted. Whilst your computer is online,
the contents are accessible. If your kernel memory is
Sharpened Blade via devel wrote:
> [...] Software should be secure by itself, [...]
That's impossible to achieve. Without hardware support, you cannot make your
software secure.
Further, human beings are involved in the writing of the software - and the
larger the codebase and the more people
It would be stored with permissions for only root to read it, and you disk
should be encrypted, or none of this matters.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=769-0f75Xag
The last episode of Linux Saloon of June 2022 is about Fedora 36
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of
On 6/28/22 09:35, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 28/06/2022 15:29, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> We can treat this as an experiment. The hope is that Java upstream is
>> big enough to be able to release updates for any CVEs in a timely manner,
>> and that the RHEL/Fedora maintainers
At least python-language-server really is dead upstream[1], replaced by
python-lsp-server, which is a maintained community fork.
The python-pyls_black package isn’t usable without python-language-server, and
nobody has stepped up to migrate it to python-lsp-server in over a year[2], so
it’s
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 05:16:14PM +0200, Andreas Gerstmayr wrote:
> I plan to submit a Grafana 8.5.6 rebase to Fedora rawhide in the coming
> days.
Why not to v9?
--
Tomasz Torcz Morality must always be based on practicality.
to...@pipebreaker.pl — Baron
On 6/28/22 07:21, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Chris Murphy:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 1:56 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>
>>> * Neal Gompa:
>>>
I treat Secure Boot purely as a compatibility interface. We need to do
just enough to get through the secure boot environment.
>>>
>>> Right.
> Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>> On 6/25/22 07:56, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
>>> On 6/19/22 22:54, Sharpened Blade via devel wrote:
>>>
Use unified kernel images by default for new releases. This can
allow for the local installation to sign the kernel and the initrd,
so the boot chain
Upstream Grafana changed the license in Grafana v8 from Apache License
2.0 to Affero General Public License (AGPL) v3 [1] [2] [3].
I plan to submit a Grafana 8.5.6 rebase to Fedora rawhide in the coming
days.
[1]
https://grafana.com/blog/2021/04/20/grafana-loki-tempo-relicensing-to-agplv3/
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 03:35:35PM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > I don't think it makes sense to restart the discussion here. I disagree
> > that there was (any) consensus on the mailing list. If you feel that it's
> > better to use a non-Fedora JRE,
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 10:18, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 28/06/2022 15:52, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> > Since I do not see this decision changing, it is probably time for
> > people negatively affected by this change to set up a COPR or some other
> >
On 28/06/2022 15:52, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
Since I do not see this decision changing, it is probably time for
people negatively affected by this change to set up a COPR or some other
build system which builds the packages as they were previously.
I think it will be better to introduce the
On 27. 06. 22 13:27, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
==
FAIL: test_openssl_version (test.test_ssl.BasicSocketTests)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
On 6/27/22 22:35, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 3:06 PM Vipul Siddharth
> wrote:
>>
>> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
>> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
>> community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 03:05:32PM +0200, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
>
>
> Am 28.06.22 um 14:51 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:41:42PM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
>
> > > > It certainly is not true that the feedback was not considered by FESCo:
> > > >
On Tue, Jun 28 2022 at 03:29:33 PM +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
We can treat this as an experiment. The hope is that Java upstream is
big enough to be able to release updates for any CVEs in a timely
manner,
and that the RHEL/Fedora maintainers are able to provide updates in a
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 8/163 (aarch64), 11/233 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220627.n.0):
ID: 1308598 Test: aarch64 Server-dvd-iso
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 09:37, Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > I don't think it makes sense to restart the discussion here. I disagree
> > that there was (any) consensus on the mailing list. If you feel that it's
> > better to
Any news about this? I saw this, but it appears to not be working with Fedora
36:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917510#c10
Also, airspyone_host-1.0.9-13 needs to be updated to airspyone_host-1.0.10.
___
devel mailing list --
On 28/06/2022 15:29, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
We can treat this as an experiment. The hope is that Java upstream is
big enough to be able to release updates for any CVEs in a timely manner,
and that the RHEL/Fedora maintainers are able to provide updates in a timely
manner. If it turns
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I don't think it makes sense to restart the discussion here. I disagree
> that there was (any) consensus on the mailing list. If you feel that it's
> better to use a non-Fedora JRE, that's certainly possible, please just do
> that if you want to. Personally, I
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 03:05:32PM +0200, Ralf Corsépius wrote:
>
>
> Am 28.06.22 um 14:51 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:41:42PM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
>
> > > > It certainly is not true that the feedback was not considered by FESCo:
> > > >
Am 28.06.22 um 14:51 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:41:42PM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
It certainly is not true that the feedback was not considered by FESCo:
there was a long discussion on IRC, and FESCo members also participated in
the mailing
On 6/28/22 08:08, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:21:33AM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/28/22 05:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>>> We have one ticket tagged with 'meeting', but there has been no
>>> progress in discussion or implementation, so
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:41:42PM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > The whole proposal consists of a few parts. The part that was voted on
> > was the first part. Various people opposed the whole proposal, but it
> > was the later parts that raised the
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> The whole proposal consists of a few parts. The part that was voted on
> was the first part. Various people opposed the whole proposal, but it
> was the later parts that raised the stronger opposition.
I and others have also objected to the entire concept of
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:24:17PM +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:07:54PM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > #2794 F37 Change proposal: Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree
> > > #libraries and with static
I am retiring two packages - python-language-server and python-pyls_black
These were originally packaged for spyder but is no longer maintained.
Instead, we have *-lsp-* packages that are used by spyder and actively
maintained. These are not needed by anything else.
$ dnf repoquery
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:07:54PM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > #2794 F37 Change proposal: Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree
> > #libraries and with static stdc++lib
> > APPROVED: FESCo approves the use of bundled libraries and static
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:21:33AM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
>
>
> On 6/28/22 05:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > We have one ticket tagged with 'meeting', but there has been no
> > progress in discussion or implementation, so I'm cancelling today's
> > meeting.
>
> Hmm. That would be
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> #2794 F37 Change proposal: Build all JDKs in Fedora against in-tree
> #libraries and with static stdc++lib
> APPROVED: FESCo approves the use of bundled libraries and static libstdc++
> for building Java (+5, 1, -0)
WTF, why???
The feedback in the mailing
* Chris Murphy:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 1:56 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> * Neal Gompa:
>>
>> > I treat Secure Boot purely as a compatibility interface. We need to do
>> > just enough to get through the secure boot environment.
>>
>> Right. It's not even clear to me why we enforce kernel
On 6/28/22 05:22, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> We have one ticket tagged with 'meeting', but there has been no
> progress in discussion or implementation, so I'm cancelling today's
> meeting.
Hmm. That would be https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2804
I don't really know what else I'm
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 01:12:25PM +0200, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 9:27 AM Daniel P. Berrangé
> wrote:
> > That's thinking about the problem from the wrong point of view. SecureBoot
> > doesn't prevent an attacker from booting an OS that's different from what
> > you
On 28/06/2022 09:26, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
What SecureBoot does is to provide a mechanism to assert that
what has booted matches the original install, and securely tie that
condition to the release of secrets for example to LUKS key.
No, it doesn't. It just blocks the ability to load
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 9:27 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> That's thinking about the problem from the wrong point of view. SecureBoot
> doesn't prevent an attacker from booting an OS that's different from what
> you installed, even without shim they could swap to a different Windows
> install.
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220627.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220628.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 122
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:949.12
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101568
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 37 Rawhide 20220628.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
We have one ticket tagged with 'meeting', but there has been no
progress in discussion or implementation, so I'm cancelling today's
meeting.
We've had a glitch in the process, and various tickets which were
voted and approved offline were not announced. I'll do that now here
in one fell swoop,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101385
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from
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-35-20220627.0):
ID: 1308279 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068801
--- Comment #6 from Robert Scheck ---
Requested epel9 branch:
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/45334
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068801
Robert Scheck changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(lkund...@v3.sk) |
Assignee|lkund...@v3.sk
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-36-20220626.0):
ID: 1308263 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2068801
Johan Vromans changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(jvromans@squirrel |
|.nl)
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 08:42:43AM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 27/06/2022 21:18, Sharpened Blade via devel wrote:
> > Also, even when you cant remove Microsoft keys, you can still use the shim.
>
> If you can't remove Microsoft keys, you're nullifying the whole purpose of
> secure
That is correct, we removed maven-javadoc-plugin from Fedora since we
had found a way to build maven without it.
xmvn has its own javadoc generator.
On 27. 6. 2022 21:46, Jerry James wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:04 AM Graham Leggett via devel
wrote:
I just tried to start from "probably
On 27/06/2022 21:19, Sharpened Blade via devel wrote:
Akmods can automatically sign kernel modules, its just a few commands and then
every version will be signed.
Yes, but anyone can read your private keys to sign anything. Someone
needs to implement support for hardware tokens, or at least
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101385
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
On 27/06/2022 21:18, Sharpened Blade via devel wrote:
Also, even when you cant remove Microsoft keys, you can still use the shim.
If you can't remove Microsoft keys, you're nullifying the whole purpose
of secure boot, because anyone can use a signed shim to boot whatever
they want.
Also,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2101193
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
66 matches
Mail list logo
