On 29 September 2016 6:08:13 PM AEST, Tomas Hozza wrote:
>I'll be pushing the updates shortly.
Cool, thanks.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Could someone with sufficient access please spin up an update of bind
for F-24 and other flavours of Fedora. That CVE looks like a pretty
serious DoS. This has already been fixed in RHEL.
Thanks,
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list --
I use e10 all the time. Works fine.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
I'm thinking, why not just have these as dump repositories (i.e. just
signed packages) and then have dnf on each system stitch up a repo from
them using createrepo locally. Then you don't need to teach bodhi
anything. And the number of such urgent packages would always be very
low. Essentially an
Dnf would need to be taught to do these things, of course
The "on the fly" repositories could be defined like any other, using
repo files. They could be signed by the same keys updates/updates-
testing repos use. Not sure why master mirrors would be required.
Wouldn't regular mirrors work, minus
If there existed updates-urgent and updates-urgent-testing repositories
for packages like kernel (example: Dirty COW patch-to-testing wait time
was rather long; note that some people cannot install unsigned kernel
packages from koji due to grub2 bugs), FF etc., maybe these large (and
possibly
Which is also already in Bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387589
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Wouldn't package maintainers get the CVE bug notification from Bugzilla
about FF that I pointed to? Given that, the assumption that maintainers
are away seems reasonable. Ergo, I sent an e-mail to the list.
PS. I also checked FF package git repo, which had no recent commits.
--
Bojan
What about this?
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2016-87/
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Could someone with access please build this version of FF. Apparently,
it's a security release.
Thanks,
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370061#c7
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
I guess I must have misread this as all kernels built in koji, not just
scratch builds. Ouch.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Thanks Martin!
A push to testing repo would also be highly appreciated. :-)
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Does anyone know whether the fix for this problem is already in F25
builds of FF or should a new build be prepared and pushed to fix this?
See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433819
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list --
Anyone understands why Firefox 52 in F25 doesn't support multi-process
any more? Or alternatively, is there a new trick to get this working,
apart from what is written here?
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list --
> Are you using Fedora's Firefox or straight from Mozilla?
Fedora:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-bb459964ce
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
> Have you checked Red Hat Bugzilla?
Yes. Nothing in there that I can find about this.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
This bug is about e10s not being activated in the presence of add-ons.
What I'm seeing is that it cannot be activated at all since 52. I had
it running in 51 (and 50, from memory). There are no add-ons here.
Even forcing it doesn't work.
--
Bojan
___
On Fri, 2017-03-10 at 07:53 +1100, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> Anyone understands why Firefox 52 in F25 doesn't support multi-
> process any more?
I can confirm that -4 release of the F25 package indeed has the fix.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list --
Was just curious, anyone understands why there are so many obsolete
updates in F26 testing repository? For example, there is firefox 54.0
from June, other stuff back from April etc.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
Hi,
I pinged folks in bug #1461641 about this a couple of times, but no
joy. Anyone else here that can rebuild and push patched bind to F26?
Thanks,
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Thank you!
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Does anyone understand what most recent masher messages mean for F28 updates
testing?
bodhi masher failed to mash f28-updates-testing 3 hours agobodhi masher
successfully mashed f28-updates-testing 3 hours ago
Confusing...
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing
Anyone knows when RHEL 7.5 packages will be available for aarch64 in
koji, so that new dependencies get picked up? I'm trying to build EPEL7
xorgxrdp against the latest xorg-x11-server and all other arches have
1.19.5, but aarch64 is stuck on 1.19.3.
PS. Buildroot overrides don't work here,
Wow! That's what I call a fast turnaround. Before even reading the replies, the
bug was fixed! :-)
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Does anyone know why latest dnf repodata for updates-testing in F27 appears to
be missing some packages that were supposed to be pushed? For instance, kernel
4.15.12-301 is there, but latest dnsmasq is not and they were supposedly pushed
at the same time.
I noticed a similar pattern the day
With RHEL 7.6 out, a new version of Xorg has been delivered, which made
xorgxrdp package that I maintain binary incompatible. Given that build
overrides are not possible with EPEL (AFAIK), could someone with enough
privileges please update the build environment for rhel7.
Thanks,
--
Bojan
Noted and thanks.
--
Bojan
Original Message
From: Orion Poplawski
Sent: 1 November 2018 1:17:11 pm AEDT
To: Development discussions related to Fedora ,
Bojan Smojver
Subject: Re: Latest RHEL7 release v Xorg
On 10/31/2018 04:13 PM, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> With RHEL 7.6
Thanks Kevin. The build worked!
Sorry about not opening a ticket. That's done here, right?
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
EPEL7 builds for x86_64 and ppc64le appear to be failing still. Example:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=31577177
Just FYI.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Thank you both for clarifying.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines:
Anyone understands why this is not being pushed in recent days?
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Just out of curiosity, is firewalld going to nftables, like rhel8? Apparently,
this change was not submitted on time for f29, so just wondering what's going
to happen with f30.
--
Bojan
Original Message
From: Ben Cotton
Sent: 25 January 2019 1:02:54 am AEDT
To:
I hope this gets fixed before FF on Wayland becomes the only option:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1666410
It makes FF really difficult to use with menus drawn off screen.
--
Bojan
Original Message
From: Ben Cotton
Sent: 26 January 2019 1:43:32 am AEDT
To:
I'm guessing most of you here probably observed this behaviour with dnf when FF
is upgraded. Even after FF restarted, dnf needs-restarting reports that it
needs restarting. Does that sound like a bug or is this somehow intentional?
I'm seeing this in f29 and previous releases are the same. Once
This was patched out, because an official feature was never submitted. Now that
RHEL8 is using that combo, maybe it's time to try again? :-)
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Awesome! Thank you.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Garver
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Cc: Bojan Smojver
Subject: Re: Firewalld v nftables
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 10:36:12 -0400
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:14:49AM +1000, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> This was patc
Just tried building a scratch build of xorgxrdp, but this still pulls in the
old Xorg, before RHEL 7.7 version. Could someone please change that, so that
builds pick the latest package up.
All in relation to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738669
OK, thanks for the pointer.
--
Bojan___
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
There was a note recently in one the the kernel packages about bodhi being a
tad temperamental recently and not pushing updates out. Anyone knows what's
going on with that? Is the fix on the horizon?
--
Bojan___
devel mailing list --
Would someone with sufficient powers mind queueing up this update?
Thanks,
--
Bojan___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Cool, thanks!
--
Bojan___
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:
Just wondering whether there is a particular reason 5.10 kernel has not been
submitted for testing in bodhi for F33. Or is it simply an oversight?
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
big issue that is outstanding in 5.10 that
is blowing people's machines up or something else (i.e. delay,
oversight, etc.).
--
Bojan
-Original Message-
From: Sérgio Basto
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Cc: Bojan Smojver
Subject: Re: F33: kernel 5.10.x
Date: Fri, 08 Jan
Just being devil's advocate for a second here...
Two days to build FF in koji? Has it gotten that big or are the builds that
slow?
:-)
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Could someone with sufficient permissions please get httpd package
unstuck in bodhi?
It's been sitting there for a few days, waiting to get to stable, but
it keeps getting kicked out, because some automated tests did not pass.
The package contains security fixes.
Thanks,
--
Bojan
Example:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=76099482
Built the same thing on F35/34/33 and EPEL8/7 and that worked. Did
something change in Rawhide that I should be aware of or is this just a
temporary thing?
Thanks,
--
Bojan
___
Thank you. Will check out the logs and the bug report.
--
Bojan
-Original Message-
From: Petr Pisar
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Cc: Bojan Smojver
Subject: Re: Rawhide: noarch package built differently on different
architectures
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 16:44:52 +0200
Ah, cool. Totally missed that in release notes. 臘♂️
Thanks,
--
Bojan
6 June 2022 8:13:10 pm Alexander Sosedkin :
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 12:03 PM Bojan Smojver via devel
wrote:
>
> Before I open a bug on this, the latest firefox/nss so
Before I open a bug on this, the latest firefox/nss software that is in F36 -
is it not accepting SSL certificates without matching subjectAlternativeName on
purpose?
I still have to complete more tests, but it seems that if SSL certificate is
issued to CN abc.example.com and if that name is
FF 107.0 shipped in all current Fedora releases a while ago. You can
find all that in bodhi. If you mean 107.0.1, that will depend on the FF
maintainers. Maybe they see no reason to respin, because the bugs fixed
in that release are not something that is important in Fedora - not
sure.
--
Bojan
107.0.1 build for
F37/x86_64: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/bojan/FF/
If you want/need or are obsessive about version numbers, like yours
truly. ;-)
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an
Now that nss 3.85 has been built, I thought I'd have a go at building
FF 107.0, given that's been out for a few days and original builds
failed in koji, because nss was too old at the time.
No idea how this is going to end up, but the tasks for F3{8,7,6,5} are
here, if anyone is interested:
Everything except F38 completed fine.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Of course, relevant build overrides had to be provided, because
required version of nss was not in stable at the time I started these
scratch builds. Thought I'd mention it for completeness.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list --
Yay! Thank you!
--
Bojan
-Original Message-
From: Mattia Verga
Reply-To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Bodhi 7.0.1 deployed to prod
Date: 17/01/23 16:39:49
- Frozen releases updates will now be forced into testing before being
pushed
Possibly in one of the future versions. I am not even sure at this
point how well (if at all) glamor support works with xorgxrdp.
--
Bojan
-Original Message-
From: Hans de Goede
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Cc: Bojan Smojver
Subject: Re: Building two conflicting
Quick question about direct to stable updates in bodhi, such as FF
106.0.4 and kernel 6.0.7 that are lined up for F37 right now. Such
updates often end up being in nowhere land for quite some time, because
they skip testing to go to stable directly, but the push to stable
cannot happen for
Maybe push them to both, if they've never been to testing? In other
words, never skip testing.
Sure, there will be some duplication of packages for a cycle or two,
but eventually, they anything that's already in stable will be kicked
out of testing, right?
--
Bojan
This may be a trivial question, but my friend Google is not showing me any
obvious answers, so I will ask here at my own peril.
Say one needs to configure and build the same source with two (or more)
different sets of options that generate different binary RPMs, but which have
files in exactly
PS. I am aware of the alternatives approach, but looking to see whether there
is something that rpm specs have natively for this.
--
Bojan
4 Nov 2022 7:31:14 am Bojan Smojver :
This may be a trivial question, but my friend Google is not showing me any
Cool, thank you! I think this is exactly what I was looking for
(unsuccessfully).
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Thank you!
--
Bojan
4 Nov 2022 8:48:25 am Florian Weimer :
* Bojan Smojver via devel:
> Sure, it is easy enough to configure/build repeatedly and stash the
> results into non-conflicting paths of buildroot, but how does one then
>
It was for packaging xorgxrdp with glamor support. Submitted to bodhi now, so
all good.
--
Bojan
4 Nov 2022 7:38:17 pm Hans de Goede :
Hi,
On 11/3/22 21:31, Bojan Smojver via devel wrote:
> This may be a trivial question, but my friend Goo
Looks like build infrastructure is having trouble building Firefox for these
two at the moment. More info here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2189964
It you have any ideas of what could be causing this, please feel free to share.
Thanks,
--
Bojan
Thank you for the pointer Kevin! Trying to build with older rust in
corp now:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/bojan/FF/build/5862010/
--
Bojan
-Original Message-
From: Bojan Smojver
To: Fedora Development List
Subject: Firefox builds broken on F38/39
Date: 30/04/23 12:05:11
Hi Fabio,
Kevin pointed to llvm/rust bugs in that FF bug already:
- https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/61932
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/109934
So, yeah - folks are already aware of this.
For Firefox, using older rust for builds worked.
--
Bojan
The former is an update to the latest version of spf-engine, which
rejigs the package, among other thing, so this will require careful
testing.
The latter had async IO pulled out, because Python 3.12 no longer
supports the APIs that were used. Once again, careful testing will be
required.
Yeah, a ticket may be a better idea. I am not a maintainer of those packages,
so don't want to overstep.
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11508
--
Bojan
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
If anyone reading this email has special powers to get some of the week old F38
updates unstuck from pending, please click the magic button.
An example of such an update:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-ef0e8e36fc
Thanks,
--
Bojan
101 - 171 of 171 matches
Mail list logo