Yubikey single-factor authentication disabled
Hi folks, anyone else seeing Yubikey single-factor authentication has been disabled. when logging into fas or any other fas based services? I checked in fas and yubikey is enabled for my account (and has been for years). Test auth in fas works. Regards, Andreas -- BR Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v4] Retiring packages for F-18
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 18:24 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: Updated with new list of packages that have failed to build. Package fbdesk (fails to build) Package gimmix (fails to build) Package libopensync-plugin-opie (fails to build) Fixed. -- Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: wine font changes system look and feel
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 09:19 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: Andreas, what do you think? If you are not fond of this complete solution, can you implement at least the wine-tahoma-fonts vs wine-tahoma-fonts-system separation, as you proposed? I will apply my proposed change for wine-tahoma with the 1.5.6 upgrade. -- Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: wine font changes system look and feel
On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 11:49 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Mar 5 juin 2012 10:59, Kamil Paral a écrit : If you are afraid there might be people out there who want wine-Tahoma as a system font, it is important to realize that those people are probably just a tiny fraction of the other side of the argument That's a dangerous argument, looks are subjective and every time someone touches a font it deems ugly others disagree. That is exactly how I see this. On a side note: I personally have the package installed and don't find e. g. facebook particularly ugly or pretty. It'd be much better if 1. the wine font didn't declare a name too heavy for it I am no font expert but from my understanding it does not. Its name is WineTahoma (and WineTahomaBold respectively). Both fonts declare them to be part of the Tahoma family. From my understanding this is perfectly alright as they share some of the defining features of the MS Tahoma font (so maybe the looks differ). 2. the font package was made technically optionnal so people who love the font (I'm sure there are some like all the other times) can still use it Well this is the tricky part as I believe them essential for a standard wine setup. We could of course aim for a dual-solution: Let wine-tahoma-fonts put the fonts in the wine font dir (mandatory for wine) and add a wine-tahoma-fonts-system package (names suggestions welcome) which also puts the fonts in the system wide font path (optional). If this would be a feasible solution I would still like some opinions if this should be done for both fonts or just for the reported bugs about the bold version. -- Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: wine font changes system look and feel
, please be heard. The desirable outcome is: 1. Wine is installed 2. Web page rendering looks pretty (no bitmap fonts) 3. No manual steps are needed Comments welcome. -- Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: wine font changes system look and feel
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 20:06 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: 1. why is wine making them mandatory? Can't the package be made optional in wine and wine use one of the default system fonts when it is not present? You can use wine without the font installed. It is just the meta package which pulls in the fonts so that a normal desktop use gets the best experience possible. You can obviously remove the font package and fiddle with wine.inf or your registry to define sensible replacements where you see fit. -- Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: wine font changes system look and feel
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 16:21 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: On 2012/06/04 20:06 (GMT+0200) Nicolas Mailhot composed: 1. why is wine making them mandatory? Probably related to Tahoma being the Windows System (aka Menu) font in W2K and/or WXP (IIRC, in both). It is quite nicely described on wikipedia [1]: The Wine project includes a free font (Wine Tahoma Regular and Wine Tahoma Bold) designed to have identical metrics to the Tahoma font.[6] This was done because Tahoma is available by default on Windows, and many applications expect the font to be available. Before Wine included a Tahoma replacement font, some applications, such as Steam, would not display any text at all, rendering them nearly unusable. [1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tahoma_(typeface)#Free_replacement -- Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 17’s unified filesystem (/usr-move)
On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 14:10 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote: Add f17-usrmove in the file /etc/yum.repos.d/f17-usrmove.repo [f17-usrmove] name=Fedora $releasever - $basearch failovermethod=priority baseurl=http://koji.fedoraproject.org/repos/f17-usrmove/latest/$basearch enabled=1 metadata_expire=1d gpgcheck=0 # yum clean all # yum upgrade As a heads up for x86-64 users: The f17-usrmove koji repo for x86-64 is missing x86-32 rpms which are normally copied from the x86-32 to x86-64 as part of the rawhide compose. Workaround is to add a second entry to the repo file pointing directly to the x86-32 (i386) repo. Otherwise yum will bail out eventually because of protected multilib versions. [f17-usrmove-x86-32] name=Fedora $releasever - $basearch failovermethod=priority baseurl=http://koji.fedoraproject.org/repos/f17-usrmove/latest/i386 enabled=1 metadata_expire=1d gpgcheck=0 Regards, Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
libetpan soname bump
Hallo everyone, I plan to upgrade libetpan in f14, f15 and rawhide to version 1.1. All releases already carry a cvs snapshot of 1.1 as it contains quite a few bug fixes for imap handling. The soname changes from 15.0.0 to 16.0.0. The only affected package in fedora is claws-mail (which I maintain). rpmfusions cairo-dock-plug-ins package is also affected. Regards, Andreas -- BrandAss Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Are their guidelines for packaging translated man pages?
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 08:57 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I have a package that supplies translated man pages (only in Ukrainian
strangely enough). They are installed by the upstream under:
%{_mandir}/uk/man1/
%{_mandir}/uk/man3/
I would use
%lang(uk) %{_mandir}/uk/man1/foo.1*
in this case.
- Andreas
--
BrandAss Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB
andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted
http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Looking for review of synce-connector
Hallo everyone, I am looking for someone to review synce-connector[1]. Synce-connector is a connection framework and dccm-implementation which integrates with udev. It effectively replaces all previous implementations from the synce project (synce-serial, vdccm, odccm, synce-hal). Getting synce-connector into fedora will help in completing [2] and clean up the stack of old implementations we have today which are not supported/maintained anymore by upstream. It should be an easy review. If you want to swap reviews ping me via mail. Best Regards, Andreas [1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=678728 [2] - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/HalRemoval -- BrandAss Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: AutoQA: distro congestion?
On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 04:35 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: I built two sets of security updates for f13/f14/f15 and autoqa rejected the f13/f14 packages. It looks like autoqa is waiting for the packages to be properly pushed to fN+1 stable before green-lighting the matching package for fN. I suppose you're talking about upgradepath test. Yes, that's exactly its behavior. This seems wrong to me. If I as a packager create an upgrade in bodhi, autoqa should consider what is present in fN+1 not only as stable package but also as proposed upgrade. It should then impose a constraint that the upgrade for fN can only be pushed to stable if fN+1 is pushed to stable at the same time (or obviously independently before). Seeing a failed upgradepath test comment at least gives me the wrong feeling on what is going on. - Andreas -- BrandAss Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: f15 libchamplain bump
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 13:45 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: yes. I mailed the two update submitters directly and asked them to coordinate. I then also unpushed the 0.10.x one that was going to go to stable without anyone having tested it or rebuilt any dependent aps. :) There's a request to add a buildroot override for it: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4645 after which things will get rebuilt and pushed at the same time. Thanks, claws-mail-plugins has been rebuild and I added it to the claws-mail/libetpan upgrade in bodhi. libchamplain and the other rebuilds can be added to it as well. - Andreas -- BrandAss Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: f15 libchamplain bump
On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 17:53 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: Is there a releng ticket for the koji buildroot override? If so, I couldn't find it. Currently, there are two competing test updates in bodhi: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libchamplain-0.9.1-1.fc15 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libchamplain-0.10.0-1.fc15 For claws this also means some patching because of API changes... - Andreas -- BrandAss Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [packager interface suggestion] Adding packages to buildroot directly from updates-testing
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:01 -0500, Tom Callaway wrote: I think a simpler idea is a minimal webapp (and perhaps a CLI interface) that lets you login with your FAS account and request an override on a built package that you have permissions for (and at the same time, choose how long the override lasts from a list of predefined lengths), and let a backend process handle the enable/disable. +1 This would make life a lot easier for both packagers and releng especially with the aspect of automated override removal. - Andreas -- BRef Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: orphaning packages
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:31 +0100, LinuxDonald wrote: openal-soft I will take openal-soft. - Andreas -- BRef Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | phone: +49 6897 1721738 | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de | fax: +49 6897 1722828 | signed/encrypted http://lowlatency.de | cell: +49 170 9665206 | mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Subscribing to package updates in bodhi?
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 16:33 +0200, Julian Aloofi wrote: Hi all, I have a pretty simple question: Is there a way to subscribe to certain packages in bodhi so that I get a notification via mail whenever updates are queued for it or pushes happen? That would be pretty useful for monitoring changes of dependencies, so I have enough time to make sure my package works with the newer version like it should. Does such a feature exist? If not, what would be the best way to accomplish something like that (I mean, except of asking the maintainer to send me a mail everytime he plans to update)? Thanks for answers in advance, Julian I don't know about bodhi but in koji you can subscribe for notifications depending on packages/tags. It might even make more sense if you want to test your packages with new versions. - Andreas -- BRef Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de| http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 6897 1721738 | cell: +49 170 9665206| mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: webkitgtk abi bump
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 10:36 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: Just a headsup: I've just built webkitgtk-1.3.2 in rawhide, which changes library sonames, so things depending on it will have to be rebuilt. claws-mail-plugins rebuild done - Andreas -- BRef Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de| http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 6897 1721738 | cell: +49 170 9665206| mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Outdated Wine versions in koji?
On Sat, 2010-05-08 at 12:20 +0200, drago01 wrote: 2010/5/8 Zoltan Boszormenyi zbos...@freemail.hu: Hi, the latest version of Wine found in koji is 1.1.38, which was released in february this year. The latest mainstream Wine is 1.1.44. Why isn't there a newer version compiled for Fedora? You'd have to ask the maintainer ... there is a bug open here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580024 Updates are delayed due to some legal questions. I will push an upgrade as soon as this is resolved. - Andreas -- BRef. Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de| http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 6897 1721738 | cell: +49 170 9665206| mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: update of perl-Tk to development release
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 03:59 -0500, Marcela Maslanova wrote: Hello, I was wondering if it's worth trying update to development release http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SR/SREZIC/Tk-804.028_502.tar.gz or if you prefer pick interesting patches? The thing is we have three years old version. Best regards, Hi there, you are correct the version in fedora is quite old. However, perl-Tk was a slow moving target as long as I know about it. If we were to upgrade to the beta it would only be for F-14 rawhide and only in case a release date would be anticipated withing the F14 time-frame. The only exception I can imagine right know is that the development release fixes/improves upon something major which is broken atm... Regards, Andreas -- Andreas Bierfert, M.Sc. | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de| http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted phone: +49 6897 1721738 | cell: +49 170 9665206| mail preferred signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
