Re: PROPOSAL: Blocking the release is our only "big hammer" — let's add a softer one.

2016-10-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 10/06/2016 03:27 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 10:39 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: So I like the idea, I do propose to simply re-use most of the blocker bug process for this, rather then inventing yet another process. I guess this could even be integrated and the way to

Re: Triaging RH Bugzilla and forwarding bugs upstream (Was: F24, small backward steps)

2016-09-19 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/18/2016 10:16 PM, Jeff Fearn wrote: Hi, we might be able to extend the External Trackers extension in RH Bugzilla to be able to create as well as sync bugs. Between which issue trackers is that supported? JBG ___ devel mailing list --

Re: F24, small backward steps

2016-09-15 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/13/2016 04:41 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: - Original Message - - Original Message - I'm seeing 24 bugs at: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/fprintd/bugs/all including a potential security one: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1333882 Fedora's bugzilla is a garbage

Re: Triaging RH Bugzilla and forwarding bugs upstream (Was: F24, small backward steps)

2016-09-14 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/14/2016 05:46 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: What I'd_really_ love to see is a layer separating bug trackers from end users. That layer already exist in the form of irc forum and askbot does it not? ( someone from the support sub-community can provide information how successful these are )

Re: Triaging RH Bugzilla and forwarding bugs upstream

2016-09-14 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/14/2016 05:03 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: "RC" == Ralf Corsepius writes: RC> - A package triggering too many BZs. RC> IMO, this should question the package's quality. A package with a million users is going to get more bugs than a package with ten regardless of

Re: Triaging RH Bugzilla and forwarding bugs upstream (Was: F24, small backward steps)

2016-09-14 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/14/2016 02:44 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: I disagree in general; when the bug volume exceeds a certain amount bugzilla basically becomes useless. However, it would be really nice if _someone_ looked at RH bugzilla for those packages and did something with them. This responsibility

Re: My experiences with KillUserProcesses=yes on F24

2016-08-31 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 08/31/2016 02:25 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: More appropriate place would be to post this upstream either on the mailinglist and or as an bug/rfs in the tracker so this issues can be addressed properly. Lingering is a per-user thing so it probably ends up being an per user opt in

Re: finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-07-29)

2016-08-02 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 08/02/2016 10:23 AM, Simo Sorce wrote: I do not actually have to prove anything, in a welcoming community you give the beneit of the doubt that people researched and know what they are talking about and you stick to actual fact in whatever they produce, not to some badge of credentials

Re: finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-07-29)

2016-08-02 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 08/02/2016 12:25 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: It's a burden, usually solved by ignoring one or the other. Since systemd is always incompatible and always will be incompatible with anything but relatively modern Linux distrubitutions, guess which packages never get ported to non-Linux

Re: finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-07-29)

2016-08-02 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 08/02/2016 09:24 AM, Simo Sorce wrote: On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 09:11 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/31/2016 06:29 AM, Parag Nemade wrote: Kevin has already given a detailed information how longer it took to retire these packages. Also see this https://fedoramagazine.org/systemd

Re: finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-07-29)

2016-08-02 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 07/31/2016 03:18 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote: why such hurry ? There has been a more than enough time for this migration to happen already and now it's existence has started to hinder other changes and adoptions in the distribution. The initial target was for the feature completion was F20

Re: finish retirement of sysvinit-only packages Re: Schedule for Friday's FESCo Meeting (2016-07-29)

2016-08-02 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 07/31/2016 06:29 AM, Parag Nemade wrote: Kevin has already given a detailed information how longer it took to retire these packages. Also see this https://fedoramagazine.org/systemd-converting-sysvinit-scripts/ Take that article with a grain of salt since it's written by somebody that has

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2016-07-15)

2016-07-15 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 07/15/2016 05:19 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: * AGREED: FESCo approves KillUserProcess=yes by default with the steps sgallagh has proposed in the ticket (+7, 0, 0) (jwb, 17:04:58) "Tier 1 packages must be ported to support operation under KillUserProcesses=yes" Is it safe to assume

Re: systemd 230 change - KillUserProcesses defaults to yes

2016-06-06 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 06/06/2016 03:56 PM, Benjamin Kreuter wrote: It took me three days to find the problem the last time systemd caused unexpected behavior on my system. What was this hard to find unexpected behaviour you encountered? JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: systemd 230 change - KillUserProcesses defaults to yes

2016-06-02 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 06/02/2016 03:13 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I don't think we need to change Fedora 24 for this. Unless I misunderstood, this systemd change has not been pushed to Fedora 24 (nor proposed for it). We're prepping for how to deal with things in Fedora 25. You should not so easily dismiss

Re: systemd 230 change - KillUserProcesses defaults to yes

2016-06-01 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 06/01/2016 02:01 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: Given the principle of least surprise, it would make more sense to default with this being disabled out of the box. I have to disagree with this statement. Upstream should always reflect how things should be while downstream reflects how things are

Re: Kernel plans for Fedora 24

2016-05-17 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 05/17/2016 05:25 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: I refuse the premise that the kernel team is going to release a 4.6.x kernel that isn't ready as a 0 day update. There is more extensive testing performed before GA release then there is in the update process hence what get's shipped in the GA

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default reposdir

2016-05-17 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 05/17/2016 04:32 PM, Till Maas wrote: Your argument sounds like yum.repos.d would be the best name for the repo definitions that are recognised by the yum parser and other implementations for this format. More accurate and more distro agnostic would be system like rpm or npm etc >.repos.d

Re: Kernel plans for Fedora 24

2016-05-17 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 05/17/2016 04:32 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson <johan...@gmail.com> wrote: On 03/16/2016 04:01 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: With the 4.5 kernel out and the merge window for 4.6 opened up, we had to make a decision on what the release

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default reposdir

2016-05-17 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 05/17/2016 02:48 PM, Lukas Zapletal wrote: With a symlink /etc/yum.repos.d to it. And for other type repository's -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Kernel plans for Fedora 24

2016-05-17 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 03/16/2016 04:01 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: With the 4.5 kernel out and the merge window for 4.6 opened up, we had to make a decision on what the release kernel for F24 would be. The decision has been made to ship F24 with the 4.5 kernel with 4.6 available as an update once it is ready.

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default reposdir

2016-05-17 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 05/17/2016 02:14 PM, Honza Šilhan wrote: there are a lot of good suggestions about the path name in the discussion. `/etc/distro.repos.d` probably wasn't the best chosen path so we've changed it to `/etc/repos.d` in the proposal. Moreover I've mentioned there possible path name

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default reposdir

2016-05-12 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 05/12/2016 08:07 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 09:36:32AM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: = Proposed System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default reposdir = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReposInEtcDistroReposD Change owner(s): * Neal Gompa * Jan Silhan ==

Re: No mass rebuild in Fedora 25

2016-05-02 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 05/02/2016 01:24 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: There is strong engineering value in having two releases per year: release early, release often. There are many projects that develop through Fedora that get thrown into disarray when our cycle gets too far out of whack (prominent examples being

Re: 4.4 rebase coming to F23 soon

2016-02-24 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 02/24/2016 05:22 PM, Laura Abbott wrote: On 02/18/2016 05:51 PM, Laura Abbott wrote: Hi, 4.4.2 is currently building and should be in updates-testing soon. As usual, please test and give karma appropriately (negative karma for new issues, not existing issues). Thanks, Laura A use

Re: Unexpected NIC naming f23 firewall implications

2015-11-10 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 11/10/2015 06:06 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 08:50:55PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: em* and p?p? come from biosdevname, which should not be used and is deprecated. I'm merely observing what happened when I updated a bunch of servers from F22 to F23. I didn't

Re: Unexpected NIC naming f23 firewall implications

2015-11-09 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 11/08/2015 07:29 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 05:28:54PM +, Christopher wrote: I recently updated my desktop to f23, and it went smoothly, for the most part. However, it broke my mediatomb server because the NIC changed from em1 to eno1. Is this something that

Re: Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2015-10-07)

2015-10-09 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 10/09/2015 02:16 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:50 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >I agree - the new wording does appear to give in to poor programming >practices. Bundling is_not_ intrinsically poor practice. Firefox is a good example of this, there have been

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-10-08 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 10/08/2015 12:31 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: >Badges was supposed to be that carrot for the mule's so perhaps there's >just missing new set of badges for this... > >1.https://badges.fedoraproject.org/ Those "badges" are completely useless

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-10-07 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 10/07/2015 11:21 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On 7 October 2015 at 16:41, Kevin Kofler wrote: >Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >>So the next step after that is that we reward people who lower a >>package's point. Good idea Kevin. > >"Reward" how? > I was thinking

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-15 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/15/2015 08:41 AM, Ian Malone wrote: On 14 September 2015 at 16:47, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson <johan...@gmail.com> wrote: They simply have welcomed their new container overlords and are using only the recommended upstream method for installing for their application ( pip,gem etc

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-15 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/14/2015 02:18 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Also, I'd like to be clear on this: whatever the outcome of this discussion, I want Fedora packagers to continue to work with their packages and upstreams to unbundle as much as possible. I think that this*does* lead to significant improvements

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-14 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/14/2015 07:08 AM, Josef Stribny wrote: On 09/12/2015 12:41 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 09/11/2015 09:09 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: What does Fedora users gain with "dnf install rails" or "dnf install ipython" versus "gem install rails&qu

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 05:51 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 13:35 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: As for which components, it's not about specific examples[1]. It's about solving the question in a generic way. We have quite a lot of software that isn't packaged for Fedora (either

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 06:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 12:06 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:51:42 -0700 Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 13:35 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: As for which components, it's not about

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/10/2015 01:53 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I assume that subject line got your attention. I know this is a long-standing debate and that this thread is likely to turn into an incomprehensible flamewar filled with the same tired arguments, but I'm going to make a proposal and then

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/10/2015 07:10 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: On 09/10/2015 09:53 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: The point of software is to provide a service to an end-user. Users don't run software because it has good packaging policies, they run software because it meets a need that they have. If they

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 07:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: In a world where bundling was allowed, the package would likely have been approved on initial review; the only significant issues found in review were bundling-related. There are a couple of trivial issues noted in #c7, but those would have been

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 07:16 PM, Haïkel wrote: 2015-09-11 21:09 GMT+02:00 Josh Stone: >On 09/11/2015 10:35 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >>Actually, the opposite is true. RHEL has fewer limitations in this >>space. Red Hat's layered projects ship a fair amount of bundled stuff.

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 07:59 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 19:32 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 09/11/2015 07:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: In a world where bundling was allowed, the package would likely have been approved on initial review; the only significant issues

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 06:40 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 18:27 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: I agree that the discussion here needs to be more broad-based; see the other thread fork. I was just providing support for Stephen's contention that this is not some airy-fairy

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 08:31 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: We certainly agree on that. > which has already been >answered by the board. >( people will first debate where to draw the line if that discussion >wont be killed in birth but in the end they end up with the same >question as has already been

Re: Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 09:09 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: What does Fedora users gain with "dnf install rails" or "dnf install ipython" versus "gem install rails" and "pip install ipython"? This indeed is very good question. I'm not sure how things are elsewhere in the world but in the case of gem's

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

2015-09-11 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On 09/11/2015 05:35 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: To me (speaking as a user of Fedora, maintainer of Fedora software and developer of both Fedora and upstream projects), the current situation is not ideal. In many cases, we're holding so rigidly to the "no bundling" policy that it is actively

Re: FESCo Meeting Minutes (2015-03-04)

2015-03-05 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 03/05/2015 02:44 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: While I would love to see 100% migration, the benefits for leaf packages aren't that big. We have fairly good compatibility support, and only a small number of people are using each package. Nobody can use those leaf packages unless

Re: FESCo Meeting Minutes (2015-03-04)

2015-03-05 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 03/05/2015 07:41 AM, Petr Pisar wrote: On 2015-03-04, Adam Jackson a...@redhat.com wrote: * #615 Strategy for services that do not have systemd native unit files (ajax, 18:03:09) * AGREED: drop sysvinit subpackages if a systemd unit file exists, in f23 (ajax, 18:17:32) *

Re: FESCo Meeting Minutes (2015-03-04)

2015-03-05 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 03/05/2015 01:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: * I think we should continue to encourage maintainers and upstreams to move to systemd native unit files wherever possible. Only a handful of maintainers migrated this themselves in the distribution so you ( as in FESCo) either has the intent

Re: FESCo Meeting Minutes (2015-03-04)

2015-03-05 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 03/05/2015 03:52 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 09:06 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: An typical outcome from a group of individuals that do not know what they are doing and are making decisions based on their own personal feeling and popularity rather then common sense

Re: FESCo Meeting Minutes (2015-03-04)

2015-03-05 Thread Jóhann B . Guðmundsson
On Mar 5, 2015 4:53 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 09:06:10AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: An typical outcome from a group of individuals that do not know what they are doing and are making decisions based on their own personal feeling

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

2015-02-27 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 02/27/2015 01:18 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Lennart Poettering mzerq...@0pointer.de wrote: On Mon, 23.02.15 08:45, Nico Kadel-Garcia (nka...@gmail.com) wrote: [ notes snipped, ] You know, that systemd creates a symlink if the file is missing is not

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

2015-02-26 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 02/26/2015 02:10 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: really? why? how do you come to that weird conclusion? surely, one can say not my package, not my problem but that's ignorant and needs no guidelines and policies - sanity should be enough I guess you did not grasp I was referring to the

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

2015-02-26 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 02/26/2015 03:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: and without the ownership model it would have been prevented what model would you use? you can't only say that model is wrong without any alternative I have already mentioned alternative before no need to repeat that proposal to you. Bottom

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

2015-02-26 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 02/26/2015 03:58 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 26.02.2015 um 16:54 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: On 02/26/2015 03:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: and without the ownership model it would have been prevented what model would you use? you can't only say that model is wrong without any

Re: systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

2015-02-26 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 02/26/2015 01:29 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 05:13:53PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: Sure I have a stake in systemd, but certainly none in fedora-release.rpm. But even for systemd, there are a number of people Sorry for the somewhat slow reply, but I've been

Re: i686 kernel bug priority plan

2015-02-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 02/25/2015 01:50 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively only x86_64 If you are going down that road you better ask for every arch kernel SIG to emerge or

Re: i686 kernel bug priority plan

2015-02-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 02/25/2015 02:15 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that platform Interesting so you are saying that the kernel sub community is effectively only x86_64 If you are

Re: initscripts

2015-01-27 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 01/27/2015 08:18 PM, Dan Williams wrote: We hope that NM can be installed on most systems, and will be there when required and useful, but will get out of the way when not required. Well I can confirm that NM pretty much does exactly that seeing as I have been running networkd for couple

Re: F22 System Wide Change: Enable Polyinstantiated /tmp and /var/tmp directories by default

2015-01-20 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 01/20/2015 11:53 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: = Proposed System Wide Change: Enable Polyinstantiated /tmp and /var/tmp directories by default = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Polyinstantiated_tmp_by_Default Change owner(s): Huzaifa Sidhpurwala huzai...@redhat.com Polyinstantiation of

Re: man-db without cache update (no cron or systemd *.timer)

2014-10-16 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 10/16/2014 12:03 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 05:53:41PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: I discussed this with Peter Schiffer and the end result was in the future the man-db cron should be removed and man-db database should be updated with rpm triggerand the cron

Re: man-db without cache update (no cron or systemd *.timer)

2014-10-16 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 10/16/2014 01:30 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:35:13AM +0200, Jan Chaloupka wrote: Forwarding Colin's response = On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 09:47:41AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Jan Chaloupka

Re: man-db without cache update (no cron or systemd *.timer)

2014-10-16 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 10/16/2014 05:10 PM, Jan Chaloupka wrote: Have you considered installing the timer file, but without the dependency? If systemd is there, it could use it, otherwise not. That would make a whole lot more sense to me than creating another package, and would be my recommendation. Nope,

Re: man-db without cache update (no cron or systemd *.timer)

2014-10-15 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 10/15/2014 05:36 PM, Ondrej Vasik wrote: On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 18:01 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 05:12:07PM +0200, Peter Schiffer wrote: On 10/15/2014 04:47 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Jan Chaloupka jchal...@redhat.com said: there has

Re: [systemd-devel] I wonder… why systemd provokes this amount of polarity and resistance

2014-09-23 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 09/23/2014 04:15 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: On 09/22/2014 12:53 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: For the journal you always keep all log history in it's original state On low-bandwidth systems, like laptops or diskless nodes, it's a performance hit to generate the log entry in the first place.

Re: [systemd-devel] I wonder… why systemd provokes this amount of polarity and resistance

2014-09-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 09/22/2014 12:58 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: i suggest you get rid of that arrogance and some other developers too because it's the reason for the subject and proves that you *do not* care about users as long you have not the same opinion you are the one demanding a friendly tone from me,

Re: [systemd-devel] I wonder… why systemd provokes this amount of polarity and resistance

2014-09-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 09/22/2014 02:25 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: (stripping systemd-devel) - Original Message - Am 22.09.2014 um 14:44 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: This is simply untrue as journalctl -o export will show you. where is it in the message? the process is systemd how to distinct

Re: [systemd-devel] I wonder… why systemd provokes this amount of polarity and resistance

2014-09-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 09/22/2014 04:35 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: For example if you want to see just error messages in the journal you use journalctl -p 3 or journalctl -b -p 3 if you want it only from last boot ( add boot id if you want to from specific boot ) or you add journalctl -b -p 3 -u httpd.service if

Re: [systemd-devel] I wonder… why systemd provokes this amount of polarity and resistance

2014-09-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 09/22/2014 04:53 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: For the journal you always keep all log history in it's original state On low-bandwidth systems, like laptops or diskless nodes, it's a performance hit to generate the log entry in the first place. It's really important to be able to configure the

Re: [systemd-devel] I wonder… why systemd provokes this amount of polarity and resistance

2014-09-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 09/22/2014 06:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: # Log systemd-logind to /var/log/secure :programname, isequal, systemd-logind -/var/log/secure :programname, isequal, systemd-logind stop :msg, contains, Starting Session stop :msg, contains, Started Session stop :msg, contains, Stopping

Re: F21 System Wide Change: cron to systemd time units

2014-05-20 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 05/20/2014 12:47 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: - Original Message - = Proposed System Wide Change: cron to systemd time units = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/cron-to-systemd-time-units Change owner(s): Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johannbg AT gmail DOT com Fix dependency on crontab

Re: We want to stop systemd from being added to docker images, because of rpm requiring systemctl.

2014-04-30 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/30/2014 01:44 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: I agree, where do I open a bugzilla to make this happen? rpm? Distro? Systemd? Dont you need to first file a change with FPC to the packaging guideline then file bug against every component that has that Require, then provide patches that

Re: We want to stop systemd from being added to docker images, because of rpm requiring systemctl.

2014-04-30 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/30/2014 02:52 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: On 04/30/2014 04:28 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: If you are right, this is an argument for rpm collections, which we've had for ages now and should really start using. YES! Getting rid of the copy-pasted rpm scriptlets would be a huge win. They are

Re: [RFC] plans for initscripts in F22

2014-04-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/25/2014 12:19 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: I too think that this split is a lot of work for small gain. Working out the full dependencies set of what needs what is going to take a while, but I think it would be better to simply shrink the package to nothing in small steps. I

Re: [RFC] plans for initscripts in F22

2014-04-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/24/2014 04:30 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: Only those that are maintained directly inside Fedora. Which is what we care about we cannot hold back progress in the distribution based on someone, someplace, somewhere might be using legacy cruff. It's better for everybody they themselves

Re: [RFC] plans for initscripts in F22

2014-04-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/25/2014 10:50 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 25.04.2014 12:40, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: On 04/24/2014 04:30 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: Only those that are maintained directly inside Fedora. Which is what we care about we cannot hold back progress in the distribution based on someone

Re: [Base] Fedora Base Design Working Group (2014-04-25) meeting minutes and logs

2014-04-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/25/2014 04:21 PM, Phil Knirsch wrote: Quick summary: - jwb already followed up on the agenda that the securetty has already been resolved - jreznik working with dglimore on the merge reviews - As pknirsch is on PTO next Friday, jreznik will run it - Good Open Floor discussion about

Re: [Base] Fedora Base Design Working Group (2014-04-25) meeting minutes and logs

2014-04-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/25/2014 04:50 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: all the compose tools fall into the base WG domain Compose tools != releng and it's service sub community. JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: [RFC] plans for initscripts in F22

2014-04-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/25/2014 05:30 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: That's certainly an option but it's not the only one; see the recent Functional threads for example. Sorry I did not want to get involved in yet another attack on our foundation, Last time I checked Fedora was not LSB certified nor compliant so

Re: [RFC] plans for initscripts in F22

2014-04-25 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/25/2014 10:53 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: I don't think our foundations ever implied that we need or want to be a closed ecosystem restricted to only the repository we produce. The just don't address this. You must understand we cannot keep back process in the distribution, be it

Re: The Forgotten F: A Tale of Fedora's Foundations

2014-04-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/22/2014 11:43 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I'd like to summon Máirín Duffy into this conversation here, if she's willing. She's done a fair amount of research into exactly how many and what kind of questions are reasonable to ask a user in startup before scaring them off or confusing

Re: Mass bug proposal: packages that auto-enable systemd units

2014-04-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/22/2014 06:50 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Hi all- I propose a mass bug against packages that install services and enable them without using the preset mechanism. Some of these can be security issues if they get installed as dependencies. I will revisit all of this once I run the

Re: Mass bug proposal: packages that auto-enable systemd units

2014-04-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/22/2014 09:32 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/22/2014 06:50 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Hi all- I propose a mass bug against packages that install services and enable them without using the preset

Re: Mass bug proposal: packages that auto-enable systemd units

2014-04-22 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/22/2014 10:14 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: I don't think that fixing the broken packages should need to wait for this migration to finish -- there is a security problem now, and it can be fixed now with local changes to the thirty-something affected packages. By all means provide

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Workstation: Disable firewall

2014-04-16 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/16/2014 12:40 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: But there would need to be a provable way to guarantee that only the XYZ application is able to open those ports. Same way there needs to be provable way for end users to guarantee they aren't receiving false positive selinux alerts to begin

Re: F21 System Wide Change: The securetty file is empty by default

2014-04-14 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 07:23 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: You are coming to this conclusion how exactly? The baseWG having to send special endorsement of the proposal in their name. So let's just clear this matter once and for all... Is the baseWG supposed to be responsible for the decisions and direction

Re: fedora-atomic discussion point: /usr/lib/passwd

2014-04-13 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 05:19 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 11.04.14 19:05, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote: There is broad agreement that future access to the user database database (both reading and writing) will be through sssd[1], and that the data model of /etc/{passwd,shadow} is too

Re: fedora-atomic discussion point: /usr/lib/passwd

2014-04-11 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 02:34 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: Within the systemd project we have been working on a scheme we call factory where packages can drop in static descriptions in /usr/lib of stuff they need in /etc and /var to work properly. The idea is to then use this information automatically

Re: fedora-atomic discussion point: /usr/lib/passwd

2014-04-11 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 02:47 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 11.04.14 14:41, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote: On 04/11/2014 02:34 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: Within the systemd project we have been working on a scheme we call factory where packages can drop in static

Re: fedora-atomic discussion point: /usr/lib/passwd

2014-04-11 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 03:11 PM, drago01 wrote: On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson johan...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/11/2014 02:47 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 11.04.14 14:41, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote: On 04/11/2014 02:34 PM, Lennart Poettering

Re: fedora-atomic discussion point: /usr/lib/passwd

2014-04-11 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 03:22 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 11.04.14 15:05, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote: On 04/11/2014 02:47 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: /etc is administrator space and evolving into administrator only space which means eventually nothing will be placing

Re: fedora-atomic discussion point: /usr/lib/passwd

2014-04-11 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 03:27 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: For me the factory systemd stuff is actually very much about containers. It's actually kinda my primary goal here: I want to allow deployment of a single /usr in a thousnad containers, so that each container's /etc and /var is automatically

Re: F21 System Wide Change: The securetty file is empty by default

2014-04-11 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/11/2014 04:18 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: = Proposed System Wide Change: The securetty file is empty by default = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/securetty_file_is_empty_by_default Change owner(s): quickbooksquickbooks.off...@gmail.com The securetty file is empty by default

Re: F21 system GCC changed to 4.9.0 prerelease

2014-04-10 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/10/2014 02:06 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: Hi! FYI, gcc in rawhide has been upgraded to 4.9.0 prerelease, please visit http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html if your package no longer builds. To investigate runtime

Re: trimming down Fedora installed size

2014-04-09 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/09/2014 07:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? Users should not have to result doing disk saving tips. I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating separated locale,doc,man packages JBG -- devel mailing list

Re: trimming down Fedora installed size

2014-04-09 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/09/2014 11:50 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/09/2014 07:23 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 04/09/2014 07:33 AM, Marius A wrote: Are there any other disk space saving tips? Users should not have to result doing disk saving tips. I

Re: trimming down Fedora installed size

2014-04-09 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/09/2014 02:31 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-page It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them. Whether they should or should not be installed by default depends on

Re: trimming down Fedora installed size

2014-04-09 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/09/2014 02:59 PM, Alexey I. Froloff wrote: On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 02:49:56PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: So, I'd question the usefulness of not installing man-page It's more about getting to the point of being able to remove them and or have the option not to install them

Re: trimming down Fedora installed size

2014-04-09 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/09/2014 04:14 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: C'mon, we have packages whose install-sizes are measured in 10ths and 100s of MBs ... and we have other dirs which can easily grow beyond any limits. I was refering to it being in the eye of the beholder so to speak but as I see it we need

Re: trimming down Fedora installed size

2014-04-09 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/09/2014 09:12 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 04/09/2014 10:05 PM, Billy Crook wrote: I would like to see logic like this: manpage files don't get installed unless/until: 1) packagename-manpages is requested to be installed by the user. that package would require the 'man' package. OR 2)

Re: trimming down Fedora installed size

2014-04-09 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/09/2014 10:06 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: no - if i type man whatever and that starts to pull 10 MB packages i stop and think 5 seconds if there is one of my ,ore than 30 machines which have it already That is you If I was concern with that I would have done the thinking ahead of time

Re: [Base] Base Design WG agenda meeting 4. Apr 2014 15:00 UTC on #fedora-meeting

2014-04-04 Thread Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 04/04/2014 12:42 PM, Phil Knirsch wrote: - Discuss https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-March/197074.html as task for Base This is just needs a feature owner and an individual to do the work and push it through - Discuss http://tinyurl.com/fedora-pkg-reviews as task

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >