Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Tuesday, August 27, 2019 10:03:51 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Technical_Specification > > The discussion and decision to not include firewall-config (GUI > configuration application for firewalld) by default, five years ago >

Re: 'showme' RPM dependency visualizer (was: Minimization Objective report)

Moved: https://pagure.io/minimization/rpm-showme I'm now updating all the references. On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 2:12 PM Adam Samalik wrote: > Yeah, that's a good point. I might rename the repo as well. Thanks for the > suggestion! > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 1:15 PM Dusty Mabe wrote: > >> >> >>

Minimization Objective report

This is the Minimization Objective [0] update. Status: Discovery phase == Toolbox == The 'showme' tool got renamed to 'rpm-showme' to make it more discoverable. It has been also moved to a new repository of the same name [1]. New features: * report — generates an html report [2] [3] comparing

Re: No longer supporting mailing lists:

I wrote: >> But what about the die-hard NNTP users? You entirely ignored my post to >> which you are supposedly replying. Gerald B. Cox replied: > I believe there is a plugin for that with Discourse: > https://meta.discourse.org/t/sync-discourse-with-nntp/58602 It would be great to get that

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:35 Miro Hrončok wrote: > If updates in rawhide gating fail the tests, what is the procedure? Should > they > be unpuhsed, or left to rot forever? > There are a few options here, fix the package so that the tests pass, disable the tests, or waive the results. If none of

unorphaning ladspa-swh-plugins

I'd like to take ownership of orphaned ladspa-swh-plugins package, because it's needed by some other packages I maintain. For some reason I missed the orphaning announcement, I'm sorry for that. What are the next steps to unorphan it? Thanks. FAS account: tartina Ciao Guido

Re: hwloc update with so-bump and mpich rebuild

Hi, I started doing the rebuilds now. I'll submit buildroot overrides as I go. (I was hoping to do this before the bodhi enablement in F31, but I got confused about the deadline). Unfortunately mpich now failed, so there'll be some delay. I'll submit one big update for F31 at the end. Zbyszek

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 17:11 -0700, John Harris wrote: > Workstation ships with sshd enabled by default, unless something has changed. It doesn't. This was definitely a conscious decision related to the firewall policy. See /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/80-workstation.preset , where sshd is

Re: ABRT configuration service removal

On Thu, 2019-08-22 at 12:25 +0200, Matej Grabovsky wrote: > Hi all, > > ABRT currently provides a D-Bus daemon, abrt-configuration, for > reading and > changing the config files of ABRT and its plugins. It was introduced > 6 > years ago without much fanfare and its source code has not been >

Re: Fedora 31: Noninstallable Python 2 packages to be retired just before the beta freeze

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 12:18:40PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 10:25 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > In line with the approved Fedora 31 change, packages that fail to install > > due to > > missing Python 2 dependencies are to be removed. I plan to retire the > >

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

Adam Williamson píše v Út 27. 08. 2019 v 16:01 -0700: > On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 15:06 +0200, Jiri Eischmann wrote: > > mcatanz...@gnome.org píše v Út 27. 08. 2019 v 15:07 +0300: > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:22 AM, John Harris < > > > joh...@splentity.com> > > > wrote: > > > > No, that is not how

Re: Debates/back and forths

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 07:03:00 -0400, Danny Lee wrote: > Hi all, Hi Danny, Open discussion is encouraged in the community and we try not to limit the scope of these discussions. We always learn something new from each other. Moderation is only used when the Code of Conduct is not followed, which

Re: Debates/back and forths

On 28 August 2019 13:34:54 CEST, "Dan Čermák" wrote: >Hi Danni, > >Danny Lee writes: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm new to the devel list and fedora in general, but i was wondering >if >> these kind of back and forths between a few people is a frequent >> occurrence.  I came to Fedora to volunteer

Re: [HEADS UP] Retiring python2 and introducing python27 later this week

On 28. 08. 19 14:48, Antonio Trande wrote: `python2-reportlab` looks no longer used by other packages. `python2-scons` is still required instead: $ repoquery --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=fedora-source --enablerepo=updates-source --release rawhide --whatrequires python2-scons

fedora-review broken?

While I'm trying to use it for a review on RPM Fusion I don't think the error is related... Just running fedora-review without any arguments produces this in the log: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/FedoraReview/review_helper.py", line 236, in run

Re: unorphaning ladspa-swh-plugins

On 28. 08. 19 8:47, Guido Aulisi wrote: I'd like to take ownership of orphaned ladspa-swh-plugins package, because it's needed by some other packages I maintain. For some reason I missed the orphaning announcement, I'm sorry for that. What are the next steps to unorphan it? Yes.

Re: [HEADS UP] Retiring python2 and introducing python27 later this week

I guess we need to keep `python2-reportlab` and `python2-scons`. On 27/08/19 22:20, Miro Hrončok wrote: > We are retiring python2 and introducing python27 later this week. > Rawhide only. > > If you plan to keep a Python 2 package in Fedora 32+, talk to me, I can > help you draft an exception

Re: Debates/back and forths

On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 07:03 -0400, Danny Lee wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm new to the devel list and fedora in general, but i was wondering > if > these kind of back and forths between a few people is a frequent > occurrence. I came to Fedora to volunteer what little spare time I > have > to help

Re: New release of Mock (fixes and subscription-manager support)

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 7:02 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 28. 08. 19 v 4:06 Nico Kadel-Garcia napsal(a): > > i will point out, from experience with subscription manager, that > > downloading RPM's from subscription-manager is unacceptably slow > > inmost build environments. Y > > Really?

Re: No longer supporting mailing lists:

Neal, while you're at it, can you find out what is going on with the RSS support. There was quite a bit of discussion about it - but that has been going on for years now and nothing seems to be happening. On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:49 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 2:31 PM

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 02:47:32PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 14:45, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 01:42:34PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 28. 08. 19 13:24, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Miro Hrončok

Re: New release of Mock (fixes and subscription-manager support)

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 5:54 AM Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 4:06:32 AM CEST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > i will point out, from experience with subscription manager, that > > downloading RPM's from subscription-manager is unacceptably slow > > inmost build environments.

Re: Debates/back and forths

Hi Danni, Danny Lee writes: > Hi all, > > I'm new to the devel list and fedora in general, but i was wondering if > these kind of back and forths between a few people is a frequent > occurrence.  I came to Fedora to volunteer what little spare time I have > to help the Fedora project in some

Fedora-31-20190828.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 21/152 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-31-20190826.n.0): ID: 437569 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/437569 ID: 437570 Test: x86_64

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On 28. 08. 19 9:32, Clement Verna wrote: On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:35 Miro Hrončok > wrote: If updates in rawhide gating fail the tests, what is the procedure? Should they be unpuhsed, or left to rot forever? There are a few options here, fix the

Re: [HEADS UP] Retiring python2 and introducing python27 later this week

On 28. 08. 19 13:02, Antonio Trande wrote: I guess we need to keep `python2-reportlab` and `python2-scons`. For what? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Correct path for package bash completion file

Ciao, what is the right path for package bash completion file? Most packages put then in %sysconf/bash_completion.d some other (and bash_completion itself) in %datadir/bash-completion/completions/ IMHO I think %sysconf should be for users and %datadir for packages Am I correct? Thanks Ciao

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On 28. 08. 19 13:24, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 28. 08. 19 9:32, Clement Verna wrote: On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:35 Miro Hrončok mailto:mhron...@redhat.com>> wrote: If updates in rawhide gating fail the tests, what is the

Re: Debates/back and forths

It's somewhat ironic that Discourse would solve this issue. As I previously mentioned, I also don't like having my inbox flooded with forum threads that don't interest me. The mailing list solution requires you setup filters or continuously delete dozens of emails. Discourse however allows you

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On 28. 08. 19 15:05, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: In this case I'd encourage to unpush update A since you know beforehand and are not interested in ever seeing this update go through. Do nothing is also an option, though it is less clear as what it means to other contributors. Makes sense. Thanks.

Re: f32/rawhide, nothing provides module(platform:f31)

* Kevin Fenzi: > On 8/26/19 7:57 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Kaleb Keithley: >> >>> `dnf update` on my f32/rawhide machine is giving me: >>> >>> Problem 1: conflicting requests >>> - nothing provides module(platform:f31) needed by module >>> bat:latest:3120190714171319:22d7e2a5-0.x86_64

Re: unorphaning ladspa-swh-plugins

Il giorno mer 28 ago 2019 alle ore 12:16 Miro Hrončok ha scritto: > > On 28. 08. 19 8:47, Guido Aulisi wrote: > > I'd like to take ownership of orphaned ladspa-swh-plugins package, > > because it's needed by some other packages I maintain. > > For some reason I missed the orphaning announcement,

Re: unorphaning ladspa-swh-plugins

On 28. 08. 19 12:30, Guido Aulisi wrote: Il giorno mer 28 ago 2019 alle ore 12:16 Miro Hrončok ha scritto: On 28. 08. 19 8:47, Guido Aulisi wrote: I'd like to take ownership of orphaned ladspa-swh-plugins package, because it's needed by some other packages I maintain. For some reason I

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20190828.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190827.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190828.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 7 Dropped packages:3 Upgraded packages: 116 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 2.39 MiB Size of dropped packages

Fedora-Rawhide-20190828.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 9 of 45 required tests failed, 6 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests: MISSING:

Re: Correct path for package bash completion file

On 28. 08. 19 13:42, Guido Aulisi wrote: Ciao, what is the right path for package bash completion file? Most packages put then in %sysconf/bash_completion.d some other (and bash_completion itself) in %datadir/bash-completion/completions/ IMHO I think %sysconf should be for users and %datadir

Re: No longer supporting mailing lists:

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:40 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: > I wrote: > >> But what about the die-hard NNTP users? You entirely ignored my post to > >> which you are supposedly replying. > > Gerald B. Cox replied: > > I believe there is a plugin for that with Discourse: > >

Re: [HEADS UP] Retiring python2 and introducing python27 later this week

`python2-reportlab` looks no longer used by other packages. `python2-scons` is still required instead: $ repoquery --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=fedora-source --enablerepo=updates-source --release rawhide --whatrequires python2-scons libffado-0:2.4.1-6.fc30.src minicomputer-0:1.41-26.fc31.src

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:24 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Is the issue about updates lingering in -testing? > I imagine this could cause some issues for e.g. generic tests that test everything in -testing in one go, instead of just one particular NVR, for performance reasons (like

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On 28. 08. 19 14:45, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 01:42:34PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 28. 08. 19 13:24, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 28. 08. 19 9:32, Clement Verna wrote: On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:35

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

John Harris wrote: > Consider this. Our default ssh config, under your firewall config, would > allow > any system on any network your system is connected to to break in. Only if you have chosen a worthless passphrase. Fedora's default SSHD configuration – on those spins where SSHD is actually

Re: New release of Mock (fixes and subscription-manager support)

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 4:06:32 AM CEST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > i will point out, from experience with subscription manager, that > downloading RPM's from subscription-manager is unacceptably slow > inmost build environments. You *will* want to use CentOS 8, or arrange > a subscription to

Debates/back and forths

Hi all, I'm new to the devel list and fedora in general, but i was wondering if these kind of back and forths between a few people is a frequent occurrence.  I came to Fedora to volunteer what little spare time I have to help the Fedora project in some little ways. I don't feel that should

Re: New release of Mock (fixes and subscription-manager support)

Dne 28. 08. 19 v 4:06 Nico Kadel-Garcia napsal(a): > i will point out, from experience with subscription manager, that > downloading RPM's from subscription-manager is unacceptably slow > inmost build environments. Y Really? cdn.redhat.com is handled by CDN Akamai. It should be pretty fast. Thou,

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 9:32, Clement Verna wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:35 Miro Hrončok > > wrote: > > > > If updates in rawhide gating fail the tests, what is the procedure? > > Should

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 01:42:34PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 13:24, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:16:09PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 28. 08. 19 9:32, Clement Verna wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 15:35 Miro

Re: Minimization Team Meeting notes 2019-08-28

On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 17:43 +0200, Adam Samalik wrote: > Minutes: > https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-08-28/minimization.2019-08-28-15.00.html > Minutes (text): > https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-08-28/minimization.2019-08-28-15.00.txt > Log: >

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 03:11:33PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 28. 08. 19 15:05, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > In this case I'd encourage to unpush update A since you know beforehand > > > > and are > > > > not interested in ever seeing this update go through. > > > > Do nothing is also

Re: Debates/back and forths

On 19-08-28 07:03:00, Danny Lee wrote: Hi all, I'm new to the devel list and fedora in general, but i was wondering if these kind of back and forths between a few people is a frequent occurrence.  I came to Fedora to volunteer what little spare time I have to help the Fedora project in some

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 31 Beta Freeze

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:52:00 -0700 Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 8/27/19 4:27 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 27. 08. 19 13:06, Paul Howarth wrote: > >> On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:55:18 -0400 > >> Mohan Boddu wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Today's an important day on the Fedora 31 schedule[1],

Re: Rawhide gating: What shell be done with failed updates?

On 28. 08. 19 16:18, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 03:11:33PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 28. 08. 19 15:05, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: In this case I'd encourage to unpush update A since you know beforehand and are not interested in ever seeing this update go through. Do

Fedora 31 compose report: 20190828.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-31-20190826.n.0 NEW: Fedora-31-20190828.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 9 Dropped packages:13 Upgraded packages: 202 Downgraded packages: 1 Size of added packages: 924.23 MiB Size of dropped packages:333.07 MiB

Re: Debates/back and forths

Open debate is essential =) But sometimes threads get drowned by Excessive Participation (TM) from one or two people replying to every sub-thread and sub-sub-thread. Eg, "Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall" thread has 25+ people and 100+ replies, but a quarter of the replies

Minimization Team Meeting notes 2019-08-28

Minutes: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-08-28/minimization.2019-08-28-15.00.html Minutes (text): https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-08-28/minimization.2019-08-28-15.00.txt Log:

Re: Debates/back and forths

On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 07:03 -0400, Danny Lee wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm new to the devel list and fedora in general, but i was wondering if > these kind of back and forths between a few people is a frequent > occurrence. I came to Fedora to volunteer what little spare time I have > to help the

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 3:33:48 AM MST Jiri Eischmann wrote: > Adam Williamson píše v Út 27. 08. 2019 v 16:01 -0700: > > > On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 15:06 +0200, Jiri Eischmann wrote: > > > > > mcatanz...@gnome.org píše v Út 27. 08. 2019 v 15:07 +0300: > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 2:45:37 AM MST Björn Persson wrote: > If an attacker guesses your passphrase, then it's your weak passphrase > that allows them to break in. No. Having it wide open to the network means it can be broken, even through brute force if necessary. > (That said, I'd be

Re: Minimization Objective report

This was an awesome objective update and one I hope we will see more of from other Objectives! regards, bex On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 10:33 AM Adam Samalik wrote: > This is the Minimization Objective [0] update. > > Status: Discovery phase > > == Toolbox == > > The 'showme' tool got renamed to

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On 19-08-28 01:03:51, Chris Murphy wrote: On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:26 PM Christopher wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:27 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > > > The Workstation technical specification document says in part: > > Where is the full technical specification document, so one can

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 31 Beta Freeze

I'm still getting these messages when I try to do "fedpkg update" for F31: fedpkg update Could not execute update: Could not generate update request: Cannot find release associated with build: copyq-3.9.2-1.fc31, tags: ['f31'] A copy of the filled in template is saved as bodhi.template.last On

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:36 AM John Harris wrote: > Essentially disabling the firewall falls under having a "bad design for > everyone else". Disabling the firewall is something that could be considered > hostile to the user. This is hyperbole, and turning up the volume isn't going to make

Re: fedora-review broken?

On 28. 08. 19 20:09, Robert-André Mauchin wrote: On Wednesday, 28 August 2019 19:30:28 CEST Richard Shaw wrote: On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:53 AM Bob Mauchin wrote: What's the mock config file you are using? From the error it seems it's missing config_opts['root'] I should have posted the

Re: fedora-review broken?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 15:12 Richard Shaw wrote: > While I'm trying to use it for a review on RPM Fusion I don't think the > error is related... > > Just running fedora-review without any arguments produces this in the log: > > Traceback (most recent call last): > File

University people in Fedora: Education/University SIG

Hello everyone, This is a follow-up email for some "coffee discussions" we had at flock a few weeks ago. Sorry for the delay! The Fedora community contains a lot of university students, many of us packaging tools for their courses and acting as first-level Linux support for the local student

Re: [HEADS UP] Retiring python2 and introducing python27 later this week

On 27. 08. 19 22:20, Miro Hrončok wrote: We are retiring python2 and introducing python27 later this week. Rawhide only. As for now, nothing should break, except python2-debug will exist no more. Packages (build)requiring python2 or python2-devel should continue to work for now. If not, let

qd license change: BSD to LBNL BSD

I am building qd 2.3.22 in Rawhide right now. The license has been corrected from "BSD" to "LBNL BSD". -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: fedora-review broken?

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:53 AM Bob Mauchin wrote: > >> > What's the mock config file you are using? From the error it seems it's > missing config_opts['root'] > I should have posted the full command anyway so here it is: $ fedora-review --rpm-spec -n plex-media-player-2.40.0-2.fc29.src.rpm

Re: fedora-review broken?

On Wednesday, 28 August 2019 19:30:28 CEST Richard Shaw wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:53 AM Bob Mauchin wrote: > > What's the mock config file you are using? From the error it seems it's > > missing config_opts['root'] > > I should have posted the full command anyway so here it is: > > $

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:01 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:36 AM John Harris wrote: > > > Essentially disabling the firewall falls under having a "bad design for > > everyone else". Disabling the firewall is something that could be considered > > hostile to the user. > >

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:57 PM Christopher wrote: > > At the very least, it'd be nice if anaconda had an option to select > the default firewalld zone during installation, A somewhat related feature that was rejected by FESCo https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SecurityPolicyInTheInstaller

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 9:05:00 AM MST Tony Nelson wrote: > Properly packaged Fedora software uses either the D-Bus interface > at runtime or firewall-cmd in a scriptlet at install time to open any > needed ports This is not actually the case. No software, to my knowledge, makes the

Re: Debates/back and forths

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 5:09:23 AM MST Gerald B. Cox wrote: > It's somewhat ironic that Discourse would solve this issue. As I > previously mentioned, I also don't like having my inbox flooded with forum > threads that don't interest me. The mailing list solution requires you > setup

Re: Debates/back and forths

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 9:27:56 AM MST Chris Peters wrote: > Maybe the code of conduct could politely nudge people towards *quality* over > quantity (so that voices don't get drowned and big threads aren't so > tiresome to keep up with) Such a rule would make it very difficult indeed to

Re: University people in Fedora: Education/University SIG

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 9:42:15 AM MST Timothée Floure wrote: > Hello everyone, > > This is a follow-up email for some "coffee discussions" we had at flock a > few weeks ago. Sorry for the delay! > > The Fedora community contains a lot of university students, many of us > packaging tools

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 4:27 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > That is talking about the whole idea that having a firewall enabled by > default is not as important if there are no listening services by > default; at that point you can make the argument that installing a > service that listens on a

Fwd: Fedora 32 Self-Contained Change proposal: Switch mingw32 toolchain to dwarf-2 exceptions

(Manually forwarding to devel-announce as we work out some tooling issues) -- Forwarded message - From: Date: Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 4:23 PM Subject: Fedora 32 Self-Contained Change proposal: Switch mingw32 toolchain to dwarf-2 exceptions To: , == Issue Link ==

Re: Fedora-31-20190828.n.0 compose check report

On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 13:24 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: > No missing expected images. > > Failed openQA tests: 21/152 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) So most of the failures boil down, I think, to one bug: gnome-initial- setup isn't working. We've had various incarnations of this problem in rapid

Re: fedora-review broken?

> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 15:12 Richard Shaw > wrote: > > While I'm trying to use it for a review on RPM Fusion I don't > think the error is related... > > Just running fedora-review without any arguments produces this in > the log: > > Traceback

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:56 PM, Christopher wrote: 2) the Workstation WG has not only taken no action in response to the FESCo statement of trust at the conclusion of our last lengthy discussion on this matter, it has been explicitly stated in this thread that they have never had any intention

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 3:33 PM wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:56 PM, Christopher > wrote: > > 2) the Workstation WG has not only taken no action in response to the FESCo > statement of trust at the conclusion of our last lengthy discussion on this > matter, it has been explicitly

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2019-08-29 16:00 UTC)

Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2019-08-29 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Thursday == 2019-08-29 09:00 PDT US/Pacific 2019-08-29

Fedora 32 Self-Contained Change proposal: Switch mingw32 toolchain to dwarf-2 exceptions

== Issue Link == https://teams.fedoraproject.org/project/changes-tracker/issue2 == Summary == Switch the mingw32 toolchain to dwarf-2 exceptions, instead of SJLJ. == owner == smani == Detailed Description == # Detailed Description The two exception modes supported by mingw32 targets are

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 22:32 +0300, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:56 PM, Christopher > wrote: > > 2) the Workstation WG has not only taken no action in response to the > > FESCo statement of trust at the conclusion of our last lengthy > > discussion on this matter, it

Re: RPM building on s390x sometimes is very slow on F-30+

Hello All, I've just got hit by this again - lockups on s390. Looks like I have 100% reproducer (just try to build Erlang and it will stuck eventually). * https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=37327589 Where should I open a ticket? Bugzilla.redhat.com or somewhere else? чт, 25

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

FWIW, For Fedora CoreOS we don't enable a firewall by default; see https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/26 (Neither for that matter does Fedora Cloud: https://pagure.io/fedora-kickstarts/blob/master/f/fedora-cloud-base.ks#_36 ) ___

Re: Fedora 32 Self-Contained Change proposal: Switch mingw32 toolchain to dwarf-2 exceptions

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 4:23 PM wrote: > > == Issue Link == > https://teams.fedoraproject.org/project/changes-tracker/issue2 > This is incorrect. The correct link is: https://teams.fedoraproject.org/project/changes-tracker/issue/2 -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:23 PM John Harris wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 8:13:59 PM MST Christopher wrote: > > The default firewall config affects every user of that edition, even > > if they never use GNOME (or even use graphical boot). So, I don't know > > if this would be

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 10:00:35 PM MST Christopher wrote: > No, the default firewalld zone affects all Fedora Workstation users, > because firewalld runs outside of GNOME. Just because a user uses the > Workstation Edition doesn't mean they're running GNOME... you can > still run Cinnamon,

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:08 AM John Harris wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 10:00:35 PM MST Christopher wrote: > > No, the default firewalld zone affects all Fedora Workstation users, > > because firewalld runs outside of GNOME. Just because a user uses the > > Workstation Edition

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 12:59:17 PM MST Christopher wrote: > Yeah, obviously that would be bad. Please don't simply dismiss a > serious suggestion, because it would be bad in other scenarios or if > taken to the extreme. This is one specific suggestion, not a proposal > to accept all similar

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 1:35:32 PM MST Colin Walters wrote: > FWIW, > > For Fedora CoreOS we don't enable a firewall by default; see > https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/26 > > (Neither for that matter does Fedora Cloud: >

Re: Debates/back and forths

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 7:04 AM Danny Lee wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm new to the devel list and fedora in general, but i was wondering if > these kind of back and forths between a few people is a frequent > occurrence. I came to Fedora to volunteer what little spare time I have > to help the

Re: University people in Fedora: Education/University SIG

I think a SIG is a great start as a gathering place for other university students. As shown in [2], it looks like a mailing list is also one of the eventual goals :) - Tim Zabel On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 17:26 -0700, John Harris wrote: > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 9:42:15 AM MST Timothée

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 8:56 PM John Harris wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 5:46:58 PM MST Christopher wrote: > > A similar idea that would keep it separate from the installer might be > > to offer a dialogue as a "first-boot" action, but that seems like it'd > > be a very GNOME-specific

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 8:13:59 PM MST Christopher wrote: > The default firewall config affects every user of that edition, even > if they never use GNOME (or even use graphical boot). So, I don't know > if this would be adequate. This only affects GNOME users. Workstation = GNOME Spin.

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 10:00:03 AM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > This is hyperbole, and turning up the volume isn't going to make > anyone go "oh, ok, now I see your point, it's hostile and we don't > want to do that, let's change it" as if literally everyone reading > this is some kind of

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 6:52 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:57 PM Christopher > wrote: > > > > At the very least, it'd be nice if anaconda had an option to select > > the default firewalld zone during installation, > > A somewhat related feature that was rejected by FESCo

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 3:50:49 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > A somewhat related feature that was rejected by FESCo > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SecurityPolicyInTheInstaller > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-March/19.html Security policies aren't related

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 5:46:58 PM MST Christopher wrote: > A similar idea that would keep it separate from the installer might be > to offer a dialogue as a "first-boot" action, but that seems like it'd > be a very GNOME-specific thing, and firewalld is not specific to the > WM/Desktop. It

Re: Fedora Workstation and disabled by default firewall

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, at 8:59 PM, John Harris wrote: > On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 1:35:32 PM MST Colin Walters wrote: > > FWIW, > > > > For Fedora CoreOS we don't enable a firewall by default; see > > https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/26 > > > > (Neither for that matter

  1   2   >