On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 19:41 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Python 3 traditionally in Fedora was built with a shared library
> > libpython3.?.so and the final binary was dynamically linked against
> > that shared library. This change is about creating the static library
> > and linking the final
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 2:17 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 05. 11. 19 19:41, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> Python 3 traditionally in Fedora was built with a shared library
> >> libpython3.?.so and the final binary was dynamically linked against
> >> that shared library. This change is about creating
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 12:11 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> But, I still am having a hard time seeing the thing I quoted as a
> respectful
> approach. I avoided paraphrasing before, but I'm going to now, not to
> caricature what Randy said but to clarify how it sounds to me and
> what I'm
>
On 05. 11. 19 19:41, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Python 3 traditionally in Fedora was built with a shared library
libpython3.?.so and the final binary was dynamically linked against
that shared library. This change is about creating the static library
and linking the final python3 binary against it,
I
On 11/5/19 4:36 AM, Felix Schwarz wrote:
> Am 05.11.19 um 10:05 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
>> That seems to be a bug.
>
> Ok, I filed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768831
> (Hopefully we can get this fixed asap because we won't be able to fix this
> automatically once
On 05. 11. 19 21:11, Neal Gompa wrote:
We need a way to autogenerate the the Python language ABI dependency
then. So far, no solution has been presented, and that needs to be
fixed before this can be implemented. Without that and no library
dependency, we have no way of knowing what to rebuild.
Randy Barlow wrote:
> I haven't used Nix before, so I can't comment on that one, but in what
> way would Gentoo's solution require a substantial user experience
> change? When Gentoo added it, the only user experience change for me
> was when I wanted to pick a non-default slot (or as we call it,
Alex Scheel wrote:
> Special care needs to be taken to make sure we discuss what happens
> when a _module maintainer_ wants to switch the module stream of one
> of its dependencies, especially a dependency the user never
> specifically selected a stream for. That should be an allowed and fully
>
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 17:55 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> To avoid the word "slot", what I'm saying is why not just add a
> "Stream" field to the RPM spec file (so, instead of NEVR, it's NESVR),
> and provide a way for users to specify which streams they want to
> follow?
So, a couple of thoughts
Randy Barlow wrote:
> There's a second reason it's relevant to mention their 15 year track
> record: if they've been doing it 15 years, and during that time there
> haven't been significant complaints (there haven't), this indicates
> that their solution has a good chance of working well.
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 08:40:05PM -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> Matthew, my door is still open to talk.
Thanks. I think that would be a good idea. I replied to your private email.
Like I said before, I was at a conference last week, and I am on vacation
this week, and I have some family matters
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 5:57 PM Randy Barlow
> > We (Stephen Gallagher and I) discussed me writing a blog post to
> > revisit
> > these past questions when Zbigniew raised the question the other
> > day.
> > However, I haven't written it yet.
>
> +1
>
> Suggestion: could it be done as a page in
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 6:37 PM Randy Barlow
wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 14:14 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Well, exactly. This is what I meant with my short "who is going to do
> > that work?" comment. Gentoo's solution is not a drop-in thing for
> > Fedora and would require changes to
On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 01:18 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> The big difference is that Gentoo is source-based, whereas Fedora is
> binary-based. So where Gentoo needs to ship only one ebuild (the
> equivalent of a specfile) for foo-1.2.3 that the user can then
> compile against different choices of
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 21:17 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> This feature of "slotting" multiple EVRs of the same name actually
> already exists in RPM. DNF currently restricts this to packages that
> contain one of the following provides:
> * installonlypkg(kernel)
> * installonlypkg(kernel-module)
> *
On 11/5/19 4:59 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
… and Calamares …
... and Domoticz (Fedora), and Kodi (RPMFusion)...
Will this be as simple as a BR change in the spec or will application patches be
necessary?
___
devel mailing list --
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 14:14 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Well, exactly. This is what I meant with my short "who is going to do
> that work?" comment. Gentoo's solution is not a drop-in thing for
> Fedora and would require changes to RPM, DNF, and the *significant*
> work of figuring out what all
Neal Gompa wrote:
> This list is fairly comprehensive, but one thing I think was missed is
> that we lack a policy and mechanism for making buildroot-only packages
> externally consumable.
I think what we actually lack is a policy banning buildroot-only packages,
period.
> For example, the Rust
- Original Message -
> From: "Kevin Kofler"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 7:48:47 PM
> Subject: Re: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread
>
> Alex Scheel wrote:
> > Special care needs to be taken to make sure we discuss what happens
> > when a
On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 01:24 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Actually, it could also mean that Gentoo users are just in a habit of
> not complaining, no matter what. :-) After all, those are the same
> users who find it perfectly fine that installing the kernel or
> LibreOffice takes days (at least in
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 19:00 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Randy, I think you are misinterpreting Matthew’s statements here.
> You’re attributing malice and dismissiveness where “text is a poor
> communication medium” is a valid answer.
Hi Stephen,
Text is a poor communication medium. I've
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 19:13 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> For packagers who want to put the same spec file in all branches
> today (I think Kevin Koffler often likes to do this)
*Kofler - sorry for misspelling your name Kevin.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 9:08 PM Randy Barlow
wrote:
>
> > langdon wrote:
> > > > * compat-libs (or compat lib style): not discoverable, name
> > > > mangling
> >
> > Randy Barlow replied:
> > > Yeah I don't love this either.
> >
> > I don't understand why people dislike compatibility libraries so
Hi Adam!
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 15:24 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> This has a few consequences I can think of. For a start it means the
> actual problem we're currently having with our current module streams
> wouldn't necessarily be solved by your system - we could've run into
> exactly the
On 05. 11. 19 21:17, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I'm sure there are other pain points and I encourage you to share
them. Please adhere to the guidelines about objectively measurable
issues, though.
M1.
For traditional packages, there was a consistent and easy way to find a spec
file for a given
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 10:00:17PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
> Le mardi 05 novembre 2019 à 19:45 +0100, Tomasz Torcz a écrit :
> >
> >
> > I don't agree with centralisation. You should run your own DoH
> > endpoint,
> > using Google's, Cloudflare's or Quad9's servers is a
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 20:56:13 -0600
Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Nico Kadel-Garcia said:
> > Without robust integration with AD, I have no use
> > for FreeIPA. And I don't know *anyone* who uses a FreeIPA server.
> >
> > Perhaps it's time to drop FreeIPA?
>
> Nope. You are assuming
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 2:31:56 PM MST Randy Barlow wrote:
> This means that Gentoo has 15 years of experience with providing
> multiple versions of software streams to their users. As I said in my
> last e-mail, it's the analogous "you can learn from the XSS
> vulnerabilities that Firefox
On 06. 11. 19 0:26, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 11/5/19 4:59 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
… and Calamares …
... and Domoticz (Fedora), and Kodi (RPMFusion)...
Will this be as simple as a BR change in the spec or will application patches be
necessary?
Not for most cases. See this list:
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 6:42:43 PM MST Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-11-06 at 01:24 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Actually, it could also mean that Gentoo users are just in a habit of
> > not complaining, no matter what. :-) After all, those are the same
> > users who find it perfectly
Hello Fedora CI and Devel Teams!
The CI team will be performing a Jenkins plugin upgrade this Thursday to
allow us to switch from fedmsg to fedora-messaging. While performing this
upgrade, dist-git tests will be temporarily unavailable. When the upgrade
is complete and things appear good, we will
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 08:40:45PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 06:10:33PM -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> > Consider the message that comments like this one and your last post
> > send. I took the time to thoughtfully put together a set of ideas that
> > can solve our
Hello,
Please find the logs from today's NeuroFedora team meeting below:
- Logs (HTML):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-neuro/2019-11-05/neurofedora.2019-11-05-16.03.log.html
- Minute (HTML):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768810
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
On 11/3/19 9:38 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 2:21 AM Orion Poplawski wrote:
>>
>> On 11/1/19 1:47 PM, Daniel Walsh wrote:
>>> Flat pack should be doing a requires(post): selinux-policy-base
>>>
>>> To make sure it is installed before flatpack.
>>
>> Thanks. The proper
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 04:34:55PM +, Jeremy Cline wrote:
> I'd just like to say that I have found this thread very demoralizing. I
> think Randy has valid points and has brought them up far more
> respectfully than I could and I feel like it's being dismissed as
> trolling. I think this has a
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:58 PM Jeremy Cline wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 12:11:56PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 04:34:55PM +, Jeremy Cline wrote:
> > > I'd just like to say that I have found this thread very demoralizing. I
> > > think Randy has valid
Stephen Gallagher writes:
> My intention was to provide some scope to the problem, because it
> seemed that a lot of alternatives being floated were not seeing some
> of the more subtle cases that we were trying to address. However, the
> biggest problem is that nearly every email to the list
Miro Hrončok wrote:
> Only applications embedding Python need to link to libpython. That is what
> software like krita or blender
… and Calamares …
> are most likely doing.
Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Le mardi 05 novembre 2019 à 19:45 +0100, Tomasz Torcz a écrit :
>
>
> I don't agree with centralisation. You should run your own DoH
> endpoint,
> using Google's, Cloudflare's or Quad9's servers is a shortcut.
DoH has zero integration and manageability. “It’s not centralized” (but
you have
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 03:07:53PM +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
>
> I personally favor DoT as it would make use of the millions of dns
> server available on the net. DoH is too centralized to implement for now.
>
I don't agree with centralisation. You should run your own DoH endpoint,
using
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 02:14:29PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> If someone were to come by and say "I don't understand why you're doing all
> this, when it's been solved by AppImage since 2004", I'd say the same thing
> I'm telling Randy: you're welcome to work on that, but it's rude to tell the
> Python 3 traditionally in Fedora was built with a shared library
> libpython3.?.so and the final binary was dynamically linked against
> that shared library. This change is about creating the static library
> and linking the final python3 binary against it,
I oppose this change, because this is
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 3:22 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> Last week, I put out a blog post and fedora-devel thread describing
> the problems that we wanted to solve with Modularity. That thread was
> not ultimately as successful as I had hoped.
>
> My intention was to provide some scope to the
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 3:17 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> My intention was to provide some scope to the problem, because it
> seemed that a lot of alternatives being floated were not seeing some
> of the more subtle cases that we were trying to address. However, the
> biggest problem is that
Thanks for writing this post Langdon!
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 12:55 -0500, langdon wrote:
> * The two most promising candidates, Gentoo's slots (etc) and nix
> both
> require a substantial user experience change both as a command line
> person and in how / where things land in the OS. We believe
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 17:19 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Others have contacted me privately and indicated that my choice of
> words here did not convey the tone that I had intended. It makes it
> sound as if I am accusing people of being disingenuous.
For what it's worth, I didn't take it
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 12:11:56PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 04:34:55PM +, Jeremy Cline wrote:
> > I'd just like to say that I have found this thread very demoralizing. I
> > think Randy has valid points and has brought them up far more
> > respectfully than I
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 01:08:23PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> I think I mentioned that it would be possible, as OpenPKG actually
> worked this way.
>
> The key for this would be improving the user-experience with
> interacting with source RPMs and spec files with DNF. We've optimized
> *heavily*
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 2:15 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 01:08:23PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > I think I mentioned that it would be possible, as OpenPKG actually
> > worked this way.
> >
> > The key for this would be improving the user-experience with
> > interacting
Last week, I put out a blog post and fedora-devel thread describing
the problems that we wanted to solve with Modularity. That thread was
not ultimately as successful as I had hoped.
My intention was to provide some scope to the problem, because it
seemed that a lot of alternatives being floated
- Original Message -
> From: "Stephen Gallagher"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 3:17:28 PM
> Subject: Modularity: The Official Complaint Thread
~snip~
> 1. Once enabled, a module stream is never changed on behalf of the
> user.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 8:15 PM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 01:08:23PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > I think I mentioned that it would be possible, as OpenPKG actually
> > worked this way.
> >
> > The key for this would be improving the user-experience with
> > interacting
> Hi,
>
> It looks like some leftover from the past. I don't really see why it
> should be there.
>
> This commit removes that:
>
> https://github.com/fedora-selinux/selinux-policy-macros/commit/5f366657da0c7c67f2448be03620581437c2dfbb
>
> Fixing it also in Rawhide and F31.
Thanks a lot! Can it
On 10/25/19 10:15 AM, Randy Barlow wrote:
On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 09:43 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
That is true, but the wording used also implied that this design has
not been
considered.
The question of whether other designs have been considered has been
raised many times over the years,
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 14:57 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Yeah, the reason OpenPKG was able to do this is because their flavor
> of RPM had specific enhancements for it:
> * Macros used in the spec had their definitions embedded into the
> SRPM
> * Generated package names and provides were
Florian Weimer writes:
* Michael Cronenworth:
> On 11/4/19 2:17 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> We are not going to implement this directly in glibc. You should talk
>> to a stub resolver on 127.0.0.1 instead. We do not want to link a
>> cryptographic library into every process that queries an
See https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/merge_requests/870
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
dnsmasq can include the real dns server ips from a external file
19/11/5 12:51(e)an, Sam Varshavchik igorleak idatzi zuen:
> Florian Weimer writes:
>
>> * Michael Cronenworth:
>>
>> > On 11/4/19 2:17 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> >> We are not going to implement this directly in glibc. You should
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
2 of 45 required tests failed, 3 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests:
FAILED:
On 05. 11. 19 13:17, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 10:45:45 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 9/24/19 14:50, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 9:04 am, Tom Callaway wrote:
or know of some reason it shouldn't be brought back
Well this looks like gstreamer 0.10. I'm
Am 04.11.19 um 17:40 schrieb Michael Cronenworth:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any project or team involved with improving encrypted DNS
> support in Fedora? Any movement in Red Hat corporate?
>
> - Glibc team?
> The /etc/resolv.conf file needs some love. AFAIK it still does not
> verify DNSSEC.
> -
* Marius Schwarz:
> Am 04.11.19 um 23:52 schrieb Michael Cronenworth:
>> cryptographic library into every process that queries an Internet host
>>> name. That also applies to DNSSEC.
>>
>> The transition to DoT/DoH makes the resolv.conf file obsolete. Any
>> discussion on removing it entirely?
On 04/11/2019 23:51, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 11/4/19 2:18 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 12:04 pm, Stephen John Smoogen
>> wrote:
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Default_Local_DNS_Resolver
>>
>> Just in case of any possible confusion: this change
Hi,
I noticed that the latest update for scribus-generator (pushed to stable F30)
now provides + obsoletes python2-tkinter. This removes python2-tkinter (from
Fedora's "python2" package) and will install scribus+dependencies instead.
I don't understand why this change was done so asking here.
Hi everybody,
It looks like the recent shuffling around of header / pkgconfig / etc.
files between mesa and libglvnd introduced some regressions. At least
a few packages are failing to build in rawhide since those changes
were made, including mutter (probably that's important?) and mutter328
(the
* Michael Cronenworth:
> On 11/4/19 2:17 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> We are not going to implement this directly in glibc. You should talk
>> to a stub resolver on 127.0.0.1 instead. We do not want to link a
>> cryptographic library into every process that queries an Internet host
>> name.
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 09:44:43AM +0100, Felix Schwarz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that the latest update for scribus-generator (pushed to stable F30)
> now provides + obsoletes python2-tkinter. This removes python2-tkinter (from
> Fedora's "python2" package) and will install scribus+dependencies
Am 05.11.19 um 10:05 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
That seems to be a bug.
Ok, I filed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768831
(Hopefully we can get this fixed asap because we won't be able to fix this
automatically once python2-tkinter was removed in existing installs.)
On 05. 11. 19 15:33, Fabio Valentini wrote:
Hi everybody,
It looks like yesterday, koji stopped blocking and removing retired
packages from the f32 tag, or at least, it stopped doing so reliably.
The following packages have been retired a day ago, but today they are
all still tagged into f32,
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 4:14 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 05. 11. 19 15:33, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > It looks like yesterday, koji stopped blocking and removing retired
> > packages from the f32 tag, or at least, it stopped doing so reliably.
> >
> > The following packages
On Mon, 2019-11-04 at 20:40 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I actually quoted less than the entire message before because I felt
> like the rest of it was even more inflammatory and trolling and I
> didn't want to escalate.
Accusing someone of trolling is not consistent with the actions of a
So a few package need to adapt, they should have listed all the required
#includes in their source files already IMO
> So you mean to say that this has to be "fixed" in each individual
> package, from fedora f32 forward?
___
devel mailing list --
Am 05.11.19 um 16:01 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen:
>
>> To an extend in bandwidth, you could send out parallel queries and
>> check, if they match or if someone has tampered
>> with them. Would be a nice sideeffect.
> This breaks down for multiple reasons.
>
> I do a parallel query and I get two
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 10:45:45 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 9/24/19 14:50, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 9:04 am, Tom Callaway wrote:
> >> or know of some reason it shouldn't be brought back
> >
> > Well this looks like gstreamer 0.10. I'm really surprised we still
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:13 PM Leigh Scott wrote:
>
> See https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/merge_requests/870
So you mean to say that this has to be "fixed" in each individual
package, from fedora f32 forward?
Fabio
> ___
> devel mailing list --
Am 04.11.19 um 23:52 schrieb Michael Cronenworth:
> cryptographic library into every process that queries an Internet host
>> name. That also applies to DNSSEC.
>
> The transition to DoT/DoH makes the resolv.conf file obsolete. Any
> discussion on removing it entirely? Default to looking at a
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20191104.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20191105.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 29
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 20.91 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0 B
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 at 15:07, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> >
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#renaming-or-replacing-existing-packages
>
> Note that these Guidelines explicitly only apply to *renaming* and
> *replacing*existing packages, not the plain removal /
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 2:44 PM Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:52:00 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> > gstreamer was retired
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gstreamer/c/21fd6753e6c7f1fa1dee1045596b25fdb8c71f37?branch=f31
> >
> > the commit was reverted
> >
Am 05.11.19 um 14:21 schrieb Florian Weimer:
>
>> ahm.. in which way, does the use of encryption, make a sourcelist for
>> dns names to ask, obsolete?
> Names or servers?
"names of domainnameservers"
>> nscd i.e. uses resolv.conf as source for the round robin server list.
> With encryption, the
Michael Schwendt wrote on 2019/11/05 21:17:
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 10:45:45 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 9/24/19 14:50, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 9:04 am, Tom Callaway wrote:
or know of some reason it shouldn't be brought back
Well this looks like gstreamer 0.10. I'm
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 at 09:51, Marius Schwarz wrote:
>
> Am 05.11.19 um 15:17 schrieb Florian Weimer:
> > I categorically reject your notion that you can increase privacy by
> > sending queries to more servers. As a result, you will end up with a
> > larger set of servers you must trust, not a
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PythonStaticSpeedup
== Summary ==
Python 3 traditionally in Fedora was built with a shared library
libpython3.?.so and the final binary was dynamically linked against
that shared library. This change is about creating the static library
and linking the final
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:52:00 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> gstreamer was retired
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gstreamer/c/21fd6753e6c7f1fa1dee1045596b25fdb8c71f37?branch=f31
>
> the commit was reverted
>
On 05/11/2019 13:42, Tom Hughes wrote:
I don't think one CDN deploying a non-standard extension can reasonably
be described as meaning that SNI is now encrypted.
Yes it is encrypted if you're using a special test version of one
specific browser and you access a site run by one of a handful of
On 05/11/2019 13:38, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 02:09:31PM +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
DoH is IMHO a waste of resources and as Browsers implement it, useless
at best, but mostly a centralization of control of users under a false
protection umbrella.
Any modern Browser will do
Hi everybody,
It looks like yesterday, koji stopped blocking and removing retired
packages from the f32 tag, or at least, it stopped doing so reliably.
The following packages have been retired a day ago, but today they are
all still tagged into f32, and were part of two composes after they
were
Am 05.11.19 um 15:17 schrieb Florian Weimer:
> I categorically reject your notion that you can increase privacy by
> sending queries to more servers. As a result, you will end up with a
> larger set of servers you must trust, not a smaller one.
>
You don't need to trust them for your privacy,
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 02:09:31PM +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
> DoH is IMHO a waste of resources and as Browsers implement it, useless
> at best, but mostly a centralization of control of users under a false
> protection umbrella.
>
> Any modern Browser will do this sequence:
>
> User enters
* Marius Schwarz:
> Am 05.11.19 um 14:21 schrieb Florian Weimer:
>>
>>> ahm.. in which way, does the use of encryption, make a sourcelist for
>>> dns names to ask, obsolete?
>> Names or servers?
> "names of domainnameservers"
>
>>> nscd i.e. uses resolv.conf as source for the round robin server
Am 05.11.19 um 14:38 schrieb Tomasz Torcz:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 02:09:31PM +0100, Marius Schwarz wrote:
>> DoH is IMHO a waste of resources and as Browsers implement it, useless
>> at best, but mostly a centralization of control of users under a false
>> protection umbrella.
>>
>> Any modern
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768973
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #2 from
On 11/5/2019 12:11 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
To get a package in EPEL8, please open a bugzilla to have it put in.
I just checked, and there currently isn't a bugzilla requesting it.
It will also need the following packages put into EPEL8 to build and
possibly run.
python3-cairosvg
On 11/5/2019 2:37 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:01 AM Edward Diener
wrote:
On 11/5/2019 12:11 PM, Troy Dawson wrote:
To get a package in EPEL8, please open a bugzilla to have it put in.
I just checked, and there currently isn't a bugzilla requesting it.
It will also need
The following Fedora EPEL 7 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
448 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-3c9292b62d
condor-8.6.11-1.el7
189 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2019-c499781e80
python-gnupg-0.4.4-1.el7
187
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768131
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|perl-Text-Table |perl-Text-Table
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1765529
Emmanuel Seyman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|perl-Data-Serializer|perl-Data-Serializer
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2019/11/06/report-389-ds-base-1.4.2.3-20191106gitcc8bfec.fc31.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1768303
Praveen Singareddy changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 222 matches
Mail list logo
