On 10. 03. 21 10:47, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:27 AM Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
Hello,
Thank you for your suggestions, but as you might understand, I do not have the
capacity to resolve problems of dependent packages when building with
autoconf-2.71.
I can only prepare
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Wednesday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on
irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2021-03-10 15:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to
On Tuesday, 09 March 2021 at 21:17, Reon Beon via devel wrote:
> coreboot-util is deprecated, no?
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/coreboot-utils is retired. Someone
could still pick it up before F34 enters Final Freeze.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion
Good morning,
I'm initiating the non-responsive maintainer process for nhorman. I
heard on the grapevine that he left Red Hat a few months ago, which -
if true - would explain why some bugs for his packages were modified
by RH employees so he is no longer the Assignee for them (and his
email link
Thanks for advice guys, setting commitish to back rawhide in copr.
Sorry for the bad advice to other maintainers. Please use pull-requests
against rawhide as Miro mentioned.
Ondrej.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:01 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 10. 03. 21 10:47, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> > On Wed,
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 09:28, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thank you for your suggestions, but as you might understand, I do not have
> the capacity to resolve problems of dependent packages when building with
> autoconf-2.71.
>
As I wrote so far I found only two packages which are not ac
I agree with David.
While I am sure that we can fix every bit of the distribution and
documentation to refer to "Fedora Linux", I don't think there is a way
to change people to refer in colloquial language to Fedora, the
operating system, as a Fedora Linux. I'll certainly keep using sentences
Hello,
Thank you for your suggestions, but as you might understand, I do not have
the capacity to resolve problems of dependent packages when building with
autoconf-2.71.
I can only prepare autoconf-2.71 and compat package autoconf2.69-2.69 for
other maintainers, so they are able to make
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:27 AM Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Thank you for your suggestions, but as you might understand, I do not have
> the capacity to resolve problems of dependent packages when building with
> autoconf-2.71.
>
> I can only prepare autoconf-2.71 and compat package
How about changing /etc/redhat-release ? I am specifically asking this
in the context of Vagrant, which seems to use this file to detect Fedora.
Vít
Dne 09. 03. 21 v 19:11 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 07:02:10PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Are we going to move from
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20210309.0):
ID: 806309 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 09:27:49AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> How about changing /etc/redhat-release ? I am specifically asking
> this in the context of Vagrant, which seems to use this file to
> detect Fedora.
That does seem to be set from NAME, and Vagrant does this:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 01:24:36PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> I don't think "Linux" conveys the distinction between those things and
> ELN. Someone who hears "Fedora Linux" won't understand that it comprises
> both Workstation and CoreOS but not ELN. It would be better to come up
> with another
Dne 10. 03. 21 v 13:32 Petr Menšík napsal(a):
Is there reason why we consider new release keys as completely unrelated
to previous keys? Is it technical decision or just lack of better
implementation?
No one done this yet. Feel free to take it. I will love to have this.
--
Miroslav Suchy,
Hi Matthew Miller,
I got mixed feeling, I understand the reason why but I don't quite
understand why you don't want to use "Fedora GNU/Linux". Read you
comment on others email but the is not much details. Could you explain
again in details? Perhaps explain on Wiki too..
p/s :
- Can we have
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Of course, the obvious response is that it hasn't stuck. That might be
> partly true, but it also definitely _has_ for other people (see for example
> the `httpd` package naming in our own repos)
Debian, on the other hand, has an apache2 package, /usr/sbin/apache2,
On 3/10/21 1:32 PM, Petr Menšík wrote:
I think Björn's point is valid note. Because DNSSEC is used to verify
email of used key, but fedora.repo does not contain any hint about how
email in GPG key should look like. Also does not contain fingerprint of
such key. It would be nice to include email
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 10:29:53AM -0500, Felix Kaechele via devel wrote:
...
[snip great email]
...
> So I'd appreciate some input here as to what the best way forward would be
> from a distribution engineering perspective.
Hi Felix, that's a fantastic write up!
I think you have outlined the
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 08:04:01PM -0500, Christopher wrote:
> I get the idea that it's useful to draw a distinction between the
> project and the product, and agree with the goal. The upstream naming
> preference wasn't really my point in those examples, though. My
> examples were an attempt to
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:26:55 +0100
Björn Persson wrote:
> It's better to give the whole distribution its own name, and not name
> it after any of its components. Fedora is a software distribution. It
> contains Linux, many GNU components, RPM, MariaDB, Libreoffice and
> lots of other things, but
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:15 AM Robbi Nespu
wrote:
>
> I got mixed feeling, I understand the reason why but I don't quite
> understand why you don't want to use "Fedora GNU/Linux". Read you
> comment on others email but the is not much details. Could you explain
> again in details?
From the
According to the schedule [1], Fedora 34 Candidate Beta-1.1 is now
available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation
testing! For more information on release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan
Test coverage information for the
> We make EPEL, ELN, and thousands of packages in Copr. These are all part of
> Fedora — but aren't Fedora Linux. We also make artwork, music,
> documentation, videos, websites, tools, and more. These things too are part
> of our project, but aren't part of the Fedora Linux distribution.
ELN also
I think Björn's point is valid note. Because DNSSEC is used to verify
email of used key, but fedora.repo does not contain any hint about how
email in GPG key should look like. Also does not contain fingerprint of
such key. It would be nice to include email of included GPG key in repo
file itself.
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210309.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210310.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 7
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 61
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:929.81
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> 2. Why Linux and not GNU/Linux? Linux is just a kernel. GNU/Linux is an OS.
It was very predictable that this argument would happen, and that's why
I've been quite happy that Fedora is just "Fedora" with no "Linux" in
the name.
If we're going to name the
Matthew Miller wrote:
> leading to things like
> people saying "Oh, that's in CoreOS, not Fedora", where the shorthand is
> more confusing than helpful.
What should that be instead? "That's in CoreOS, not Linux" is no better.
"That's in Fedora CoreOS, not Fedora Linux" makes no sense either,
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021, at 10:02 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 7:46 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > On 09.03.2021 00:10, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
> > > Is there something I can do to sed out the -qt5 suffix, or should I
> > > just bite the bullet, build the
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 10:19:53PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Fedora actually *has* other things branded Fedora today, and may do so
> for more things in the future. They don't have the opportunity to get
> attention because our ability to present ourselves beyond the Linux
> distribution sucks.
>
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 09:20:21AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> However, I can imagine that somebody will correct me that the right
> way is to say "I have installed Fedora Linux on my LP", because
> "Fedora" does not exist in this context.
Here's my suggestion: if you're writing formal Fedora
As a reminder to the community, we've reached the point in the year where
jurisdictions around the world begin or end summer time. Be sure to check
your recurring meetings on Fedocal[1] to make sure you know when you're
meeting. Some meetings are set to a fixed time UTC and
others are set to a
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:15:23AM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 06:57, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
>
> > If any concerns about the autoconf2.69-2.69 compat package ? If needed it
> > can be implemented as non-parallelly instalable,
> >
>
> Really .. instead wasting time on
Please, keep simple "Fedora".
Don't make us ridiculous.
I vote -1.
ср, 10 мар. 2021 г., 22:22 Reon Beon via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>:
> uname -a
>
> Linux fedora 5.12.0-0.rc2.165.fc35.x86_64 #1 SMP Sat Mar 6 16:32:15 UTC
> 2021 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> Shouldn't fedora
Dne 10. 03. 21 v 19:28 Colin Walters napsal(a):
With this model, the fingerprint changing is a hard failure.
Yes. But the question is whether you can easily find that you have been attacked or you are under attack. Yes,
fingerprint is better than comparing whole key, but the UX still sucks.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 07:21:44PM -, Reon Beon via devel wrote:
> uname -a
>
> Linux fedora 5.12.0-0.rc2.165.fc35.x86_64 #1 SMP Sat Mar 6 16:32:15 UTC 2021
> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> Shouldn't fedora be capitalized?
No. The 2nd word of the output of "uname -a" is the nodename
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:47:44AM +0500, Vladislav Kazakov wrote:
> I can already see huge misunderstandings outside of mailing lists.
> In my opinion, “Fedora” is better.
Where are you seeing huge misunderstandings? What misunderstandings are
there? Are these misunderstandings the sole reason
Dne 10. 03. 21 v 20:43 Petr Menšík napsal(a):
If we finally fixed periodic gpg key breakage on new release
branching, it should have been obtained by trusted way.
F36 gpg key has been already released. I thin that this summer we will have correct gpg keys all the time and branching
will be
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 7/187 (x86_64), 19/126 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-34-20210309.n.0):
ID: 807568 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/807568
ID: 807623 Test: aarch64
No missing expected images.
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
4 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 21/187 (x86_64), 19/110 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed
On 3/10/21 5:43 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, at 7:32 AM, Petr Menšík wrote:
>> I think Björn's point is valid note. Because DNSSEC is used to verify
>> email of used key, but fedora.repo does not contain any hint about how
>> email in GPG key should look like. Also does
I can already see huge misunderstandings outside of mailing lists.
In my opinion, “Fedora” is better.
-1.
Чт, 11 марта 2021 г. в 00:30, Vascom :
> Please, keep simple "Fedora".
>
> Don't make us ridiculous.
>
> I vote -1.
>
> ср, 10 мар. 2021 г., 22:22 Reon Beon via devel <
>
uname -a
Linux fedora 5.12.0-0.rc2.165.fc35.x86_64 #1 SMP Sat Mar 6 16:32:15 UTC 2021
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Shouldn't fedora be capitalized?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
On Wed, 2021-03-10 at 09:52 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> [snip]
> A global list of time changes is available by country[2] and by
> date[3], but here are a few highlights:
>
> 14 March — summer time begins in Canada, parts of Mexico, and the US
Actually in Canada we have four seasons, so
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd x86_64
Iot dvd aarch64
Failed openQA tests: 8/15 (aarch64), 1/16 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210308.0):
ID: 807847 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_rpmostree_overlay@uefi
URL:
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64), 2/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210308.0):
ID: 807873 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso base_services_start
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/807873
ID: 807882 Test: aarch64
Minutes:
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-03-10/fesco.2021-03-10-15.02.html
Minutes (text):
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-03-10/fesco.2021-03-10-15.02.txt
Log:
Dne 10. 03. 21 v 17:43 Colin Walters napsal(a):
For 3rd party repositories like COPR, as I noted in that issue I think the best
is to bootstrap trust over TLS - e.g. we have
```
gpgkeyfingerprint=
```
Would you, as sysadmin, notice if the fingerprint changed (because of
attacker)? I
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 8/176 (x86_64), 24/126 (aarch64)
ID: 806874 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_master
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/806874
ID: 806875 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_replica
URL:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, at 7:32 AM, Petr Menšík wrote:
> I think Björn's point is valid note. Because DNSSEC is used to verify
> email of used key, but fedora.repo does not contain any hint about how
> email in GPG key should look like. Also does not contain fingerprint of
> such key. It would be
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 10. 03. 21 v 17:43 Colin Walters napsal(a):
> > For 3rd party repositories like COPR, as I noted in that issue I think the
> > best is to bootstrap trust over TLS - e.g. we have
> > ```
> > gpgkeyfingerprint=
> > ```
>
> Would you,
For me I go with your first suggestion:
Keep it simple for the OS, just fedora, as it already is; and for the
overall effort, Fedora Project. It works already.
Em qua, 10 de mar de 2021 09:27, Björn Persson
escreveu:
> Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > 2. Why Linux and not GNU/Linux? Linux is
On 10/03/21 03:22 -, Scott Williams wrote:
I'm +1 on "Fedora Linux". I believe it adds clarity, especially when talking with software
vendors. IE, "I'm running Fedora Linux" is less ambiguous than having to explain that Fedora is
Linux after telling your ISP's support, etc., "I'm running
OLD: Fedora-34-20210309.n.0
NEW: Fedora-34-20210310.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:8
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:929.32 KiB
Size
On Wed, 2021-03-10 at 10:21 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> ...[snip]
> From the Community Blog post[1]:
>
> > Why not use “Fedora GNU+Linux” or some similar name? We want to be
> > easy to say. The more words we add, the harder that is. And while
> > GNU is an important part of Fedora Linux, there
Hi all,
I put some comments on the OpenSSH mailing list[1] about UpdateHostKeys
and other SHA-1 related changes.
The OpenSSH release notes simply tell people to update OpenSSH. In
practice, people who use distributions like Fedora, RHEL and CentOS are
going to wait for a package. Security
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2021-03-11 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. uitime):
= Day: Thursday ==
2021-03-11 09:00 PST US/Pacific
2021-03-11
It has a build system in it to build the bios file then you flash it. It system
can make more than one bios/uefi to flash to many different hardware. What is
wrong with packaging the tool to do that?
The worst you could get is a non-backdoor-ed firmware to boot from. *Shrugs*
My vote:
Fedora for the distro some want to rename Fedora Linux
Fedora Project for the all-encompassing collection of things Fedora
And now, back to more important things
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:56:52 -0500
Stephen Snow wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-03-10 at 09:52 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > 14 March — summer time begins in Canada, parts of Mexico, and the US
>
> Actually in Canada we have four seasons, so Springtime begins at or
As do we in the UK, but BST
On 3/10/21 11:21 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:15 AM Robbi Nespu
wrote:
I got mixed feeling, I understand the reason why but I don't quite
understand why you don't want to use "Fedora GNU/Linux". Read you
comment on others email but the is not much details. Could you
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 01:26:55PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> If we're going to name the distribution after some of its components,
> why stop at one or two?
...
> It's better to give the whole distribution its own name, and not name
> it after any of its components. Fedora is a software
Sorry for being not constructive. I'll try to explain my point of view.
> Where are you seeing huge misunderstandings?
In Fedora and other Linux communities (not eng, btw).
> What misunderstandings are there?
To my surprise, I saw how a person who perfectly knows the difference between
Fedora
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210310.0):
ID: 808561 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL:
ppisar opened a new pull-request against the project: `perl-IPTables-libiptc`
that you are following:
``
Tests
``
To reply, visit the link below
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-IPTables-libiptc/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1932205
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
ppisar merged a pull-request against the project: `perl-IPTables-libiptc` that
you are following.
Merged pull-request:
``
Tests
``
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-IPTables-libiptc/pull-request/1
___
perl-devel mailing list --
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933287
Andrea Veri changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(andrea.veri@gmail |
|.com)
https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/pull/4668
--
389 Directory Server Development Team
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890585
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933287
Jakub Jedelsky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890590
Bug 1890590 depends on bug 1890585, which changed state.
Bug 1890585 Summary: EPEL8 Request: perl-AnyEvent-AIO
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890585
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1850772
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1937584
Bug ID: 1937584
Summary: perl-MooseX-Types-URI-0.09 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: perl-MooseX-Types-URI
Keywords: FutureFeature,
https://fedorapeople.org/groups/389ds/ci/nightly/2021/03/11/report-389-ds-base-2.0.3-20210311git19eb28db4.fc33.x86_64.html
___
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
74 matches
Mail list logo
