Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

On 11/15/2012 11:11 AM, John Reiser wrote: bodhi -D FEDORA-2012-18258 will download all packages in that update for you. Usability is so poor that you might give up [all on up-to-date Fedora 18 Beta-TC8+]: "yum search bodhi"? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.

Re: Problem with jack update

On 15 November 2012 04:40, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > Hi all, > > A few months ago earlier in the F-17 release cycle, we had a problem > with jackd turning verbose, flooding the stdout, even when its > verbosity was turned off. This was a bug [1] in the compiler, > specifically in the optimized builds

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said: >> > Well, it would be weird that the "minimal" installation is actually not >> > "minimal" at all, but the "container" installation is. >> >> That would be weird. But fortunately, it's @core

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said: > > Well, it would be weird that the "minimal" installation is actually not > > "minimal" at all, but the "container" installation is. > > That would be weird. But fortunately, it's @core, not @minimal. So we could > easily have @minimal, @core, and

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said: > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:03:36PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Is there any reason those two can't be split up? Maybe @really-hard-core > > > for the first, and @core for the second. ;-) > > That's basically what Kevin proposed several mail

Re: raising warning flag on firewalld-default feature

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Jan Zelený wrote: > On 12. 11. 2012 at 17:59:00, Chris Adams wrote: > > Once upon a time, Richard Vickery said: > > > Change still frightens people to varying degree s., and many busy > > > end-users > > > may not have time to read pages in order to learn a new c

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Am 15.11.2012 19:58, schrieb Adam Williamson: > I don't think anyone asked you to do any of those things. Fedora > obviously does not have the power to replace iptables with firewalld on > your router, so the question is not 'can you replace iptables with > firewalld on everything in your network

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

On 11/15/12 2:11 PM, John Reiser wrote: # yum install bodhi Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit fedora/18/x86_64/metalink | 12 kB 00:00:00 updates/18/x86_64/metalink | 18 kB 00:00:00 No package bod

[Bug 876221] perl-Wx does not provide perl(Wx::Dialog) and others.

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876221 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Wx-0.9914-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Wx-0.9914-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on t

[Bug 876221] perl-Wx does not provide perl(Wx::Dialog) and others.

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876221 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Wx-0.9914-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Wx-0.9914-2.fc16 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on t

[Bug 876221] perl-Wx does not provide perl(Wx::Dialog) and others.

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876221 --- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Wx-0.9914-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Wx-0.9914-2.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on t

Re: raising warning flag on firewalld-default feature

On 11/12/2012 02:15 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Right. We need to stop writing core system components in scripting languages! Well, there _are_ significant advantages to using a higer-level language than C.[1] Using one of the higher-level

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

> bodhi -D FEDORA-2012-18258 > > will download all packages in that update for you. Usability is so poor that you might give up [all on up-to-date Fedora 18 Beta-TC8+]: # type bodhi bash: type: bodhi: not found <> # yum install bodhi Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit fedor

[perl-Wx] 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides

commit f78b62cbacba8fb8868d5788a5fe4640998aa08a Author: Tom Callaway Date: Thu Nov 15 14:07:24 2012 -0500 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides perl-Wx.spec | 329 +- 1 files changed, 326 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) --- diff --g

[perl-Wx/f18] 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides

commit b84078132c3f0c213da6687ea716c8ac2f6aafa5 Author: Tom Callaway Date: Thu Nov 15 14:06:49 2012 -0500 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides perl-Wx.spec | 329 +- 1 files changed, 326 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) --- diff --g

[perl-Wx/f17] 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides

commit 9df52c8f768409c128c62c6eb15b425ca8dd3f86 Author: Tom Callaway Date: Thu Nov 15 14:06:15 2012 -0500 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides perl-Wx.spec | 363 +- sources |2 +- 2 files changed, 361 insertions(+), 4 d

[perl-Wx/f16] 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides

commit 37361aeae7d7d4eca39de9ec35ed6394ad00357b Author: Tom Callaway Date: Thu Nov 15 14:04:14 2012 -0500 0.9914 + more complete list of Provides perl-Wx.spec | 374 +- sources |2 +- 2 files changed, 371 insertions(+), 5 d

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 19:46 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 15.11.2012 19:37, schrieb Kevin Fenzi: > >>> Have you actually _tried_? It's supposed to be as easy as > >>> s/iptables/firewall-cmd --direct --passthrough ipv4/ > >>> > >>> I don't know for a fact whether it is good enough. You seem

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Am 15.11.2012 19:37, schrieb Kevin Fenzi: >>> Have you actually _tried_? It's supposed to be as easy as >>> s/iptables/firewall-cmd --direct --passthrough ipv4/ >>> >>> I don't know for a fact whether it is good enough. You seem to >>> have a script that could tell us. >> >> i posted a script r

Re: LuaJIT - an alternative for current Python C bindings

Hi Florian, On 15.11.2012 13:18, Florian Weimer wrote: On 11/15/2012 01:49 AM, Alek Paunov wrote: So, to me it seems natural joining all above together to start thinking for replacing the classic python C bindings with thin textual or bytecode(*) LuaJIT/FFI shims in benefit of things with grea

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

Vít Ondruch wrote: > I wish it would be installable as a single update. If bodhi could > compose the yum install command for copy paste at least, it might be > helpful as well. Assuming you already have GNOME installed, these commands: yum install yum-security yum --enablerepo=updates-testing --ad

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 19:30:27 +0100 Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 15.11.2012 19:27, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Reindl Harald > > wrote: > >> Am 15.11.2012 19:02, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > >>> It would be very helpful for judging the maturity/suitability of > >>> firew

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Am 15.11.2012 19:27, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> Am 15.11.2012 19:02, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: >>> It would be very helpful for judging the maturity/suitability of >>> firewalld if you could try converting your iptables script to >>> firewall

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 15.11.2012 19:02, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: >> It would be very helpful for judging the maturity/suitability of >> firewalld if you could try converting your iptables script to >> firewall-cmd --direct (which, at least I hope, should be poss

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Am 15.11.2012 19:16, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > (as far as I understand the situation:) iptables as a kernel > interface and a low-level command will exist, but applications will > expect the existence of the firewalld D-Bus service (as opposed to the > system-config-firewall D-Bus service, at le

Re: raising warning flag on firewalld-default feature

On Thu, 15.11.12 10:06, Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 01:53:32AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > In fact, all system bus services should be configured to defer > > activation to systemd, so that all services regardless how they are > > triggered ar

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Am 15.11.2012 19:02, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> Am 15.11.2012 18:06, schrieb Adam Williamson: >>> Right. I hate to say it, but Harald is correct here: AFAIK, all those >>> and other firewall configuration mechanisms were ultimately just >>>

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:10:43AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > Sure, but the background here was the 'replace vs. augment' question - > is firewalld actually planned to replace iptables in the long run, or > are we committed to maintaining iptables as an alternative mechanism? It > sounds like

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 19:02 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Reindl Harald >> wrote: >> > Am 15.11.2012 18:06, schrieb Adam Williamson: >> >> Right. I hate to say it, but Harald is correct here: AFAIK, all

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 19:02 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 15.11.2012 18:06, schrieb Adam Williamson: > >> Right. I hate to say it, but Harald is correct here: AFAIK, all those > >> and other firewall configuration mechanisms were ultima

[389-devel] please review ticket 507 - use mutex for FrontendConfig lock instead of rwlock

https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/507 https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/507/0001-Ticket-507-use-mutex-for-FrontendConfig-lock-instead.patch -- Mark Reynolds Red Hat, Inc mreyno...@redhat.com -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.o

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 10:57 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:49:50 +0100 > Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Dne 15.11.2012 18:45, Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > ...snip... > > > > I wish it would be installable as a single update. If bodhi could > > > compose the yum install command for cop

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 15.11.2012 18:06, schrieb Adam Williamson: >> Right. I hate to say it, but Harald is correct here: AFAIK, all those >> and other firewall configuration mechanisms were ultimately just >> UI/abstraction layers wrapped around iptables. They

Re: PKLA --> JavaScript

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:09:07AM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: >> Once upon a time, tim.laurid...@gmail.com said: >> > the .rules file should look like this: and go into * >> > /usr/share/polkit-1/rules.d/ * >> System-local config belongs in

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:49:50 +0100 Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 15.11.2012 18:45, Vít Ondruch napsal(a): ...snip... > > I wish it would be installable as a single update. If bodhi could > > compose the yum install command for copy paste at least, it might > > be helpful as well. > > 'yum update' a

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

Dne 15.11.2012 18:45, Vít Ondruch napsal(a): Dne 15.11.2012 18:04, Adam Williamson napsal(a): On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 11:43 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: On 11/13/2012 01:07 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: It's time for the last big GNOME update for F18 to bring bug fixes and translation updates to users!

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

Dne 15.11.2012 18:04, Adam Williamson napsal(a): On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 11:43 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: On 11/13/2012 01:07 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: It's time for the last big GNOME update for F18 to bring bug fixes and translation updates to users! The update is now in Bodhi, thanks to everyon

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Am 15.11.2012 18:06, schrieb Adam Williamson: > On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 14:48 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 15.11.2012 13:33, schrieb Michael Scherer: >>> Not really. For example, ubuntu use ufw, mandriva used shorewall. Debian >>> offered several frontend, but IIRC, didn't use one by default

Re: PKLA --> JavaScript

On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:09:53 -0500 Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 06:06:44PM +0100, drago01 wrote: > > Thus are by definition not system administrators. There are not > > supposed to be software developers but being able to deal with > > simple code (shell scripts?!) is part of a

Re: PKLA --> JavaScript

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:09:07AM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, tim.laurid...@gmail.com said: > > the .rules file should look like this: and go into * > > /usr/share/polkit-1/rules.d/ * > System-local config belongs in /etc, not /usr. Is there a corresponding > /etc path for rule

Re: PKLA --> JavaScript

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 06:06:44PM +0100, drago01 wrote: > Thus are by definition not system administrators. There are not > supposed to be software developers but being able to deal with simple > code (shell scripts?!) is part of a sysadmins jobs. > So the solution would be "fire him and hire a ne

Re: bodhi 0.9.3 deployed to production

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 05:52:23AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Luke Macken wrote: > > A new bugfix release of Bodhi has just been deployed to production. > > > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates > > > > Bugs and enhancement requests can be filed here: > > > > http://bodhi.fedorah

Re: PKLA --> JavaScript

Once upon a time, tim.laurid...@gmail.com said: > the .rules file should look like this: and go into * > /usr/share/polkit-1/rules.d/ * System-local config belongs in /etc, not /usr. Is there a corresponding /etc path for rules? -- Chris Adams Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Intern

Re: PKLA --> JavaScript

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote: > [...] but this seems like a terrible burden > to put on system administrators, particularly those who are (sometimes > proudly) averse to anything that smacks of "programming". Thus are by definition not system administrators. There are not su

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 14:48 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 15.11.2012 13:33, schrieb Michael Scherer: > > Le jeudi 15 novembre 2012 à 03:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler a écrit : > >> iptables rules are a long-established cross- > >> distribution interface > > > > Not really. For example, ubuntu use u

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 11:43 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 11/13/2012 01:07 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > > It's time for the last big GNOME update for F18 to bring bug fixes > > and translation updates to users! > > The update is now in Bodhi, thanks to everyone who pitched in with builds. > > http

Re: PKLA --> JavaScript

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote: > I've just reviewed those pages, and it's certainly not obvious to me > how I would go about "porting" a PKLA file. > > [libvirt Management Access] > Identity=unix-group:wheel > Action=org.libvirt.unix.manage > ResultAny=no > ResultIn

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:31:52AM -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > >Well, this is part of what I mean by "Fedora is not a tiny-linux > >distribution." It might be interesting to have a busybox-based spin, but I > >think that's a different thing. > Since busybox package already exists, I think it

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

Once upon a time, Przemek Klosowski said: > Since busybox package already exists, I think it makes sense to use > it--not because we're doing some tiny-linux, but because why not, it's > just 651 kB. Most packages we discussed here (openssh-clients, sendmail) > are individually much larger than

PKLA --> JavaScript

On 11/14/2012 01:07 AM, tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote: > http://davidz25.blogspot.dk/2012/06/authorization-rules-in-polkit.html > http://www.freedesktop.org/software/polkit/docs/master/polkit.8.html I've just reviewed those pages, and it's certainly not obvious to me how I would go about "porting"

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On 11/15/2012 11:18 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:59:26AM -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: I don't know if that is what you're after, because busybox duplicates the functionality of individual packages (and may have some limitations in how well it duplicates, I'm sure). All

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Am 15.11.2012 13:33, schrieb Michael Scherer: > Le jeudi 15 novembre 2012 à 03:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler a écrit : >> iptables rules are a long-established cross- >> distribution interface > > Not really. For example, ubuntu use ufw, mandriva used shorewall. Debian > offered several frontend, but I

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:59:26AM -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > I don't know if that is what you're after, because busybox > duplicates the functionality of individual packages (and may have > some limitations in how well it duplicates, I'm sure). All the same, > I would definitely consider in

Re: raising warning flag on firewalld-default feature

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:15:25PM +0100, Matej Cepl wrote: > > I was looking for resources on systemd and dbus activation. I realized > > that > > the documentation here is very scarce -- there's this tutorial on just dbus > > activation a

Re: fedora elections questions [Re: remove polkit from core?]

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 09:43:41AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> Anyway, I'd like to hear what FESCo members have to say about this, >> because it would strongly influence who I would vote for. > > Yeah, I too came up with a couple of

[perl-IO-stringy] BuildRequire perl(lib)

commit cfb2b6537a3fa9c24b395230b4d6e73888492aaa Author: Petr Šabata Date: Thu Nov 15 17:05:00 2012 +0100 BuildRequire perl(lib) perl-IO-stringy.spec |6 +- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/perl-IO-stringy.spec b/perl-IO-stringy.spec index d88ee05..

Re: raising warning flag on firewalld-default feature

On 2012-11-15, 15:06 GMT, Matthew Miller wrote: > I was looking for resources on systemd and dbus activation. I realized > that > the documentation here is very scarce -- there's this tutorial on just dbus > activation and our > wiki page <

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On 11/12/2012 11:28 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: I see three basic options for the target: A) kernel + init system and we're done B) "boot to yum (with network)": a text-mode bootstrap environment on which other things can be added by hand (or by kickstart) C) a traditional Unix command

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 01:13:09AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > Well, it would be weird that the "minimal" installation is actually not > "minimal" at all, but the "container" installation is. That would be weird. But fortunately, it's @core, not @minimal. So we could easily have @minimal, @

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 01:19:59AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > For containers a yum group for usage with --installroot= is the only > thing that matters. For this, is a group even necessary or useful? -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ -- devel mailing list devel@lis

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:03:36PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Is there any reason those two can't be split up? Maybe @really-hard-core > > for the first, and @core for the second. ;-) > That's basically what Kevin proposed several mails back, and I agree it > seems like we have two broadly d

fedora elections questions [Re: remove polkit from core?]

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 09:43:41AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Anyway, I'd like to hear what FESCo members have to say about this, > because it would strongly influence who I would vote for. Yeah, I too came up with a couple of questions I'd like to add to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F19

Re: remove polkit from core?

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 08:34:00PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote: > > Also, creating individual groups for all the various > > privileged operations we have simply doesn't scale. > This is a better argument. > > So, PK's usecase is a valid and an important one. You cannot replace > > that by Unix groups

[perl-IO-Socket-SSL] Added some missing build dependencies

commit afe37c043b4f2380e4d5679890cfa20e69b65907 Author: Petr Šabata Date: Thu Nov 15 16:10:08 2012 +0100 Added some missing build dependencies perl-IO-Socket-SSL.spec |9 - 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/perl-IO-Socket-SSL.spec b/perl-IO-Sock

[Bug 877015] perl-CGI: Newline injection due to improper CRLF escaping in Set-Cookie and P3P headers

Product: Security Response https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877015 --- Comment #3 from Jan Lieskovsky --- This issue affects the versions of the perl package, as shipped with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 and 6. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 877015] perl-CGI: Newline injection due to improper CRLF escaping in Set-Cookie and P3P headers

=moderate,public=2012 |1112,reported=20121115,sour |1112,reported=20121115,sour |ce=internet,cvss2=2.6/AV:N/ |ce=internet,cvss2=2.6/AV:N/ |AC:H/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N,fedor |AC:H/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N,rhel- |a-all/perl-CGI=affected |5

Re: raising warning flag on firewalld-default feature

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 01:53:32AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > In fact, all system bus services should be configured to defer > activation to systemd, so that all services regardless how they are > triggered are executed in the same clean execution environment, and can > be manipulated with

[Bug 877015] perl-CGI: Newline injection due to improper CRLF escaping in Set-Cookie and P3P headers

Product: Security Response https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877015 --- Comment #1 from Jan Lieskovsky --- This issue affects the versions of the perl-CGI package, as shipped with Fedora release of 16 and 17. Please schedule an update. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are o

[Bug 877015] perl-CGI: Newline injection due to improper CRLF escaping in Set-Cookie and P3P headers

Product: Security Response https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877015 Jan Lieskovsky changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mmasl...@redh

[389-devel] Revised: please review ticket 394 - error deleting a specific userpassword

I thought unhashed userpassword was removed from the entry, but it still might be there, so I added back the code to remove it. Original Message Subject: [389-devel] please review ticket 394 - error deleting a specific userpassword Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:52:47 -0500 Fro

Re: bodhi 0.9.3 deployed to production

Adam Williamson wrote: > There seems to be a mania for CURRENTRELEASE lately. I don't know where > it's coming from. Well, it used to be what we used in the beginnings of Fedora. It got changed to ERRATA because that makes a lot more sense. > The policy clearly states ERRATA: > > https://fedora

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

> From: Stephen John Smoogen > > On 14 November 2012 17:19, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > > Oh, I wasn't aware that this is solely about anaconda-based installs, > > sorry. > > Well actually I think the correct question here is.. is this about > anaconda based installs which was my guess whe

Re: LuaJIT - an alternative for current Python C bindings

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:18 PM, drago01 wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> On 11/15/2012 01:49 AM, Alek Paunov wrote: >> >>> So, to me it seems natural joining all above together to start thinking >>> for replacing the classic python C bindings with thin textual

Re: LuaJIT - an alternative for current Python C bindings

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 11/15/2012 01:49 AM, Alek Paunov wrote: > >> So, to me it seems natural joining all above together to start thinking >> for replacing the classic python C bindings with thin textual or >> bytecode(*) LuaJIT/FFI shims in benefit of things

Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

> From: Lennart Poettering > > I think a good way to approach this is by looking for the interesting > usecases for a minimal installation: > > A) Containers > B) VMs > C) Bare-Metal Servers > D) Paranoid people (not relevant) > E) Embedded (out of focus for Fedora) I don't believe embedded is

[perl-DateTime-TimeZone] Add BR, filter duplicated requires.

commit 473337bb37698841ad212e69bb895004a7be69bd Author: Marcela Mašláňová Date: Thu Nov 15 13:36:09 2012 +0100 Add BR, filter duplicated requires. perl-DateTime-TimeZone.spec | 11 +-- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/perl-DateTime-TimeZone.spec

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

Le jeudi 15 novembre 2012 à 03:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler a écrit : > iptables rules are a long-established cross- > distribution interface Not really. For example, ubuntu use ufw, mandriva used shorewall. Debian offered several frontend, but IIRC, didn't use one by default. And I have worked as fi

Re: Heads up: rpm 4.11 alpha coming soon to rawhide near you

On 11/15/2012 12:20 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 11/15/2012 11:59 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:28:49AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: For further details see the draft release notes at http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.11.0 Should we start changing %doc README COPYIN

Re: LuaJIT - an alternative for current Python C bindings

On 11/15/2012 01:49 AM, Alek Paunov wrote: So, to me it seems natural joining all above together to start thinking for replacing the classic python C bindings with thin textual or bytecode(*) LuaJIT/FFI shims in benefit of things with great set of dependencies like Anaconda (thanks to lupa, Lua

[perl-Inline-Files] Modernize the spec a bit

commit 7e3320b2fc52fcd430356adda5f50f319d3ea188 Author: Petr Šabata Date: Thu Nov 15 11:54:58 2012 +0100 Modernize the spec a bit perl-Inline-Files.spec | 19 --- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/perl-Inline-Files.spec b/perl-Inline-File

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

On 11/15/2012 11:43 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: > This is the ticket I've filed to ask QA to consider including this in > the Beta release: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876922 (Sorry, messed up the bugzilla link in the original message.) -- Kalev -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fe

Re: The GNOME 3.6.2 Megaupdate

On 11/13/2012 01:07 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > It's time for the last big GNOME update for F18 to bring bug fixes > and translation updates to users! The update is now in Bodhi, thanks to everyone who pitched in with builds. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-18258 It missed the

Re: Heads up: rpm 4.11 alpha coming soon to rawhide near you

On 11/15/2012 12:21 PM, Mathieu Bridon wrote: On Thursday, November 15, 2012 06:20 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 11/15/2012 11:59 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:28:49AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: For further details see the draft release notes at http://rpm.org/wik

Re: Heads up: rpm 4.11 alpha coming soon to rawhide near you

On Thursday, November 15, 2012 06:20 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 11/15/2012 11:59 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:28:49AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: For further details see the draft release notes at http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.11.0 Should we start changing %

Re: Heads up: rpm 4.11 alpha coming soon to rawhide near you

On 11/15/2012 11:59 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:28:49AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: For further details see the draft release notes at http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.11.0 Should we start changing %doc README COPYING to %doc README %license COPYING ? Eventua

Re: Heads up: rpm 4.11 alpha coming soon to rawhide near you

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:28:49AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: > For further details see the draft release notes at > http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.11.0 Should we start changing %doc README COPYING to %doc README %license COPYING ? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat ht

Re: remove polkit from core?

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 07:34:22PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 11/14/2012 07:33 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 09:44:55AM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > >>On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Chris Adams wrote: > >>>Great - let's take something that people are

Heads up: rpm 4.11 alpha coming soon to rawhide near you

Now that FESCo accepted http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/RPM4.11 for F19... (in what might well be a record time - less than a minute in the meeting from proposal to acceptance :) Rpm 4.11 alpha (or actually post-alpha snapshot to pull in a few accumulated fixes + enhancements) will be

Re: Setting the default firewall configuration (was Re: Attention, dependency fighters)

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > And what about the many system administrators using handwritten > rules (see Harald Reindl's reply)? There is a --direct option that is supposed to provide a compatibility/escape mechanism with full iptables functionality (and mostly same synt