On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Kyle Marek wrote:
> But you are certainly right that any non-read-only access on the ESP
> outside of the context of Linux md is going to lead to corruption. I
> would think that read only access (reading the .efi file) should be
> safe, right?
Writing outside of
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 6:48 PM Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> Some packages call install-info and provide the actual entry for the
> directory instead of allowing install-info to extract it from the info
> file. I'm not sure why this is done, but if removing scriptlets which
> do this, the result
As of Fedora 28, the 'info' package has gained a file trigger
(%transfiletrigger) which will automatically rebuild the info directory
node when any file is installed into %_infodir. Thus it is no longer
necessary for packages in F28 or newer to include scriptlets which call
install-info, nor to in
Hello.
There are a couple of things that's been annoying me in KDE for a
while, and I'd like to poke around and understand how I can help
making them any better.
1. Which is not as bad, but still, is the screen power. It seems to
randomly not work, i.e. leave the power on despite the settings to
On Fri, 15 Jun 2018, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
As part of a recent guideline change
(https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/772) which ties in with an
accepted F29 change
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompilation),
this section of the guidelines was
On 06/15/2018 07:22 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 4:42 PM, Kyle Marek wrote:
>> On 06/15/2018 06:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 15/06/18 22:50, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "KM" == Kyle Marek writes:
> K
As part of a recent guideline change
(https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/772) which ties in with an
accepted F29 change
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/No_more_automagic_Python_bytecompilation),
this section of the guidelines was overhauled for F29+:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 4:42 PM, Kyle Marek wrote:
> On 06/15/2018 06:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
>>> On 15/06/18 22:50, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> "KM" == Kyle Marek writes:
KM> I can't remember what else I discovered in
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting on Monday. I don't
see anything urgent to discuss, so let's take the time off.
If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week,
please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead and run the meeting.
Thanks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedo
On 06/15/2018 06:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
>> On 15/06/18 22:50, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"KM" == Kyle Marek writes:
>>>
>>> KM> I can't remember what else I discovered in reading the manual
>>> KM> last. Do you know if there are a
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 15/06/18 22:50, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>
>>> "KM" == Kyle Marek writes:
>>
>>
>> KM> I can't remember what else I discovered in reading the manual
>> KM> last. Do you know if there are any other discovery/identification
>> KM>
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 3:09 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "CM" == Chris Murphy writes:
>
> CM> The installer right now, against upstream mdadm dev's explicit
> CM> advice, sets up an mdadm raid1 using (I think deprecated 0.9
> CM> metadata format but could also work with 1.0 format).
>
Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines.
-
In Fedora 28 (and rawhide), the texinfo scriptlets (which call
install-info) are no longer necessary and should be removed or, for
cross-release specfiles, wrapped in conditionals. Note that there are
nearly 300 specs currently callin
> "AL" == Andrew Lutomirski writes:
AL> I wouldn't be surprised if using a capsule-on-disk did terrible
AL> terrible things if ESP were on invisible RAID 1 (a la mdadm 0.9 or
AL> 1.0).
Anything that writes will do "terrible" things (really just corrupting
one of the copies, which for two-dri
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 15/06/18 22:50, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>
>>> "KM" == Kyle Marek writes:
>>
>>
>> KM> I can't remember what else I discovered in reading the manual
>> KM> last. Do you know if there are any other discovery/identification
>> KM>
On 15/06/18 22:50, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"KM" == Kyle Marek writes:
KM> I can't remember what else I discovered in reading the manual
KM> last. Do you know if there are any other discovery/identification
KM> limitations to the old superblocks?
I don't think there are any in the context
> "KM" == Kyle Marek writes:
KM> I can't remember what else I discovered in reading the manual
KM> last. Do you know if there are any other discovery/identification
KM> limitations to the old superblocks?
I don't think there are any in the context of having a small RAID1 ESP
across not too m
On 06/15/2018 05:09 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>> "CM" == Chris Murphy writes:
> CM> The installer right now, against upstream mdadm dev's explicit
> CM> advice, sets up an mdadm raid1 using (I think deprecated 0.9
> CM> metadata format but could also work with 1.0 format).
>
> And I'm re
> "CM" == Chris Murphy writes:
CM> The installer right now, against upstream mdadm dev's explicit
CM> advice, sets up an mdadm raid1 using (I think deprecated 0.9
CM> metadata format but could also work with 1.0 format).
And I'm really happy that it does; I have used that configuration for
y
Rex Dieter wrote:
> Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 09:37 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>> fyi, I've begun work to bring Qt 5.9.6 LTS/bugfix release to fedora
>>> 27.
>>> This work will involve rebuilding all packages that have a strict
>>> versioned
>>> dependency (ie, those packages
> "MM" == Matthew Miller writes:
MM> That seems like we're doing things right!
Yes, of course, one nice thing about Fedora is that if you are willing
to do work, people will let you do work. But it also might explain why
there is something of a lack of candidates for FESCo. There are
proba
On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 at 21:32, Jason L Tibbitts III
wrote:
> > "JB" == Josh Boyer writes:
>
> JB> I know we do a lot of rubber stamping because process requires it.
>
> This is one of the primary reasons why I lost interest in serving on
> FESCo way back in the day. It felt like an endless s
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 02:31:45PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> If I want to be involved in actually making something happen, I just
> need to put my head down and do some work. I don't need to be on
> FESCo to get things done.
That seems like we're doing things right!
--
Matthew Miller
On 15/06/18 19:52, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> I have mixed feelings about that. On one hand, I agree that this is NOT
> a serious security issue (it's essentially a local compromise requiring
> an existing local compromise), so if someone claims it'll make their
> life easier, I want to say 'ju
> "JB" == Josh Boyer writes:
JB> I know we do a lot of rubber stamping because process requires it.
This is one of the primary reasons why I lost interest in serving on
FESCo way back in the day. It felt like an endless stream of feature
process documents without much real involvement in an
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 8/138 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
New failures (same test did not fail in Rawhide-20180611.n.0):
ID: 249300 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_cockpit_basic
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/249300
ID: 249315 Test: x86_64 Workstation-l
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 6:54 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am curious if any of the upcoming changes also solve the following issue:
>>
>> Workstation setup where you want full disk redudancy with raid1 and efi
>> boot.
>
> I've
On 06/15/2018 07:30 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
Nevertheless still no one answered on very simple question. So I'll repeat it:
Why Fedora_must_ offer OOTB ~/.local/bin, /usr/local{s,}bin paths on
the front of the $PATH in OOTB settings?
The churn in some software (javascript, python, ...) is su
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 6:54 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am curious if any of the upcoming changes also solve the following issue:
>
> Workstation setup where you want full disk redudancy with raid1 and efi
> boot.
I've though of two sane options:
a. Anything that modifies the ESP is
Hi,
Am 15.06.2018 um 00:50 schrieb Alois Mahdal:
On 06/14/2018 11:37 PM, Till Maas wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 04:19:27PM +0200, Alois Mahdal wrote:
On 06/14/2018 08:40 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
What about attack success rate?
But if the attacker is some browser exploit
On 06/15/2018 11:24 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> ...]
>
>> What I'm trying to say is that with these kinds of attack (like viruses,
>> or exploits on massively accessed page), there is inevitably going to be
>> some sort of economic decision on side of author affecting how "smart"
>> they want the cod
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2018-06-15)
===
Meeting started by bowlofeggs at 15:00:00 UTC. The full logs are
available at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2018-06-15/fesco.2018-06-15-15.00.log.html
.
Meeting summar
Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> Many people here gently been pointing on the issue without showing
> real POC how to use this.
> I think that it may force someone to put publically some POC showing
> how to use this.
> I see almost between the lines that I'm not only person here which
> such POC already _h
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes:
> The "how to test section" doesn't have too many details.
>
>> 1. install a PKCS#11 module, say softhsm
>> 2. create an NSS database
>> 3. list modules registered to the NSS database, and check that there is
>> softhsm
>
> *Please* provide explicit instructio
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 06:06:57AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 10:42 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:51 PM Till Maas wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 03:57:36PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:53 PM Randy Barlo
Announcing the creation of a new nightly release validation test event
for Fedora 29 Rawhide 20180615.n.0. Please help run some tests for this
nightly compose if you have time. For more information on nightly
release validation testing, see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
I clarified some aspects of this proposal.
After consulting with Jakub Jelinek, I'm now proposing to use
“-march=i686 -msse2 -mtune=generic -mfpmath=sse -mstackrealign”. This
is very close to previous proposal. Only a few preprocessor macros are
different:
@@ -142,3 +142,2 @@
#define __FL
On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:12:58PM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote:
> = Proposed System Wide Change: NSS load p11-kit modules by default =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NSSLoadP11KitModules
>
>
> Owner(s):
> * Daiki Ueno
>
>
> When NSS database is created, PKCS#11 modules configured in the
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 2:34 PM, Josh Boyer
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 6:08 AM Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 10:42 PM Josh Boyer
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:51 PM Till Maas wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 03:57:36PM -0400,
I am late to the discussion, and a lot of them are related to the
security implications. I am more worried about users overriding
dependencies of other programs. Let me explain with a hypothetical case:
1- There is a system installed application that manipulates PDFs and has
a requirement to G
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 12:06 PM, Stephen Gallagher
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 10:42 PM Josh Boyer
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:51 PM Till Maas wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 03:57:36PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:53 PM Randy Barlow
>>
Hello,
I am curious if any of the upcoming changes also solve the following issue:
Workstation setup where you want full disk redudancy with raid1 and efi
boot.
* Setting up the OS to be placed on raid1 leaves you with multiple options
(mdadm/btrfs/...)
* Setting up EFI only makes one of those d
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 6:08 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 10:42 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:51 PM Till Maas wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 03:57:36PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:53 PM Randy Barlow
>> >
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 6:49 AM Alexander Ploumistos <
alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> By the way, our 32-bit configurations have always been i386 instead of
> i686?
>
They are i686, the chroots are named that for historical reasons.
Thanks,
Richard
__
By the way, our 32-bit configurations have always been i386 instead of i686?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-
Thank you both,
mock -r fedora-29-i386 --arch=i386 kernel-4.18.0-0.rc0.git9.1.fc29.src.rpm
ran just fine.
On the other hand, retrying after a "--scrub=all" with
mock -r fedora-29-i386 --forcearch=i386 init
gave the same error.
___
devel mailing list -- de
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 at 17:53, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
[..]
> We put the bar for _security_ measures much higher then mere inconvenience.
> In fact we know that users have been installing software in ~/
> successfully before this change, and it doesn't allow them to do
> anything they co
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 10:42 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:51 PM Till Maas wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 03:57:36PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:53 PM Randy Barlow
> >
> > > > Downside is that it would be possible (though I'd guess unlikely)
Dne 15.6.2018 v 08:40 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):
> ERROR: Could not find useradd in chroot, maybe the install failed?
I have seen this error when there was old root cache (created prior rename of
unprivileged user in buildroot).
Try `-r fedora-29-i386 --scrub=all`. If this is the case, it sh
Dne 15.6.2018 v 08:40 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):
> ERROR: Could not find useradd in chroot, maybe the install failed?
I have seen this error when there was old root cache (created prior rename of
unprivileged user in buildroot).
Try `-r fedora-29-i386 --scrub=all`. If this is the case, it sh
On 15/06/18 07:40, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
I'm having trouble with the i386 arch on x86_64. I've tested it on
actual hardware and in a VM and in both cases I get
ERROR: Could not find useradd in chroot, maybe the install failed?
I've tried building the kernel with
mock -r fedora-29-i386 --
Hi,
I'm orphaining emacs-mew package because I'm not the user of it
anymore. pleease feel free to take it over if you want to maintain.
--
Akira TAGOH
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@l
52 matches
Mail list logo
