Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

Hi all, On Sunday, 21 August 2022 17:29:56 CEST Neal Gompa wrote: > I don't disagree that glibc should respect what distros set, I'm just > asking us to build glibc with a DT_HASH table added until a formal > deprecation/retirement cycle is done with all stakeholders aware of > the change and ever

[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2022-08-22 Fedora QA Meeting

Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting today/tomrrow. I don't have anything much for the agenda again. There will be a blocker review meeting, though. If you're aware of anything it would be useful to discuss this week, please do reply to this mail and we can run the meeting. Thanks fol

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 4:21 AM Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > PS: I find it incredibly rude to share a paywalled link on a public mailing > list, I 100% agree with this (although, to be slightly fair, this does regularly happen on many of the lists I read, as people just presume (falsely) that

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Neal Gompa wrote: >> There's a pretty decent write-up about this on LWN: >> https://lwn.net/Articles/904892/ > > Here's a link that actually works: > https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/904892/dba951441b61cbdc/ > (Putting the title and "SubscriberLink", both between quot

Poco soname bump in rawhide/f37

Poco 1.12.2 landed in rawhide/f37 with a soname bump. -robin ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On 8/21/22 10:14, Demi Marie Obenour wrote: On 8/21/22 12:51, John Reiser wrote: it's clear there's a documentation problem [with DT_GNU_HASH] Partly due to lack of documentation, already I have seen "abuses" of the DT_GNU_HASH format. In particular, some versions of Rust and/or musl run-times

Re: Review swap : blueprint-compiler

Thanks! Happy to do it :)! Le 21/08/2022 à 19:56, Jonathan Wright via devel a écrit : I'm happy to trade for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118887 On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 1:03 PM Lyes Saadi

Re: Review swap : blueprint-compiler

I'm happy to trade for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118887 On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 1:03 PM Lyes Saadi wrote: > Hello devel! > > I have new dependency I need to update dialect to 2.0. It's been waiting > since july, so I'm proposing a review swap. It's the python/meson > guideline

Review swap : blueprint-compiler

Hello devel! I have new dependency I need to update dialect to 2.0. It's been waiting since july, so I'm proposing a review swap. It's the python/meson guidelines. blueprint-compiler : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2106919 Regards, Lyes Saadi ___

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On 8/21/22 12:51, John Reiser wrote: >> it's clear there's a documentation problem [with DT_GNU_HASH] > Partly due to lack of documentation, already I have seen "abuses" > of the DT_GNU_HASH format. In particular, some versions of Rust > and/or musl run-times use (0 == nbucket) to mean something l

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

it's clear there's a documentation problem [with DT_GNU_HASH] Partly due to lack of documentation, already I have seen "abuses" of the DT_GNU_HASH format. In particular, some versions of Rust and/or musl run-times use (0 == nbucket) to mean something like "there is no hash table information" but

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 9:19 AM Jan Drögehoff wrote: > > > On 8/21/22 12:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 12:05:11PM +0200, Jan Drögehoff wrote: > >>> It's Epic's fault. They must update their anti-cheat to use the modern > >>> API. > >> More reports have come out claiming this

SElinux policy question on F34... lots of "device_t:sock_file write" AVCs

Since July 6, I've been seeing a lot of AVC's though I've not changed anything in my policies. Any ideas why? The majority seem to be device_t:sock_file write which implies to me that it's a macro that's missing in the base policies. [root@mail mail]# ausearch -m avc | audit2allow #

Re: [HEADS-UP] Upcoming retirement of gstreamer-rs and wasm-bindgen stacks

On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 3:54 PM Kalev Lember wrote: > > Hi Fabio, > > tpm pointed out on IRC that gst-plugins-rs uses rust-gstreamer. We don't have > gst-plugins-rs in Fedora, but I suspect it's something we might need in the > future. > > I've been meaning to try my hand on rust packaging for a

Re: [HEADS-UP] Upcoming retirement of gstreamer-rs and wasm-bindgen stacks

On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 4:16 PM Fabio Valentini wrote: > Hello fellow Rust packagers, > > I am progressing with my "spring cleaning" efforts for the Rust stack, > and it became apparent that there's a few clusters of packages that > are actually unused, but which regularly take up a non-insignifi

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On 8/21/22 12:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 12:05:11PM +0200, Jan Drögehoff wrote: It's Epic's fault. They must update their anti-cheat to use the modern API. More reports have come out claiming this also affects the game Shovel Knight[2] and the open source library libstran

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20220821.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220820.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220821.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 49 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size

Fedora 37 compose report: 20220821.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-37-20220820.n.0 NEW: Fedora-37-20220821.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 57 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 12:05:11PM +0200, Jan Drögehoff wrote: > > It's Epic's fault. They must update their anti-cheat to use the modern > > API. > > More reports have come out claiming this also affects the game Shovel > Knight[2] and the open source library libstrangle[3], there is the non 0 >

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On 8/21/22 10:59, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 20/08/2022 21:42, Neal Gompa wrote: It seems that upstream glibc disabled support for generating DT_HASH tables for its libraries and binaries, which breaks Linux games that use Epic Games' Easy Anti-Cheat (EAC). DT_HASH was deprecated for 15

Re: glibc 2.36 and DT_HASH (preserving it for F37+)

On 20/08/2022 21:42, Neal Gompa wrote: It seems that upstream glibc disabled support for generating DT_HASH tables for its libraries and binaries, which breaks Linux games that use Epic Games' Easy Anti-Cheat (EAC). DT_HASH was deprecated for 15+ years. We shouldn't take care of proprietary DR