I don't want to contribute much to this discussion because I have not done any packaging
for over 15 years and I never did packaging for Fedora, and since I am currently
overwhelmed with other work, I also couldn't read all posts thoroughly. However, even if
my perspective on packaging and such
On 03/12/2024 09.34, Barry Scott wrote:
I'm trying to access fedora bugzilla to update a bug.
I was emailed this link:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2251248
When I open that page and click Login and choose FAS
I am taken to this page:
https://id.fedoraproject.org/saml2/SSO/Redi
L security to allow all attendees into the
building. You will need to send him your full name (as it appears on an ID
you'll carry in case UCL security want to check) and your affiliation.Those who
have already signed up in the pollon Fedora Discussion[3] *are already
registered*.
[1] https://www
On 05/09/2024 16.24, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 5:21 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 41 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time
and try to run:
dnf --releasever=41 --enablerepo=updates-testing --assumeno
distro-sync
It looks good. I assume the rp
On 18/08/2024 14.22, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 8:16 AM Andrew Bauer
wrote:
I've got a question regarding a new crypto library that falls under this policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/CryptoPolicies/
Per the documentation, I should contact the Fed
I just would like to shift for a moment attention to a new opportunity that is
on the rise.
Some of you already saw that we have now a local UK SIG and a Local London
Meetup [1].
I am currently talking to people from SuSE in UK and there is interest to talk
about making this a joint / neutral
I forgot to mention that additionally to bad requests and time outs, sometimes it is
"unauthorized" (so 401). I just had that one. Unfortunately, I forgot to enable
debug before :( I hope I manage to get used to enable debug over the next days when I
login :D
On 27/05/2024 20.51, C
On 27/05/2024 18.16, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 06:07:10PM GMT, Björn Persson wrote:
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I am unaware of any recent auth issues aside this kernel app one.
Everything has been working great since we moved the ipsilon servers to
f39 on march 27th. If there are, plea
Unfortunately, such errors are not a seldom phenomenon (at least in my case).
You can try again, it will work at some time usually. I have seen bad request
and time outs so far. Usually trying it again once or twice should be enough.
In any case, do not return with the button but refresh the lo
On 26/04/2024 15.41, Major Hayden wrote:
Hey there,
I'm incredibly thankful for all of the support I've received while serving on
the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee (FESCo) since Fedora 38 in 2022. So
many of you have taught me so many things and given me so much valuable
feedback. ♥️
On 10/04/2024 15.52, Timothée Ravier wrote:
Due to a bug in rpm-ostree, the /etc/shadow, /etc/shadow-, /etc/gshadow and
/etc/gshadow- files in Fedora CoreOS, IoT, Atomic Desktops have the
world-readable bit set.
== Affected versions ==
All Fedora CoreOS nodes installed starting from the foll
On 08/04/2024 11.31, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 12:22:35AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
I've noticed a trend in proposed changes in the way Fedora works.
I am fed up of this salami tactic as well. When we complain about the new
stuff, we in
On 01/04/2024 19.27, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 05:07:13PM +, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 23.08, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 10:30:23PM +0200, Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
Not sure, if it was already mentioned -> containers. I had here a tool
On 31/03/2024 23.08, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 10:30:23PM +0200, Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
Not sure, if it was already mentioned -> containers. I had here a toolbox
environment with F40. That I had not in my first actions
on the screen. The last state had 5.6.0-3 installed
On 01/04/2024 16.32, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 06:52:53 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
"Fedora Linux 40 branched users (i.e. pre-Beta) likely received the potentially
vulnerable 5.6.0-2.fc40 build if the system updated between March 2nd and March 6th.
F
On 31/03/2024 21.33, Sandro wrote:
On 31-03-2024 20:54, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.52, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I'm really frustrated with our communic
On 31/03/2024 23.11, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 08:55:37PM +, Christopher Klooz wrote:
The repo files should be the same on Fedora containers, so if the container is
F40 and the testing repo is enabled, it might have installed the malicious
build.
Right, if it was dnf
On 31/03/2024 22.30, Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
Am 31.03.24 um 21:33 schrieb Sandro:
On 31-03-2024 20:54, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.52, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
On 31/03/2024 20.52, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I'm really frustrated with our communication regarding this issue. Does anybody
know who can fix this?
The Fedora Mag
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I'm really frustrated with our communication regarding this issue. Does anybody
know who can fix this?
The Fedora Magazine article has been fixed (thanks!).
"*Fedora Linux
On 31/03/2024 16.56, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 12:55:23 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
In case someone from the Fedora Magazine is in the devel mailing list and reads
this:
I'm really frustrated with our communication regarding this issue. Does anybody
On 30/03/2024 15.45, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30 2024 at 12:26:48 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
If I got Rich right, the malicious code is likely to be broken on F40,
No, that is not correct, as explained by [1] and [2]. We have already asked Red
Hat to investigate
On 30/03/2024 20.08, Sandro wrote:
On 30-03-2024 13:26, Christopher Klooz wrote:
I don't know how the assumption came up that F40 is only affected if users
opted in for testing, but that interpretation already ended up in the Fedora
Magazine and in the official linkedin post of Fedo
On 30/03/2024 15.45, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30 2024 at 12:26:48 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
If I got Rich right, the malicious code is likely to be broken on F40,
No, that is not correct, as explained by [1] and [2]. We have already asked Red
Hat to investigate
On 29/03/2024 22.10, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29 2024 at 08:16:55 PM +00:00:00, Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
These are the exact builds which were vulnerable. Note the tags are
all empty because Kevin untagged them last night, so you'll probably
need to cross-reference these with bod
On 29/03/2024 21.01, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 06:46:59PM +, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Yes, F40 beta is affected, along with rawhide, but not F38/F39.
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/warning-malicious-code-in-current-pre-release-testing-versions-variants-f40
Yes, F40 beta is affected, along with rawhide, but not F38/F39.
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/warning-malicious-code-in-current-pre-release-testing-versions-variants-f40-and-rawhide-affected-users-of-f40-rawhide-need-to-respond/110683
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/urgent-security-alert
996301 - that would be
appreciated.
Thanks, Jens
PS Special thanks to Neal Gompa for pinging me in Matrix. 🙏
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, 20:05 Christopher Klooz, wrote:
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is al
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, 20:05 Christopher Klooz, wrote:
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is already at 3.1.11.1.
Among the updates since 3.1.3, there have been two security-critical
(including the medium CVE-2023
PS Special thanks to Neal Gompa for pinging me in Matrix. 🙏
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, 20:05 Christopher Klooz, wrote:
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is already at 3.1.11.1.
Among the updates since 3.1.3,
Thanks! :)
On 09/02/2024 13.18, Luna Jernberg wrote:
CCed his work email in case he looks there
-- Forwarded message -
Från: Christopher Klooz
Date: fre 9 feb. 2024 kl 13:05
Subject: Unresponsive maintainer: petersen / Pandoc package not updated
since June 2023: Security
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is already at 3.1.11.1.
Among the updates since 3.1.3, there have been two security-critical
(including the medium CVE-2023-35936. Security fixes are in 3.1.4 & 3.1.6).
The actu
On 29/12/2023 17.31, Sergio Pascual wrote:
Hello, I would like to bring attention to this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2250192
This problem prevents Brasero from creating CD images in F39.
Brasero complains about "old version of cdrdao", but the version in F39 is
the latest (
MAC randomization if they are affected negatively could be a
good mitigation without increasing the stuff in the installer.
[1]
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-proposal-wifi-mac-randomization-system-wide/99856/22
On 24/12/2023 11.19, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 24/12/2023
On 24/12/2023 04.45, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Kevin Kofler via devel writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Christopher Klooz writes:
>
>> Btw, does anyone know if this (in the practically-same manner) is
really
>> already introduced in Windows, Mac, Android by default? Globall
I would like to avoid duplicates and unnecessary redundancy, but
especially for the issue discussed below it might be worth to also
review the discussion on discussion.fp.org -> I am not convinced if it
is that easy for all users when it comes to existing network
configurations / setups, especi
Because not everyone is active on discourse, I thought it makes sense to
link this here for people from the area in or close to London:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/local-meetup-london-2024/98029
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedor
It used to be different, but since GitLab changed their UI, I also would
no longer choose it over alternatives (so, unfortunately: +1 for the UX
mess & the preference for alternatives). The remaining advantage of
GitLab is the time-effective drag/drop issue board, but that cannot
balance the re
The below is a duplicate from discourse (I suggest to focus the
discussion there):
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/potential-security-issue-for-beginners-non-experts-when-release-is-end-of-life-fedora-doesnt-consider-the-behavior-of-beginners-non-experts-sufficiently/87311/1
I just bec
Matt has started a poll with regards to the community's preferences
about the topic:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/straw-poll-on-your-preferences-about-opt-in-opt-out-for-possible-data-collection/85675/2
On 7/12/23 12:37, Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday, 2023-07-11 08:17:07 -050
Matt has started a poll with regards to the community's preferences
about the topic:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/straw-poll-on-your-preferences-about-opt-in-opt-out-for-possible-data-collection/85675/2
On 7/12/23 12:37, Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday, 2023-07-11 08:17:07 -0500,
23 16:01, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 8:38 AM Christopher Klooz via devel
wrote:
Hi,
I was testing an instance of the LXQt Spin in a VM and saw that after
updating all packages, the LXQt packages are still with version 1.1.0,
which is from April 2022. Current is 1.3.0.
I read the
Hi,
I was testing an instance of the LXQt Spin in a VM and saw that after
updating all packages, the LXQt packages are still with version 1.1.0,
which is from April 2022. Current is 1.3.0.
I read the LXQt team does not maintain itself, and 1.2.0 and 1.3.0 seem
to not contain critical securit
ues could both be explained by an acpi-related bug).
I already asked Justin to change the BZ# in Bodhi.
On 6/14/23 10:43, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi Christopher,
On 6/13/23 23:26, Christopher Klooz via devel wrote:
In case you are already aware of the issue, feel free to ignore this mail. I
j
In case you are already aware of the issue, feel free to ignore this
mail. I just want to make aware that there could be multiple
interrelated (bug) reports that might be considered in conjunction and
not on their own, given that the amount of affected users is above
average (I could imagine th
On 6/9/23 02:24, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 09:21:38PM +0200, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Hi,
I saw that some users filed kernel bug reports, which lacked information.
Then I wanted to check the kernel bug report template and found out: there
is no longer a template.
So in the
Hi,
I saw that some users filed kernel bug reports, which lacked
information. Then I wanted to check the kernel bug report template and
found out: there is no longer a template.
So in the past, once the component "kernel" was chosen, the user was
provided with a template of the bug report, w
Several users experience an issue with Fedora's `libheif` package, which
can be easily reproduced:
See
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unknown-update-error-with-libheif/81302/6
With regards to our default dnf repositories: our package has weak
dependencies that are not satisfied by ou
On 4/21/23 17:27, Daniel Alley wrote:
If one uses OpenPGP and if people verify it
As you mention, that's a big "if"
Absolutely, and if the majority does not verify in the devel mailing
list, it is clearly an indicator that this type of security is not
relevant here ;) But finally, I am not su
On 4/21/23 16:30, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
On 4/21/23 15:25, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Just a slight addition about "archaic email" and related comments:
Email and its capability for being used in conjunction with OpenPGP
ensures two major institutions in kernel development and
Just a slight addition about "archaic email" and related comments:
Email and its capability for being used in conjunction with OpenPGP
ensures two major institutions in kernel development and elsewhere:
"Trusting the developers, not infrastructure" [1], and, assume "any part
of the infrastruct
Thanks for the information. I filed a ticket, so everyone should get an
email, including Fab by his private mail address:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171184
On 2/18/23 14:06, Ben Beasley wrote:
Fabian Affolter has been consistently active in Fedora. At the same time, he
maint
Hi all,
Does anyone know about the maintainer "Fab"?
I have tried to contact him through
asciidoc-maintain...@fedoraproject.org on 29th January and through
f...@fedoraproject.org on 11th February, but did not received an answer
from either.
asciiDoc has not been updated for two years with 1
No worries. Thanks!
On 1/27/23 19:41, Davide Cavalca wrote:
On 2023-01-27 10:34, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Hi,
I just saw that a package (x11docker) seems to be orphaned: we ship a
very old release (many releases since June 2021), and when reviewing
the release notes of subsequent releases on
Hi,
I just saw that a package (x11docker) seems to be orphaned: we ship a
very old release (many releases since June 2021), and when reviewing the
release notes of subsequent releases on github of that package, I think
this old release (from June 2021) should no longer be deployed: see
https:
:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 3:37 PM Christopher Klooz wrote:
A fresh installation of Fedora 37 has by default the "--supervised"
option active in its gpg-agent systemd file
(/usr/lib/systemd/user/gpg-agent.service).
According to GnuPG Docs [1], this option is deprecated. Once gpg-agent
A fresh installation of Fedora 37 has by default the "--supervised"
option active in its gpg-agent systemd file
(/usr/lib/systemd/user/gpg-agent.service).
According to GnuPG Docs [1], this option is deprecated. Once gpg-agent
is invoked, the log of "systemctl --user status gpg-agent.service"
if necessary, open a topic there. We had
nested virtualization topics in the past, so maybe someone there can
help you with that.
Cheers,
Chris
On 28/12/2022 09:34, Peter Boy wrote:
Hi Chris,
Am 27.12.2022 um 23:01 schrieb Christopher Klooz:
...
The Red Hat Docs you refer to differ to th
Hi Peter,
I have not much experience with nested virtualization in particular. But
although I am quite sure that it will not fail without host-passthrough,
I cannot imagine it to be sufficiently efficient without making use of
host-passthrough in production (and also not effective in many use
Just tested and added karma to f36 and f37. Thanks!
On 01/11/2022 18:22, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I've just pushed the updates for OpenSSL fixing 2 CVEs evaluated as
HIGH. Could you please check the freshly pushed builds to get
necessary karma ASAP?
Many thanks!
--
Dmitry
On 05/10/2022 20:28, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 10/5/22 19:59, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 05/10/2022 18:39, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 05/10/2022 17:33, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 11:16 AM, Christopher Klooz wrote:
However, on ask.fp, a user mentioned that the grub
On 05/10/2022 18:39, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 05/10/2022 17:33, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 11:16 AM, Christopher Klooz wrote:
However, on ask.fp, a user mentioned that the grub menu is no longer
enabled by default on single boot systems so that changing the
kernel is
On 05/10/2022 17:33, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 11:16 AM, Christopher Klooz wrote:
However, on ask.fp, a user mentioned that the grub menu is no longer
enabled by default on single boot systems so that changing the kernel is
no longer easily possible, and put forward
https
The current issue on 5.19.12 made it necessary for some users to change
their kernel on boot to avoid 5.19.12 until the update to 5.19.13 was
pushed to stable. Obviously, the option to easily boot recent kernels
can be necessary in several circumstances, especially for non-advanced
users it has
On 26/08/2022 01:28, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Everything should be back to working. Try a 'dnf --refresh...' or a
'dnf clean all'.
Yes, the packages are no longer in the update list. So the errors are
gone for now. Thanks!
It's not fully clear yet some of the events. ;(
The person who used to
I just tried an update (`dnf update`, F36).
Three packages that are to be updated are from the fedora-cisco-openh264
repository.
In all three cases, I get the dnf output that these packages have not
been signed, which finally makes the GPG verification to fail.
The packages are:
gstreamer
:
You can became maintainer and add this to rpmfusion.
Makes sense ;)
пт, 1 июл. 2022 г., 10:50 Christopher Klooz :
Sorry, I didn't mean to implement this specific solution. That was
only meant as example that the issue is known. I meant it more
generic, any solution for the user that c
have it with nvidia. I was wondering as the 8811CU seems widespread.
On 01/07/2022 01:39, Naheem Zaffar wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022, 23:50 Christopher Klooz, wrote:
It seems that Fedora does not support the Realtek RTL8811CU for
WiFi. A
user at ask.Fedora just had the issue. `
It seems that Fedora does not support the Realtek RTL8811CU for WiFi. A
user at ask.Fedora just had the issue. `lsusb` classifies it just as
"Bus 001 Device 010: ID 0bda:c811 Realtek Semiconductor Corp. 802.11ac
NIC"; correspondingly, `nmcli` does not recognize it at all.
A bug report with som
The irony is that XTS uses two different keys for different parts of the
operation. This means that AES-XTS-256 is AES128 and AES-XTS-512 is
AES256 (security is not increased by the second key).
So, you compared AES with 128 bit encryption with XChaCha with 256 bit.
And despite the doubled key
Hi all,
Borg Backup (https://www.borgbackup.org/), which is also part of the
Fedora repository, is a widespread open source incremental backup tool
with authenticated encryption. Quite sure many of you know & use it.
The crypto was completely redesigned for the upcoming version 1.3.
Therefor
On 28/05/2022 00:34, Stephen Snow wrote:
On Fri, 2022-05-27 at 09:52 -0700, Brian C. Lane wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 09:38:43AM -0400, Stephen Snow wrote:
On Wed, 2022-05-25 at 14:02 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
The rescue mode has always been on the traditional installer
images,
not the
Just as a short incentive from my side: I currently try to solve the
issue Stephen is talking about.
Feel free to have a look on:
https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/not-boot-not-disks/21992
My point is that the complexity we are able to tackle and the complexity
some users are able to tackle di
73 matches
Mail list logo
