On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 15:37:19 -0700
Jesse Keating wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/5/10 2:30 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> > Well, how about creating "dist-f14-for-chainbuild" build target and
> > allow people to tag or untag build as/from that tag freely?
> >
> > F
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 01:21:03 -0400 Jon Masters wrote:
> It would seem that systemd employs some kind of arbitrary timeout (30
> seconds?)
60 s
> Certain services, such as kdump.service might require some time to
> recreate their initramfs and will thus never be able to start normally
> (I'm very
Hi all,
seems that I forgot to send meeting minutes from our last Java SIG
meeting. So here goes...
Summary:
* New packaging guidelines are being created:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Akurtakov/JavaPackagingDraftUpdate
* Wiki to collect monitored packages
- https://fedoraproject
2010/10/8 Stanislav Ochotnicky :
> * New packaging guidelines (sochotnicky, 17:19:37)
> * LINK:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Akurtakov/JavaPackagingDraftUpdate
> (akurtakov_, 17:22:21)
> * LINK:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Akurtakov/JavaPackagingDraftUpdate
> page
On 10/08/2010 10:49 AM, Guido Grazioli wrote:
> Hello and thanks for minutes; should we consider free to contribute to
> the draft
> page directly, or maybe in the discussion page? Or better in this ml?
I think it would be best to discuss possible improvements on java-devel
mailing list. If propos
Hi,
I am the maintainer for ykpers and libyubikey for Fedora. It's great
to see Fedora starting to use these nifty devices!
If there is anything I can do to help out and make the use of
Yubikey's in the Fedora project into a success, just holler. It might
be interesting to add a README.Fedora to
Adam Williamson said the following on 10/07/2010 01:24 PM Pacific Time:
>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/QA:SOP_nth_process_nth_draft
>>> is a proposed new page which covers the whole nice-to-have review process
>>> much as the above proposed page covers the blocker review process
Martin Sourada, Thu, 07 Oct 2010 22:55:52 +0200:
> but unless someone announces API/ABI changes, you'll notice them only
> after someone fills a bug that your plugin does not work (yes, this is
> precisely the kind of thing that could be caught by usual dependency
> check if mozilla used properly v
On Fri, 08.10.10 01:21, Jon Masters (jonat...@jonmasters.org) wrote:
> Folks,
>
> It would seem that systemd employs some kind of arbitrary timeout (30
> seconds?) by default and will log "operation timed out. Terminating" if
> things take longer than this time to start up. I would like to know h
Compose started at Fri Oct 8 08:15:19 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
antlr3-python-3.1.2-7.fc14.noarch requires python(abi) = 0:2.6
clutter-gst-devel-1.2.0-1.fc15.i686 requires pkgconfig(clutter-1.0) <
0:1.3.0
cl
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am the maintainer for ykpers and libyubikey for Fedora. It's great
> to see Fedora starting to use these nifty devices!
>
> If there is anything I can do to help out and make the use of
> Yubikey's in the Fedora project into a success, just h
On Thursday, October 07, 2010 04:25:45 am Thomas Spura wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 11:19:21 +0200
>
> Farkas Levente wrote:
> > hi,
> > while try to make a scratch build i always got:
> > -
> > # fedpkg scratch-build
> > Could not log into koji: Opening a S
In most cases I try sync all branches if there no real reasons to make
differences.
After made some changes in origin/master and commit is I also must do
for each available branches something similar:
fedpkg switch-branch el5;
git pull
git merge origin/master
git push
fedpkg build
fedpkg update
On Friday, October 08, 2010 12:06:58 am Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > My understanding on this is, and I reserve the right to misunderstand
> > this, is that once the AES key is on the yubikey, there is no way to get
> > it off of there. That key is just used to
On 10/08/2010 03:53 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Thursday, October 07, 2010 04:25:45 am Thomas Spura wrote:
>> On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 11:19:21 +0200
>>
>> Farkas Levente wrote:
>>> hi,
>>> while try to make a scratch build i always got:
>>> -
>>> # fedpkg scra
On Friday, October 08, 2010 09:15:08 am Farkas Levente wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 03:53 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 07, 2010 04:25:45 am Thomas Spura wrote:
> >> On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 11:19:21 +0200
> >>
> >> Farkas Levente wrote:
> >>> hi,
> >>> while try to make a scratch build
Dear Fedora Comunity,
We would like to draw your attention to forthcoming Fedora Test Day focused on
OpenLDAP [1] with TLS encryption.
The crypto implementation for TLS/SSL was recently changed from OpenSSL to
Mozilla Network Security Services (MozNSS). And there are 88 packages
depending on open
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> Even if you use your yubikey with yubicos servers. and auth against multiple
> different providers your AES key is never exposed to to any of the places that
> you auth to.
That is correct if different service providers auth the OTP against
yubicos serv
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 11:47:43AM +0200, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
> If there is anything I can do to help out and make the use of
> Yubikey's in the Fedora project into a success, just holler. It might
Fixing the pam module to not crash might be good. :)
Have you considerd packaging up the server
Compose started at Fri Oct 8 13:15:20 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
almanah-0.7.3-3.fc14.x86_64 requires libedataserverui-1.2.so.10()(64bit)
antlr3-python-3.1.2-7.fc14.noarch requires python(abi) = 0:2.6
frysk-0.
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
> After made some changes in origin/master and commit is I also must do
> for each available branches something similar:
> fedpkg switch-branch el5;
> git pull
> git merge origin/master
> git push
> fedpkg build
> fedpkg update
Does th
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 07:12 -0400, John Poelstra wrote:
> On the other hand it has taken us a *long* time to get to the place
> where we are today where churn in RC has been reduced to a bare minimum.
> I still subscribe to the theory (realizing some in Fedora don't) that
> every additional c
All,
I shall be working on some web frontends for ResultsDB, and I have
been told that y'all already have some mock-ups/ideas for such a
beast. If so, could y'all point me in the right direction.
Thanks
John Dulaney
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fe
On 2010-10-08 10:57:16 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 11:47:43AM +0200, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
> > If there is anything I can do to help out and make the use of
> > Yubikey's in the Fedora project into a success, just holler. It might
>
> Fixing the pam module to not crash mi
On 10/08/2010 04:28 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Friday, October 08, 2010 09:15:08 am Farkas Levente wrote:
>> On 10/08/2010 03:53 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>>> On Thursday, October 07, 2010 04:25:45 am Thomas Spura wrote:
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 11:19:21 +0200
Farkas Levente wrote:
>>
Hello,
Will OpenLayers see any more updates for F13? The version available is
2.8-5.fc12 while latest upstream is 2.10.
I'll file an RFE for update if necessary.
--
Thanks!
Regards,
Ankur
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
"FranciscoD"
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/8/10 9:57 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 04:28 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> On Friday, October 08, 2010 09:15:08 am Farkas Levente wrote:
>>> On 10/08/2010 03:53 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Thursday, October 07, 2010 04:25:45 am
On 10/08/2010 07:19 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 10/8/10 9:57 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
>> On 10/08/2010 04:28 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>>> On Friday, October 08, 2010 09:15:08 am Farkas Levente wrote:
On 10/08/2010 03:53 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Thursday, October 07, 2010 04:25:45
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
> rhel-6 beta2's
> nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
> anyway yesterday morning i was not able to build, but afternoot after a
> new cert ie: fedora-packager-setup i was able to build again. then today
> i can't build a
On 10/08/2010 07:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
>> rhel-6 beta2's
>> nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
>> anyway yesterday morning i was not able to build, but afternoot after a
>> new cert ie: fedora-packager-setup i was able to build again. then today
>> i can't bu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/8/10 11:09 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 07:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
>>> rhel-6 beta2's
>>> nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
>>> anyway yesterday morning i was not able to build, but afternoot a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=631993
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=452403&action=edit
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
On Friday, October 08, 2010 12:19:46 pm Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 10/8/10 9:57 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
> >
> > [lfar...@eagle jna (f12)]$ fedora-cert -v
> > Verifying Certificate
> > cert expires: 2011-04-06
> > CRL Checking not implemented yet
> > [lfar...@eagle jna (f12)]$ fedpkg -v build
> >
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:57:58AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
> > rhel-6 beta2's
> > nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
> > anyway yesterday morning i was not able to build, but afternoot after a
> > new cert ie
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:09:32PM +0200, Farkas Levente wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 07:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
> >> rhel-6 beta2's
> >> nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
> >> anyway yesterday morning i was not able to build, but afternoot after a
> >> new cert i
On Friday, October 08, 2010 01:09:32 pm Farkas Levente wrote:
> On 10/08/2010 07:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
> >> rhel-6 beta2's
> >> nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
> >> anyway yesterday morning i was not able to build, but afternoot after a
> >> new cert ie:
Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
>> After made some changes in origin/master and commit is I also must do
>> for each available branches something similar:
>> fedpkg switch-branch el5;
>> git pull
>> git merge origin/master
>> git push
>> fedpkg bu
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 07:12 -0400, John Poelstra wrote:
> Adam Williamson said the following on 10/07/2010 01:24 PM Pacific Time:
> >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/QA:SOP_nth_process_nth_draft
> >>> is a proposed new page which covers the whole nice-to-have review process
> >>> m
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 11:33 -0400, John Dulaney wrote:
> All,
>
> I shall be working on some web frontends for ResultsDB, and I have
> been told that y'all already have some mock-ups/ideas for such a
> beast. If so, could y'all point me in the right direction.
I think this was intended for autoq
=
#fedora-bugzappers: Fedora 14 Blocker Bug Review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=538277&hide_resolved=1
===
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 11:23 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> > Would it be overkill to put more explicit testing sign-off around NTH bugs?
>
> I don't see why not. I think this topic came up in a previous mail.
> I'd propose that NTH bugs must be tested and have appropriate bodhi
> karma for them to
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:03:04 +0400
"Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)" wrote:
> In most cases I try sync all branches if there no real reasons to
> make differences.
...snip...
I would hope a real reason would be that the update is not a security
or bugfix only update, right?
kevin
signa
On 10/08/2010 04:03 PM, Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) wrote:
> In most cases I try sync all branches if there no real reasons to make
> differences.
>
> After made some changes in origin/master and commit is I also must do
> for each available branches something similar:
> fedpkg switch-bran
On 10/08/2010 08:49 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 08:09:32PM +0200, Farkas Levente wrote:
>> On 10/08/2010 07:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
rhel-6 beta2's
nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
anyway yesterday morning i was not ab
On 10/08/2010 08:51 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> On Friday, October 08, 2010 01:09:32 pm Farkas Levente wrote:
>> On 10/08/2010 07:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> On 10/8/10 10:52 AM, Farkas Levente wrote:
rhel-6 beta2's
nss-3.12.6-3.el6.x86_64
anyway yesterday morning i was not able
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 08:48, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>
>> It sounds like you do not fully understand how the yubikeys work. either that
>> or i dont understand the attack you are describing?
>
> It all comes down to this being based on symmetric crypto, no
On 10/07/2010 10:58 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> One usage of yubikey I would like very much is as storage for the AES
> encryption key for disk encryption. I'd prefer the disk crypto key to
> not be on the disk at all, protected by just a passphrase. It would be
> nice to have it on a yubikey instead
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 12:42 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 11:23 -0400, James Laska wrote:
>
> > > Would it be overkill to put more explicit testing sign-off around NTH
> > > bugs?
> >
> > I don't see why not. I think this topic came up in a previous mail.
> > I'd propose
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> On 10/07/2010 10:58 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
>> One usage of yubikey I would like very much is as storage for the AES
>> encryption key for disk encryption. I'd prefer the disk crypto key to
>> not be on the disk at all, protected by just a passphras
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/8/10 2:48 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
>
>> On 10/07/2010 10:58 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
>>> One usage of yubikey I would like very much is as storage for the AES
>>> encryption key for disk encryption.
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:31:00PM +0530, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Will OpenLayers see any more updates for F13? The version available is
> 2.8-5.fc12 while latest upstream is 2.10.
> I'll file an RFE for update if necessary.
No, sorry.
According to the new fedora update rules, an update like openl
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 17:05 -0400, James Laska wrote:
> Oh your right. Lemme rethink if there is a better way to articulate my
> thoughts. I was searching for a generic way to say, potentially
> disruptive changes to core packages aren't a good fit for NTH. The NTH
> xorg bug#596557 discussed d
On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> Note that yubikeys are not (yet) usable for this. You cannot request the
>> AES key from it (AFAIK), only an OTP. And the OTP can also not be used to
>> unlock
>> an AES key on the harddisk because it is different for each activation.
>
> Can't you use
I've just updated perl-MooseX-StrictConstructor to the latest upstream
version in rawhide and f14. This brings a license change from "GPL+ or
Artistic" (aka "same as perl") to "Artistic 2.0".
--
Iain.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/lis
Hi!
I would like to introduce reviewing package q4wine: Qt4 GUI for wine. It can:*
Work with different wine versions at same time;* Creat, delete and manage
prefixes (WINEPREFIX);* Cd-image use;* Backup and restore for managed
prefixes;* Winetriks support.And other.
Review request is on https://
On Sat, 2010-10-09 at 00:17 +0200, Sven Lankes wrote:
> No, sorry.
>
> According to the new fedora update rules, an update like openlayers
> 2.8
> -> 2.10 is no longer allowed as the it could break code that is using
> openlayers (e.g. with the OpenLayers.Layer.Google changes).
>
> I have just bu
On Saturday 09 October 2010, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Does this mean that no other package needs openlayers? If this is the
> case, can we update since there won't be any breakages?
If an update is known to break dependent software, it breaks it whether the
affected software is in Fedora or not.
--
On Sat, 2010-10-09 at 09:42 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> If an update is known to break dependent software, it breaks it
> whether the
> affected software is in Fedora or not.
I just read up the update policy.[1]
This means you either use rawhide for latest packages (no one uses
rawhide for dev
58 matches
Mail list logo
