Re: Strange ssh / openldap linking problem

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/20/2014 03:33 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Well this bug has reappeared on my machine. openldap depends on > openldap-devel. > > $ ll /usr/lib64/libldap* > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 10 Feb 25 22:59 /usr/lib64/libldap-2.4.so.2 -> > libldap

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

- Original Message - > On 03/19/2014 01:09 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > There is also a proposal for a "Fedora Plasma" product based around KDE. > > I'm > > personally a little skeptical but listening -- I think want a technology > > showcase masquerading as a product would miss the point,

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Hi, > So maybe a solution would be to write a libwrap2 instead ? Don't think this is the solution. Part of the problem is that some of the functionality is just obsolete in todays world. Trusting IDENT and DNS for access control maybe made sense in the 90ies. It certainly doesn't today, and

Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > How much breakage will we have to suffer until people finally realize that > SELinux is a horribly flawed idea? > > Kevin Kofler > I'm sure you are entitled to your opinion, and it is quite easy to disable if that's what you want. Ho

Re: Yet another bug caused by SELinux

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Hi, > > GHC (Haskell) was broken for (at least) over a year because of a bug in the > workaround for stupid SELinux restrictions: > https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7629 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=907515 > > How much

[Bug 1071125] Upgrade to new upstream version

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1071125 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Config-Validator-1.2-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because:

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

On 03/21/2014 10:02 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: - Original Message - On 03/19/2014 01:09 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: There is also a proposal for a "Fedora Plasma" product based around KDE. I'm personally a little skeptical but listening -- I think want a technology showcase masquerading a

Re: fail2ban + firewalld suggestions needed

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:36:38PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > because the journal isn't optional in Fedora. And I think I'd combine > > mail and sendmail (because the /usr/sbin/sendmail command can be > > provided by a lot of alternatives, including the very lightweight > > ssmtp). > Yeah, I

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:28:26AM +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote: > I agree with Jaroslav. I was looking forward to have a fourth > product to those three. KDE can help define what is needed for new > product, what must be done by all teams, how much work it will be > ... I guess we should speak m

F21 System Wide Change: Java 8

= Proposed System Wide Change: Java 8 = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java8 Change owner(s): Omair Majid Make Java 8 (provided by OpenJDK 8 which is java-1.8.0-openjdk) the default Java runtime. The current default Java runtime (Java 7, provided by OpenJDK 7, java-1.7.0-openjdk) will

DSO API stability guidelines

Hey all- Can anyone point me to fedora packaging documentation that discusses the need for API stability in packaged shared libraries? I'm sure we have some requirement that APIs in a DSO need to be versioned and maintained through a release, but for the life of me I'm unable to find it.

F21 Self Contained Change: Improved Scala Ecosystem Support

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Improved Scala Ecosystem Support = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ImprovedScalaEcosystem Change owner(s): William Benton Fedora now supports several essential parts of the Scala language ecosystem as well as building packages with sbt, the de facto bui

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

- Original Message - > From: "Matthew Miller" > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" > > Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:59:01 PM > Subject: Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:28:26AM +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote

Re: DSO API stability guidelines

On 03/21/2014 01:18 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > Can anyone point me to fedora packaging documentation that discusses > the need for API stability in packaged shared libraries? I'm sure we > have some requirement that APIs in a DSO need to be versioned and > maintained through a release, but for the l

Re: EPEL EPIC! [was Re: and SCL]

2014-03-21 16:07 GMT+04:00 Matthew Miller : >> It doesn't exist, it's an idea that Robyn has floated semi-seriously >> as a way to provide a repo that moves faster than EPEL. Rather than >> try to jam fast-moving stuff in to EPEL, the idea was to do an Extra >> Packages for Infrastructure and Clou

F21 Self Contained Change: Apache Spark

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Apache Spark = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ApacheSpark Change owner(s): William Benton Apache Spark is a fast and general engine for large-scale data processing. This change brings Spark to Fedora, allowing easy deployment and development of Spark a

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21.03.14 00:27, Paul Wouters (p...@nohats.ca) wrote: > On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > >I mean, in this day and age we should not consider an ACL language well > >designed if it basically pushes users to use IDENT and DNS for > >authentication. (And no, don't say the wo

F21 Self Contained Change: NFS Ganesha File Server

= Proposed Self Contained Change: NFS Ganesha File Server = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NFSGanesha Change owner(s): Jim Lieb NFS Ganesha is a user mode file server that supports NFSv3, NFSv4, and NFSv4.1 including pNFS for distributed filesystems. It uses loadable filesystem driver

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Java 8

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 13:11:44 +0100 Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: Java 8 = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java8 > > Change owner(s): Omair Majid > > Make Java 8 (provided by OpenJDK 8 which is java-1.8.0-openjdk) the > default Java runtime. The current defaul

Re: DSO API stability guidelines

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 01:25:52PM +0100, Michal Schmidt wrote: > On 03/21/2014 01:18 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > > Can anyone point me to fedora packaging documentation that discusses > > the need for API stability in packaged shared libraries? I'm sure we > > have some requirement that APIs in a DS

Updated Rawhide to nss-3.16

nss 3.16 was released this week and is now on Rawhide. Details in the upstream release notes at https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/NSS/NSS_3.16_release_notes. It should appear on updated testing for fedora stable branches next week. Elio -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.o

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

On 21.03.2014 13:24, Christian Schaller wrote: - Original Message - From: "Matthew Miller" To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:59:01 PM Subject: Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:28:

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Java 8

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 13:11:44 +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: = Proposed System Wide Change: Java 8 = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java8 It may be a good idea to mass rebuild Java packages against OpenJDK 8 to spot any source incompatibilities earlier. This is not required. Is th

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 06:34:22PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > I wonder whether it wouldn't be time to say goodbye to tcpwrappers in > Fedora. There has been a request in systemd upstream to disable support I talked to some of the RHEL planning people, and they're okay with marking it depre

[perl-Test-Modern/f20] Initial import (perl-Test-Modern-0.002-3)

Summary of changes: 1567260... Initial import (perl-Test-Modern-0.002-3) (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://a

[Base] Base Design WG agenda meeting 21. Mar 2014 15:00 UTC on #fedora-meeting

Agenda: - Discuss draft for Tech Spec for Base Design - Open Floor Thanks & regards, Phil -- Philipp Knirsch | Tel.: +49-711-96437-470 Manager Core Services| Fax.: +49-711-96437-111 Red Hat GmbH | Email: Phil Knirsch Wankelstrasse 5 | Web:

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Java 8

- Original Message - > Is there an easy way to do test builds against 8 now? java-1.8.0-openjdk is available in F19 (updates-testing), F20 (updates-testing) and in rawhide. It doesn't provide 'java-devel' (which is what yum uses to find JDKs), so Koji shouldn't use java-1.8.0-openjdk

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Java 8

- Original Message - From: "Dan Horák" > Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > Make Java 8 (provided by OpenJDK 8 which is java-1.8.0-openjdk) the > > default Java runtime. The current default Java runtime (Java 7, > > provided by OpenJDK 7, java-1.7.0-openjdk) will be obsoleted and > > removed.

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Java 8

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:24:05 -0400 (EDT) Omair Majid wrote: > > > - Original Message - > From: "Dan Horák" > > Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > > Make Java 8 (provided by OpenJDK 8 which is java-1.8.0-openjdk) > > > the default Java runtime. The current default Java runtime (Java > > > 7, p

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 20:55 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > So offer something with equivalent functionality (and config file > syntax compatibility), with a nice modern clean API and then systemd > and others can be moved over to that 1 by 1, and once we've no more > users left we can kill of the o

Packaging changes on NetworkManager? Whither NetworkManager-glib...

Did something recently change with the packaging of NetworkManager? I’m not finding NetworkManager-glib, just NetworkManager-glib-devel: [root@builder philipp]# yum update Loaded plugins: langpacks, refresh-packagekit adobe-linux-x86_64 | 951 B 00:00

[Base] Fedora Base Design Working Group (2014-03-14) meeting minutes and logs

Hi all. Agenda for today was discussing the tech spec that masta wanted to write. Unfortunately due to his other workload he wasn't able to complete it by today, so we postponed the discussion to next week. In the openfloor session we brought up a topic from jreznik about any requirements Ba

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, Lennart Poettering wrote: we kinda do have dnssec per default. All DNS servers installed per default do DNSSEC. Installing dnssec-trigger makes that even more pervasive. Well, but glibc can't do the DNSSEC client side, can it? Applications that want to do DNSSEC validati

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21.03.14 12:37, Paul Wouters (p...@nohats.ca) wrote: > On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > >>we kinda do have dnssec per default. All DNS servers installed per > >>default do DNSSEC. Installing dnssec-trigger makes that even more > >>pervasive. > > > >Well, but glibc can't

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, Lennart Poettering wrote: As long as -lresolve (i.e. glibc and getaddrinfo()) can't do DNSSEC it's just not there... You are proposing changing the api of getaddrinfo()? Could luck with that? Yes, applications that want to see DNSSEC results will have to do a little bit o

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21.03.14 13:05, Paul Wouters (p...@nohats.ca) wrote: > On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > >As long as -lresolve (i.e. glibc and getaddrinfo()) can't do DNSSEC it's > >just not there... > > You are proposing changing the api of getaddrinfo()? Could luck with > that? Dunno

Re: Packaging changes on NetworkManager? Whither NetworkManager-glib...

On Fri, 2014-03-21 at 10:04 -0600, Philip Prindeville wrote: > Did something recently change with the packaging of NetworkManager? > > I’m not finding NetworkManager-glib, just NetworkManager-glib-devel: Outdated mirrors perhaps? It's clearly in the repos: http://mirror.cc.vt.edu/pub/fedora/lin

Re: Packaging changes on NetworkManager? Whither NetworkManager-glib...

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote: > Did something recently change with the packaging of NetworkManager? > > I'm not finding NetworkManager-glib, just NetworkManager-glib-devel: > > [root@builder philipp]# yum update > Loaded plugins: langpacks, refresh-packagekit > adobe-l

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

* Lennart Poettering: >> So offer something with equivalent functionality (and config file >> syntax compatibility), with a nice modern clean API and then systemd >> and others can be moved over to that 1 by 1, and once we've no more >> users left we can kill of the old beast ? > > Nope. In system

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 21.03.2014 20:02, schrieb Florian Weimer: > * Lennart Poettering: > >>> So offer something with equivalent functionality (and config file >>> syntax compatibility), with a nice modern clean API and then systemd >>> and others can be moved over to that 1 by 1, and once we've no more >>> users

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On 03/21/2014 02:05 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 06:34:22PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: >I wonder whether it wouldn't be time to say goodbye to tcpwrappers in >Fedora. There has been a request in systemd upstream to disable support I talked to some of the RHEL plannin

PEP453 // ensurepip // pip

Hey there, So I’m one of the authors of PEP453, the original implementor of ensurepip, and a pip maintainer. I know that pip (and other language level package managers) have a sort of love/hate (sometimes more of one or the other!) relationship with the downstream Linux packagers. I know that PEP4

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:16 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > In other words you are telling us that now to get something implemented or > removed in Fedora we have to not only deal with our usual politics and > bureaucracy but also all the downstream distribution to us as well... One way t

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On 03/21/2014 10:30 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote: On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:16 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" mailto:johan...@gmail.com>> wrote: In other words you are telling us that now to get something implemented or removed in Fedora we have to not only deal with our usual politics a

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 21.03.2014 23:16, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: > On 03/21/2014 02:05 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 06:34:22PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: >>> >I wonder whether it wouldn't be time to say goodbye to tcpwrappers in >>> >Fedora. There has been a request in systemd upst

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 21.03.2014 23:31, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: > > On 03/21/2014 10:30 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:16 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" > > wrote: >> >> In other words you are telling us that now to get something implemented >> or remove

[perl-Net-Twitter-Lite/el6] Initial import (#1074482).

Summary of changes: 3f04fa4... Initial import (#1074482). (*) (*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproj

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On 03/21/2014 10:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: the author of tcpwrapper is Wietse Venema, You do realize when he wrote this and what he was trying to overcome at that time so I have to ask have you spoken to him about how useful he thinks his creation is today and why he stopped maintaining it

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 21.03.2014 23:37, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: > > On 03/21/2014 10:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> the author of tcpwrapper is Wietse Venema, > > You do realize when he wrote this and what he was trying to overcome at that > time so I have to ask have you spoken > to him about how useful

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

2014-03-21 1:00 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering : > On Thu, 20.03.14 13:44, Stephen John Smoogen (smo...@gmail.com) wrote: > > And now I need to have X number applications special syntax to > > whitelist/blacklist a site. I need to change X files to make that change. > > Each of those could be a sepa

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

2014-03-21 10:02 GMT+01:00 Jaroslav Reznik : > > KDE should not be a top level Product. In my opinion, Fedora should only > > produce the currently listed 3 Products and not more. Otherwise we get > > back at square 1 where we have too many offerings and nobody knows what > > makes a supported Fed

Re: What will happen to XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnemon in Fedora.Next

2014-03-21 14:46 GMT+01:00 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn : > As I perceive it one of the biggest problems for Fedora as a development > platform for new technologies is that everything is tied to very rigorous > guidelines and controls that tend to be fairly conservative. This is great > when you care abo

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21.03.14 20:02, Florian Weimer (f...@deneb.enyo.de) wrote: > * Lennart Poettering: > > >> So offer something with equivalent functionality (and config file > >> syntax compatibility), with a nice modern clean API and then systemd > >> and others can be moved over to that 1 by 1, and once

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21.03.14 23:35, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: > > In other words you are telling us that now to get something implemented or > > removed in Fedora we have to not only > > deal with our usual politics and bureaucracy but also all the downstream > > distribution to us as we

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, 21.03.14 23:46, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: > if you believe it or not: there exists code which don't neeed > updates and reweites all te time because it just works and given You do realize that if software engineering has shown something then yes, software development i

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Sat, 22.03.14 01:20, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote: > > Well, if you filter in postfix or ssh, then you have a domain-specific, > > powerful language there. You can not only match on source addresses, but > > also on user names, groups, authentication methods, connection features > > SAS

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

2014-03-22 3:07 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering : > On Fri, 21.03.14 23:46, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: > > > if you believe it or not: there exists code which don't neeed > > updates and reweites all te time because it just works and given > > You do realize that if software engine

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > You do realize that if software engineering has shown something then > yes, software development is never finished, it's a process. You do need > maintains for such things. > The software in my microwave oven, coffee maker, thermostat,

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

2014-03-22 3:21 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering : > On Sat, 22.03.14 01:20, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote: > > > > Well, if you filter in postfix or ssh, then you have a domain-specific, > > > powerful language there. You can not only match on source addresses, > but > > > also on user names,

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

2014-03-22 5:20 GMT+01:00 Miloslav Trmač : > I'm participating in this discussion because, as a general rule, I assume > most administrators configuring security, and most users in general, *aren't > idiots*. So, the fairly large number of assumed non-idiots using this > functionality suggests, a

Re: F21 System Wide Change: Java 8

2014-03-21 13:11 GMT+01:00 Jaroslav Reznik : > = Proposed System Wide Change: Java 8 = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java8 > > == Detailed Description == > OpenJDK8 is much more strict when it comes to building javadocs. Many - > javadoc package in Fedora fail to build. Those that

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

2014-03-20 18:59 GMT+01:00 Paul Wouters : > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > I wonder whether it wouldn't be time to say goodbye to tcpwrappers in >> Fedora. >> > > I'd be happy to see those go. > > Those who depend on it though, should see some "failed closed" > behaviour, so t

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 22.03.2014 03:07, schrieb Lennart Poettering: > On Fri, 21.03.14 23:46, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: > >> if you believe it or not: there exists code which don't neeed >> updates and reweites all te time because it just works and given > > You do realize that if software eng

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 22.03.2014 03:05, schrieb Lennart Poettering: > On Fri, 21.03.14 23:35, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: > >>> In other words you are telling us that now to get something implemented or >>> removed in Fedora we have to not only >>> deal with our usual politics and bureaucracy bu

Re: Maybe it's time to get rid of tcpwrappers/tcpd?

Am 22.03.2014 03:21, schrieb Lennart Poettering: > On Sat, 22.03.14 01:20, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote: >> DNS queries can't really be done within the firewall (and due to the >> circular dependency between having the firewall up before allowing access >> to the network and needing acces