Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

> It should be possible to touch /.autorelabel and have the SELinux > labels on the filesystem fixed at next boot. […] > (a) Configure /etc/selinux/config to set SELinux permissive, and > modify the fedora-autorelabel.service so it edits /etc/selinux/config > to re-enable SELinux next time. This

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On 06/30/2016 09:34 AM, Christian Stadelmann wrote: Setting SELinux to permissive (even for a very short time) seems risky to me. I'd rather not do that. Is it really substantially more risky than blindly relabeling the file system? Florian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.or

Looking for a proven packager

Hi! I submitted a bugzilla report with a patch that implements an improvement of the hadoop package in Fedora, extending the current incomplete Fedora integration patch that only supports ix86 and x86_64 to more architectures. The maintainer is unwilling to apply it, but says that if a proven pack

Re: RFC: static builds for user emulators in Fedora QEMU RPMs

On 06/29/2016 12:03 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > The change to introduce a qemu-binfmt package has small upgrade > implications since anyone with qemu-user installed today, will loose > the binary format rules unless they manually install qemu-binfmt. Not if you add "Obsoletes: qemu-user < V-R"

Re: RFC: static builds for user emulators in Fedora QEMU RPMs

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:21:18AM +0200, Michal Schmidt wrote: > On 06/29/2016 12:03 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > The change to introduce a qemu-binfmt package has small upgrade > > implications since anyone with qemu-user installed today, will loose > > the binary format rules unless they ma

Re: Looking for a proven packager

First thing you should do is to send your patch upstream. If upstream will say "it's good patch", I will help you to get it in Fedora before upstream will release new version. Unfortunately it's not possible in other way. Also there are some comments from random guys about code quality. On Thu, J

Re: Looking for a proven packager

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > First thing you should do is to send your patch upstream. If upstream > will say "it's good patch", I will help you to get it in Fedora before > upstream will release new version. Unfortunately it's not possible in > other way. In the hadoop

Re: Looking for a proven packager

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Mattias Ellert wrote: > Hi! > > I submitted a bugzilla report with a patch that implements an > improvement of the hadoop package in Fedora, extending the current > incomplete Fedora integration patch that only supports ix86 and x86_64 > to more architectures. The

Re: Anyone know how to contact maintainer Salimma?

2016-06-30 4:59 GMT+02:00 Avram Lubkin : > > I've been trying to contact Salimma, Michel Alexandre Salim, for the last > month. I've been trying to update python-sphinx which hasn't had an update > since last fall. Worked through all of the issues, but maintainer hasn't > responded to commit reques

Re: Gnome-shell crash with Nvidia drivers (fix available but not in Fedora 24 it seems)

Thanks ! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

Hi all, we were talking about this item for some time, so let's start a thread for it to have the discussion and hopefully also a solution documented. This is meant as discussion initiation based on the situation in Fedora on POWER. I would like to ask the bigger experts than me to fill the missin

Re: fedora-packager installs yum

On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 1:27:46 AM CDT Christopher wrote: > Installing fedora-packager pulls in yum as a dependency. Is this expected > on a system built around dnf and without yum already installed? yes it is expected and will continue to be the case for years to come, why? mock, we will al

Re: fedora-packager installs yum

On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 10:42:36 AM CDT Raphael Groner wrote: > There's a controversial ongoing discussion. f-e-k needs a port to Python 3. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329629 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024796 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?i

[Modularity] Modularization wiki moved to "Modularity"

The Modularization wiki formerly found at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Modularization has been moved to "Modularity" as part of an effort to consolidate terminology. This includes the subpages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Modularity/Infra /Modularity/Developer_Notes /Modularity/Getting_involv

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20160630.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20160629.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20160630.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:4 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 5 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 77 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 8.28 MiB Size of dropped packages:0.00

F25 System Wide Change: Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages

= Proposed System Wide Change: Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ Automatic_Provides_for_Python_RPM_Packages Change owner(s): * Tomas Orsava * Miro Hroncok

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ > Automatic_Provides_for_Python_RPM_Packages > > Change owner(s): > * Tomas Orsava

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ > Automatic_Provides_for_Python_RPM_Packages > > Change owner(s): > * Tomas Orsava

Fedora Rawhide-20160630.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Workstation live i386 Cloud_base raw-xz i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Kde raw-xz armhfp Minimal raw-xz armhfp Workstation live x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 13/78 (x86_64), 2/16 (i386) ID: 24230 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedora

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 12:12:37 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > For ppc64 (the big endian POWER) the base is set by the toolchain > default which is Power4/ppc970. When Power7 came we were asked what are > the options to take the advantage of these CPUs, 3 generations newer > than the base. The solution was

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 12:12:37 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: >> For ppc64 (the big endian POWER) the base is set by the toolchain >> default which is Power4/ppc970. When Power7 came we were asked what are >> the options to take the advantage of thes

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On Thu, 2016-06-30 at 07:34 +, Christian Stadelmann wrote: > > It should be possible to touch /.autorelabel and have the SELinux > > labels on the filesystem fixed at next boot. > > […] > > > (a) Configure /etc/selinux/config to set SELinux permissive, and > > modify the fedora-autorelabel.se

Re: [Modularity] Modularization wiki moved to "Modularity"

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 07:12:23AM -0400, Stephen Gilson wrote: > The Modularization wiki formerly found at > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Modularization has been moved to > "Modularity" as part of an effort to consolidate terminology. > > This includes the subpages: > https://fedoraproject.org/

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 12:12:37 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: >> For ppc64 (the big endian POWER) the base is set by the toolchain >> default which is Power4/ppc970. When Power7 came we were asked what are >> the options to take the advantage of thes

autoconf test for deprecated readdir_r

Hi, Does anyone have a good/working autoconf test for checking for deprecated readdir_r (for Fedora 25) ? I'm not having much luck. (Have tried AC_COMPILE_IFELSE, among other things.) Alternatively it would be nice if there was a some kind of feature test define in dirent.h. Thanks, -- Kaleb

Re: fedora-packager installs yum

On 06/30/2016 04:34 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 10:42:36 AM CDT Raphael Groner wrote: >> There's a controversial ongoing discussion. f-e-k needs a port to Python 3. >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1329629 >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1

Re: autoconf test for deprecated readdir_r

Dne 30.6.2016 v 17:30 Kaleb KEITHLEY napsal(a): Hi, Does anyone have a good/working autoconf test for checking for deprecated readdir_r (for Fedora 25) ? I'm not having much luck. (Have tried AC_COMPILE_IFELSE, among other things.) Alternatively it would be nice if there was a some kind of fe

Re: autoconf test for deprecated readdir_r

On 06/30/2016 05:38 PM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: Cut & paste example code solution from lvm2: #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || (__GLIBC__ < 2) || ((__GLIBC__ == 2) && (__GLIBC_MINOR__ < 23)) /* readdir_r is deprecated with newer GLIBC */ struct dirent entry, *iter = 0; while ( (errno = readd

Re: autoconf test for deprecated readdir_r

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:30:38AM -0400, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: > > Hi, > > Does anyone have a good/working autoconf test for checking for > deprecated readdir_r (for Fedora 25) ? > > I'm not having much luck. (Have tried AC_COMPILE_IFELSE, among other > things.) > > Alternatively it would be n

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:13:59 +0200, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Jan Kratochvil > wrote: > > But now there is ppc64le for >=Power8. So <=Power7 can use ppc64 but newer > >>=Power8 hardware does use ppc64le which is already Power8 optimized. > > So isn't this problem (some

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:13:59 +0200, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Jan Kratochvil >> wrote: >> > But now there is ppc64le for >=Power8. So <=Power7 can use ppc64 but newer >> >>=Power8 hardware does use ppc64le whic

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On Thu, 30.06.16 10:45, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > Insert your idea here … > > > > Do it the same way `dnf system-upgrade` works. The requirements (having > > local filesystem read- and writable) are quite similar. Or the way > > PackageKit's system upgrade works… > > probably th

Re: Looking for a proven packager

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:35 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Igor Gnatenko > wrote: > > First thing you should do is to send your patch upstream. If upstream > > will say "it's good patch", I will help you to get it in Fedora before > > upstream will release new versi

Re: F25 System Wide Change: Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages

> "JR" == Jaroslav Reznik writes: JR> * Proposal owners: Prepare a draft for the Fedora Packaging JR> Guidelines for Python Please open a ticket with FPC sooner rather than later, even if the draft isn't ready/started. - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://list

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:13:59 +0200, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Jan Kratochvil >> wrote: >> > But now there is ppc64le for >=Power8. So <=Power7 can use ppc64 but newer >> >>=Power8 hardware does use ppc64le whi

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 12:12:37PM +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > For ppc64 (the big endian POWER) the base is set by the toolchain > default which is Power4/ppc970. When Power7 came we were asked what are > the options to take the advantage of these CPUs, 3 generations newer > than the base. The soluti

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On 06/30/2016 06:13 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Thu, 30.06.16 10:45, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote: > Insert your idea here … >>> >>> Do it the same way `dnf system-upgrade` works. The requirements (having >>> local filesystem read- and writable) are quite similar. Or the way >>

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Petr Lautrbach wrote: > On 06/30/2016 06:13 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Thu, 30.06.16 10:45, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > Insert your idea here … > >>> > >>> Do it the same way `dnf system-upgrade` works. The requirements (having

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 08:04:57PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > I will just snipe here that the situation would be better if POWER > 4 > hardware was generally available to buy. The upcoming Raptor Talos POWER8 board [1] looks promising, but at $3700 a pop just for the motherboard and an en

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 15:59:38 -0400 Solomon Peachy wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 08:04:57PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > I will just snipe here that the situation would be better if POWER > > > 4 hardware was generally available to buy. > > The upcoming Raptor Talos POWER8 board [1] lo

Re: Problem with exact provides in pre-release version

On 2016-06-30 04:27, Ahmad Samir wrote: > On 30 June 2016 at 01:21, Marcin Zajączkowski wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm a maintainer of NetworkManager-sstp package and before 1.2.0 final >> will be released I experimenting in my CORP repo with pre-release Git >> version. I've encountered a situation wh

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On 06/30/2016 09:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Petr Lautrbach wrote: >> On 06/30/2016 06:13 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: >>> On Thu, 30.06.16 10:45, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote: >>> >> Insert your idea here … > > Do it the same way

Re: Updated hdf5, netcdf, libdap coming to rawhide tomorrow

On 06/29/2016 05:08 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 06/28/2016 04:59 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: >> I'll be updating hdf5, netcdf, and libdap in rawhide tomorrow and doing >> rebuilds of dependent packages. >> > > Well, as typical, running into issues with openmpi on arm. Investigating. > Looks

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On Thu, 30.06.16 21:23, Petr Lautrbach (plaut...@redhat.com) wrote: > I like the idea that the relabeling will be isolated in a special > target. And we've recently moved fedora-selinux.service to > policycoreutils so it could live there. > > However, it won't probably fix the following problems:

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

On Thu, 30.06.16 22:27, Petr Lautrbach (plaut...@redhat.com) wrote: > > SELinux is in Permissive mode during this time. > > SELinux policy is loaded in systemd on very beginning so unless it's set > to be permissive in the config file or on the kernel command line, a > system is in enforcing mode

[OT] Tim, Gil, et. al. (e-mail address settings)

To keep this off-list as much as possible, the rant is here: http://reiisi.blogspot.com/2016/07/to-gil-tim-fedora-et-al.html (The blame lies elsewhere. I wish I had the network and social cred to get a real movement started, away from the current faceless CA system and towards a different identit

Re: Fixing /.autorelabel

> "PL" == Petr Lautrbach writes: PL> (2) when a generator file was mislabeled it could not be run by PL> systemd as systemd can't read fedora-relabel unit file now Isn't it possible to detect that situation and simply force the relabel? - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:01:38 +0200, you wrote: >> Realistically, it isn't about either specifically. Each iteration of >> POWER tends to require tuning specifically for that generation if you >> want to get the most performance out of your software. > >Latest CPU features get utilized mostly only

Re: multi-CPU optimization inside a distribution

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 22:07:24 +0200, you wrote: >On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 15:59:38 -0400 >Solomon Peachy wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 08:04:57PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> > I will just snipe here that the situation would be better if POWER >> > > 4 hardware was generally available to b