Seek a sponsor for new package : pcb-rnd (PCB layout editor)

Hi, I am Alain, a French EE engineer using Fedora 28 and EDA open source tools, as an hobby. I am part of the pcb-rnd developer upstream http://repo.hu/projects/pcb-rnd/ and was able to produce a .spec file + SRPM rpm file, and COPR successful build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/avigne/

Re: Prioritizing ~/.local/bin over /usr/bin on the PATH

Well said, there is no catchy name for this (virtual) security threat. We will have to let one of those that oppose this proposal to find a caching name (PATHEXIT?), maybe even build a paper explaining how to mitigate it. I am bit disappointed because other distributions fixed it, even twice aft

Re: Prioritizing ~/.local/bin over /usr/bin on the PATH

On 7.6.2018 10:21, Sorin Sbarnea wrote: Now that we have a change proposal, how to continue? To get it accepted or rejected, is there a way/process that we need to follow? Mark the change ready for wrangler. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___

Re: Prioritizing ~/.local/bin over /usr/bin on the PATH

On 7.6.2018 10:37, Miro Hrončok wrote: On 7.6.2018 10:21, Sorin Sbarnea wrote: Now that we have a change proposal, how to continue? To get it accepted or rejected, is there a way/process that we need to follow? Mark the change ready for wrangler. I've just did. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +42

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

Hi, On 04-06-18 21:17, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 12:43 +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: = Proposed System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/HiddenGrubMenu We (QA) would like to note that the "How to test" section of this Change seems heavily un

F29 Self Contained Change: User PATH Prioritization

= Proposed Self Contained Change: User PATH Prioritization = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UserPathPrioritization Owner(s): * Sorin Sbarnea * Till Maas * Miro Hrončok Changing user PATH '''~/.local/bin''' to be moved to the top of the PATH list instead of the end. This will br

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

Can someone explain me *real quick* what is the multilib good for? - or more precisely, why whould anone run 32-bit software on x86_64 OS? >From what I googled, it look like everyone does it yet nobody explains why :D -- Michal Schorm Associate Software Engineer Core Services - Databases Team Re

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: User PATH Prioritization

On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 11:08:55AM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: > = Proposed Self Contained Change: User PATH Prioritization = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UserPathPrioritization > > > Owner(s): > * Sorin Sbarnea > * Till Maas > * Miro Hrončok > > > Changing user PATH '''~/.loca

Re: Detecting building package on rawhide

On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 02:48:25PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 06/06/2018 02:24 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote: > > Checking rpm --showrc, I can see rawhide sets %{fedora} to 29 and > > there does not seem any mention of rawhide in the showrc output. > > > > What would people recommend to distingui

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 10:35:34AM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: > = Proposed System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64 = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/i686_Is_For_x86-64 > > > Owner(s): > * Florian Weimer > > > Fedora builds its i686 packages for use on x86-64 systems as multi-lib RPMs. >

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

Because sometimes the software I'm developing needs to link with a proprietary library that is only available as 32 bit library. It's a lot rarer than it used to be but there are still a few databases that I work with that don't have 64 bit libraries. Or indeed just because our customers want a

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: User PATH Prioritization

On 7.6.2018 11:59, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: Currently if user is installing his own tools with installers like s/his/their/g done There should be '''no security concerns''' due to this change because any user is already able to add executables and to alter its own PATH, s/its/t

Re: Detecting building package on rawhide

Dne 6.6.2018 v 14:24 Jan Pazdziora napsal(a): > What would people recommend to distinguish rawhide from non-rawhide? > For now I'm running the builds in copr but eventually I'd like for > it to work in koji as well. There is nothing I can recommend. But if you asked for a hack...: * if /etc/yum.

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2

On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 11:54 -0500, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: > On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:40 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: > > and weak > > Diffie-Hellman key exchange sizes (1024 bit) > > What size is currently required by upstream Firefox and Chrome? > > The most recent reference I could find is > htt

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2

On Wed, 2018-06-06 at 12:05 +, Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2018-06-05, John Florian wrote: > > Makes sense, but what is the best way to deal with such old HW if > > you're > > stuck with it? I don't want to compromise my workstation for all > > my > > normal needs just to deal with some ancient

fwupd license change

Hi all, Just a small unimportant notice that I'm required to do: fwupd changed license from "GPLv2+ AND LGPLv2+" to just "LGPLv2+". The library was always the LGPL bit, so this doesn't affect any other things linking to libfwupd. Richard. ___ devel mail

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:51 AM Michal Schorm wrote: > Can someone explain me *real quick* what is the multilib good for? - or > more precisely, why whould anone run 32-bit software on x86_64 OS? > In my case, there are a couple of games that are either older, or just not provided in 64bit so I n

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2

On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 16:34 -0400, John Florian wrote: > On 06/05/2018 12:25 PM, Tomas Mraz wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 16:11 +, Christian Stadelmann wrote: > > > "Fallback option" always smells like "protocol downgrade attack". > > > This would undermine the idea of a crypto policy. Anywa

Re: Elections for Council - May 2018 - Result announcement

On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 04:34:10AM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: > The elections for Council - May 2018 [1] have concluded, and the > results are shown below. Welcome, Till! And, thank you Nick for your work on the Council over the last year. I really appreciate the perspective and thoughtfulness you br

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:51 AM Michal Schorm wrote: > >> Can someone explain me *real quick* what is the multilib good for? - or >> more precisely, why whould anone run 32-bit software on x86_64 OS? >> > In my case, there are a couple of game

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:09 AM Michal Schorm wrote: > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:51 AM Michal Schorm wrote: >> >>> Can someone explain me *real quick* what is the multilib good for? - or >>> more precisely, why whould anone run 32-bit softw

Re: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:19 AM Jan Pazdziora wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 10:35:34AM +0200, Jan Kurik wrote: > > = Proposed System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64 = > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/i686_Is_For_x86-64 > > > > > > Owner(s): > > * Florian Weimer > > > > > > Fedora

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:17 AM Richard Shaw wrote: > The other is The Dark Mod, which is open source but they're still using > the DOOM 3 graphics engine IIRC and their buildsystem which is still 32bit > only. > HAH! Writing this caused me to google it and apparently with the latest release ther

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

On 14/05/18 17:19 +0200, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote: > does anybody know if the files /etc/profile.d/lang.{csh,sh} > are still used these days, and what for? > Do we still need them in Fedora? > Should they be installed by default these days? > > Any info is appreciated! :) Frankly, had no idea

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

On 7 June 2018 at 09:07, Michal Schorm wrote: > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:51 AM Michal Schorm wrote: >>> >>> Can someone explain me *real quick* what is the multilib good for? - or >>> more precisely, why whould anone run 32-bit software o

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: User PATH Prioritization

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:59 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: I'm pretty sure ~/bin should be moved too. All the same considerations apply to ~/bin as to ~/.local/bin, and having one at the beginning and one at the end would be rather strange. Yes, surely it makes no sense to change one b

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

Josh Boyer writes: >> I guess we disagree about what the problem is, but it's unfortunate if >> Fedora/RH isn't interested in the sort of environment for which >> config-package was developed. > > Can you elaborate more on what that environment is? A fairly large university (not as big as MIT) w

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

Stephen John Smoogen writes: > 1. Do not strip out who you are replying to. There are hundreds of > people on this list and people come in at different times... and I am > not sure who "You" was. Apologies, it was a mistake due to Gnus configuration and replying through Gmane; I understand mail

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

devzero2000 writes: > Il gio 31 mag 2018, 13:42 Neal Gompa ha scritto: > >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:54 AM Dave Love >> wrote: >> > >> > Is there any existing system for rpm like the Debian one >> > for building local >> > configuration packages?

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

Neal Gompa writes: > The reason Ansible is used is because we have no current equivalent > facilities to do delayed script execution or diversion of > configuration files. Both are functions required for Debian-style > configuration packages. Feel free to file an issue with rpm upstream[1] > to f

Re: Fedora Elections May 2018 - Voting period of FESCo elections has started

On 7 June 2018 at 03:17, Jan Kurik wrote: [..] > [2.1] Justin Forbes: > https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fesco-election-interview-justin- > forbes-jforbes/ > [2.2] Stephen Gallagher: > https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fesco-election-interview-stephen- > gallagher-sgallagh/ > [2.3] T

Re: /etc/profile.d/lang.sh -- still needed?

On 06/07/2018 06:50 AM, Jan Pokorný wrote: > On 14/05/18 17:19 +0200, David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] wrote: >> does anybody know if the files /etc/profile.d/lang.{csh,sh} >> are still used these days, and what for? >> Do we still need them in Fedora? >> Should they be installed by default these days? >> >>

Re: [X86] Fwd: F29 System Wide Change: i686 Is For x86-64

Michal Schorm writes: > Can someone explain me *real quick* what is the multilib good for? - or > more precisely, why whould anone run 32-bit software on x86_64 OS? Among other reasons, 32-bit code can be smaller and faster than 64-bit code for some applications. When trying to stuff many conta

Re: Fedora Elections May 2018 - Voting period of FESCo elections has started

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 12:15 PM Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > > On 7 June 2018 at 03:17, Jan Kurik wrote: > [..] >> >> [2.1] Justin Forbes: >> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fesco-election-interview-justin-forbes-jforbes/ >> [2.2] Stephen Gallagher: >> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/f

Re: equivalent of Debian config-package?

On 7 June 2018 at 12:11, Dave Love wrote: > Stephen John Smoogen writes: > >> 4. System administration/configuration management is 99% "I have a >> solution I endure and I don't have time to re-engineer it." and 1% "Oh >> I think I want to write my own configuration management toolkit >> becaus

Re: Fedora Elections May 2018 - Voting period of FESCo elections has started

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 11:15 AM, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 7 June 2018 at 03:17, Jan Kurik wrote: > [..] >> >> [2.1] Justin Forbes: >> >> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fesco-election-interview-justin-forbes-jforbes/ >> [2.2] Stephen Gallagher: >> >> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Strong crypto settings: phase 2

On 06/07/2018 08:44 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote: On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 16:34 -0400, John Florian wrote: On 06/05/2018 12:25 PM, Tomas Mraz wrote: On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 16:11 +, Christian Stadelmann wrote: "Fallback option" always smells like "protocol downgrade attack". This would undermine the i

Ending development of Hubs

Earlier in the year, the Fedora Infrastructure team had a hackathon. Among other work during the event, we made adjustments to app development and ownership to keep the team working efficiently. For example, we retired the separate Jenkins instance in Fedora infrastructure since it’s redundant. We

Re: F29 System Wide Change: Hide the grub menu

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:07 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > A question to you (and the Fedora community in general) where > should the documentation for this live ? I would like to have > something longer lived then the Changes wiki page or the > release notes. > If it were me, I would put it in: