Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:29 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> So, the first thing we need to do to fix this is move deltarpm creation out
> of the updates process.
Right.
> Kevin Fenzi tells me this would mean we'd need a
> separate delta RPMs repo,
Why? You can do that in the same repo. You just need onc
Dne 29. 12. 20 v 12:02 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 2:21 PM Derek Pressnall
wrote:
(snip)
Welcome to Fedora!
Meanwhile, a couple additional questions. Right now I have a template
of the spec file in the project's Git repo. Should the spec file be
in its own repo (or p
* Matthew Miller:
> I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off.
Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported savings are
generally very small for me. Downloading the metadata costs something
On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 3:46 PM Till Maas wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 07:58:53AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
>
> > 4. Build the packages in COPR.
> >
> > Easy enough using a bash script but is there a better way?
>
> packit allows to create test builds in COPR based on GitHub PRs and
What's the progress on this change? Is it going to land in one week? I
just want to be sure that our tooling is ready and works with this
change since we hardcode "fedora-master" in many places.
Thanks!
Tomas
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 4:06 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/C
Hi,
On 12/30/20 11:52 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 5:48 PM Marius Schwarz wrote:
>>
>> Am 30.12.20 um 22:14 schrieb Michel Alexandre Salim:
>>> - a separate partition for storing GRUB config, no matter what
>>> architecture, is probably the ideal solution
>> Not always. In VMs
> Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported savings are
> generally very small for me. Downloading the metadata costs something
> as well.
In F33, mostly so. I generally keep up to date (update once a week),
but available deltarpms have been lesser compared to earlier versions.
I used
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off. But that's
> definitely plan B. We can point people who are in low-bandwidth situations
> at Sil
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 8:34 AM Colin Walters wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >
> > I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> > real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off. But that's
> > definitely plan
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the
FESCo meeting Wednesday at 15:00UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 on
irc.freenode.net.
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UTCHowto
or run:
date -d '2021-01-06 15:00 UTC'
Links to all issues to
On 05. 01. 21 15:07, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
#2525 Updates Policy exception for black (python-black)
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2525
APPROVED (+4, 0, 0)
Upgraded black is in bodhi:
F33: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-a453d7234b
F32: https://bodhi.fedoraprojec
Dear maintainers.
Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
will be retired from Fedora 34 approximately one week before branching (February
2021).
Policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/
Note that s
Once upon a time, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek said:
> #2517 F34 Change: ntp replacement
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2517
> APPROVED (+5, 0, 0)
I changed my stratum 1 server from ntpd to chronyd+ntp-refclock... had a
few small bumps to figure out (getting the NTP, PPS, and chrony services
corr
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 08:49:20AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 8:34 AM Colin Walters wrote:
> > Now speaking of deltas - really delta implementations are going to benefit
> > from a stronger "cadence" to releases, exactly much like what we do for
> > CoreOS (but not Silverb
Hi,
> we aren't making very many, which makes them even less useful. Plus, we're
> only making them between updates and for packages where those updates are
> frequent, that means you need to keep on top of things, which may be best
> practice but is most difficult for low-bandwidth users who mi
Hi,
My name is Frédéric and you can reach me on Github as "fepitre"
(https://github.com/fepitre).
I'm currently a member of Qubes OS (https://github.com/QubesOS) core team since
2016. In this project, my work consists in releasing (building, packaging,
testing or continuous integration) the O
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 06:29:13PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off. But that's
> definitely plan B. We can point people who are in low-bandwidth situations
> a
On 11/30/20 2:06 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
As part of the f34 change request[1] for removing make from the
buildroot, I will be doing a mass update of packages[2] to add
BuildRequires: make where it is needed.
If you are a package maintainer and would prefer to update your packages
on you
On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 03:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:29 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> > So, the first thing we need to do to fix this is move deltarpm creation
> out
> > of the updates process.
>
> Right.
>
> > Kevin Fenzi tells me this would mean we'd need a
> > separate delta
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 9:45 AM Frédéric Pierret
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> My name is Frédéric and you can reach me on Github as "fepitre"
> (https://github.com/fepitre).
>
> I'm currently a member of Qubes OS (https://github.com/QubesOS) core team
> since 2016. In this project, my work consists in rele
On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 06:28:22PM +0800, Qiyu Yan wrote:
> Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> 于2020年12月31日周四 下午6:12写道：
> >
> > On 30.12.2020 20:53, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > > This change makes the GRUB configuration files layout to be consistent
> > > across all the supported architectures. Currently EFI is
Welcome Frédéric!
On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 15:44 +0100, Frédéric Pierret wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My name is Frédéric and you can reach me on Github as "fepitre" (
> https://github.com/fepitre).
>
> I'm currently a member of Qubes OS (https://github.com/QubesOS) core
> team since 2016. In this project, my
I took python-orderedset.
On 12/30/20 4:41 PM, Jerry James wrote:
> I maintain packages that used to BR the packages in $SUBJECT, but with
> their latest versions no longer do. I'm orphaning these packages. If
> you need them, please pick them up.
>
_
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:30:10AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> > real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off.
>
> Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported savings are
> generally very
* Matthew Miller:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:30:10AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> > I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
>> > real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off.
>>
>> Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported savi
This may be of interest to us as well...
-- Forwarded message -
From: Ludwig Nussel
Date: Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:03 AM
Subject: Thoughts on the file system layout
To:
Hi,
While working on MicroOS, UsrMerge, UsrEtc, playing with systemd
features I was wondering where that could
Hi,
a bit later than what I expected (holidays are a busy time as well :-) ) I
will update armadillo to 10.1.0. This implies an so bump and so I will update
it in a side tag together with the dependent packages gdal and mlpack.
I intend to do this for rawhide, and later for Fedora 33 and 32.
Am 05.01.21 um 16:01 schrieb Neal Gompa:
Welcome to Fedora, Frédéric! I'm looking forward to see efforts around
reproducible builds in Fedora. :)
+1 from me.
I think this is really on example where free software can really show its
strengths and if there is some easy tooling in Fedora to ensu
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 3:46 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
> The metadata would also be much larger, and so would be the battery
> usage to recompress the payload. 8-(
And while the bandwidth reduction has value,
cpu and wallclock time to rebuild the rpm is
substantially increased for low end devices
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 03:44:31PM +0100, Frédéric Pierret wrote:
> I'm using Redhat linux distribution family for more than 20 years so I
> guess it's time to propose my help into this community effort.
Welcome! Glad to have you here!
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
Dne 24. 12. 20 v 22:54 Matthew Almond via devel napsal(a):
Depends on how it got there, and what you asked for. Here's some
examples:
1. cp foo.rpm /var/cache/dnf//Packages/ && dnf install foo
...will fail the librepo full file check, and it'll be re-
downloaded.
2. dnf install /root/foo
Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:50 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 06:29:13PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:21:15PM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote:
There's been a lot of interesting talk about the state and future of
drpm. I'd like to propose we continue the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
Note that this change was submitted after the deadline, but since it can be
shipped in an complete state, I am still processing it for Fedora 34.
== Summary ==
We want to add signatures to individual files that are part of shipped RPMs.
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 12:26:45PM +0100, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> What's the progress on this change? Is it going to land in one week? I
For src.fedoraproject.org yes. It's planned for next week.
(some pagure.io projects we control should go tomorrow (Phase1))
> just want to be sure that our tooli
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 01:05:01PM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> We want to add signatures to individual files that are part of shipped RPMs.
This is for _every file_ in every RPM? Or some files in some RPMs?
--
Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
___
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 1:05 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
>
> Note that this change was submitted after the deadline, but since it can be
> shipped in an complete state, I am still processing it for Fedora 34.
>
>
> == Summary ==
> We want to
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021, at 1:05 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
There's a bunch of related discussion in
https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree/issues/1883
I think probably rather than having RPMs *also* include IMA signatures by
default it'd b
* Ben Cotton:
> During signing builds, the files in it will be signed with IMA
> signatures.. These signatures will be made with a key that’s kept by
> the Fedora Infrastructure team, and installed on the sign vaults.
What is the impact on RPM database size?
Will GPLv3 packages be excluded, or
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 09:49:59AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:29 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> > So, the first thing we need to do to fix this is move deltarpm creation out
> > of the updates process.
>
> Right.
>
> > Kevin Fenzi tells me this would mean we'd need a
> > sepa
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 07:41:05PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Will GPLv3 packages be excluded, or will the signing keys be provided
> upon request?
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GiveUpKeys
Q: I use public key cryptography to sign my code to assure its
authenticity. I
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 01:38:48PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> While having IMA is nice, can we *please* have repodata signing too?
Why? It gets us nothing really... adds complexity and issues.
We would definiltey need to improve dnf's handling of signed repos
before we did at least.
kevin
Dne 05. 01. 21 v 15:31 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> Yet another reason why popcon would be useful.
https://github.com/xsuchy/popcon-for-fedora-old
Feel free to take it :)
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager ABRT/Copr, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
___
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 1:51 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 01:38:48PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > While having IMA is nice, can we *please* have repodata signing too?
>
> Why? It gets us nothing really... adds complexity and issues.
>
And IMA has the same problem. IMA is w
Dne 05. 01. 21 v 19:44 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> On the next f33-updates push the entire process runs again. It never
> _updates_ existing repos, it always creates them.
Ahh. So this all worked when we run the the process once per week. But because
we run it every day now, the deltas are
minimal.
On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 13:05 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
>
> Note that this change was submitted after the deadline, but since it
> can be shipped in an complete state, I am still processing it for
> Fedora 34.
>
>
> == Summary ==
> We wan
On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 18:18 +0100, Daniel Mach wrote:
> Dne 24. 12. 20 v 22:54 Matthew Almond via devel napsal(a):
> > Depends on how it got there, and what you asked for. Here's some
> > examples:
> >
> > 1. cp foo.rpm /var/cache/dnf//Packages/ && dnf install foo
> > ...will fail the librepo
side-tag created for sundials-5.6.1:
$ koji list-tagged --latest f34-build-side-35531
Build Tag Built by
sundials-5.6.1-1.fc34 f34-build-s
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 08:01:04PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 05. 01. 21 v 19:44 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> > On the next f33-updates push the entire process runs again. It never
> > _updates_ existing repos, it always creates them.
>
> Ahh. So this all worked when we run the the process onc
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 1:39 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 1:05 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
> >
> > Note that this change was submitted after the deadline, but since it can be
> > shipped in an complete state, I am stil
Matthew Miller writes:
> Logs can accidentally contain sensitive data, and it's just plain
> faster to work with them when there's less. I propose we set this to
> something like six months by default.
If there are non-negligible speed impacts from large logs, this seems
like a problem with syst
On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 08:49 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> To be blunt, I would have never done Zchunk metadata if it was going
> to be used as a tool to kill DeltaRPMs. I firmly believe we need both
> to have a comprehensive offering that accommodates the needs of
> Fedora users across the world.
Hey
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 03:19:16PM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/golang1.16
>>
>> == Summary ==
>> Rebase of Golang package to upcoming version 1.16 in Fedora 34,
>
> No complaint about the Change, but...
> can we please
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:39 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 1:05 PM Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Signed_RPM_Contents
> >
> > Note that this change was submitted after the deadline, but since it can be
> > shipped in an complete state, I am stil
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:41 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Ben Cotton:
>
> > During signing builds, the files in it will be signed with IMA
> > signatures.. These signatures will be made with a key that’s kept by
> > the Fedora Infrastructure team, and installed on the sign vaults.
>
> What is th
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:59 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 1:51 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 01:38:48PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >
> > > While having IMA is nice, can we *please* have repodata signing too?
> >
> > Why? It gets us nothing really... add
* Peter Robinson:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:41 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> * Ben Cotton:
>>
>> > During signing builds, the files in it will be signed with IMA
>> > signatures.. These signatures will be made with a key that’s kept by
>> > the Fedora Infrastructure team, and installed on the
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 2:40 PM Robbie Harwood wrote:
>
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 03:19:16PM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/golang1.16
> >>
> >> == Summary ==
> >> Rebase of Golang package to upcoming version 1.16 in F
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021, at 3:19 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> ... IMA seems to be pretty useless.
This is a complex and highly nuanced topic because IMA is both a mechanism and
a set of potential *policies* that one can use, and a whole lot depends on the
exact policy in use.
Like SELinux in that i
Hello Roberto,
- Original Message -
> From: "Roberto Ragusa"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2020 5:20:38 PM
> Subject: Re: gpg-agents all over the place
>
> On 12/23/20 1:56 PM, Oron Peled wrote:
>
> > More problematic, but possible.
> >
> > The key
Per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main#Phase0_-_2021-01-05
here's a short guide for any interested folks on how to change the
default branch in pagure.io projects:
Switching default branch from ‘master’ to ‘main’ on pagure.io
If you have an existing project using ‘mas
Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>> It's a linked library, so *yes*, rpmbuild will add it.
>
> Depends on whether the application links directly to libQt5Svg.so.5 or
> whether it uses it only through the plugin-based imageformats
In this context, for the software/package in ques
On 1/5/21 6:58 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
On 11/30/20 2:06 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
As part of the f34 change request[1] for removing make from the
buildroot, I will be doing a mass update of packages[2] to add
BuildRequires: make where it is needed.
If you are a package maintainer and woul
Ben Cotton wrote:
> == Summary ==
> We want to add signatures to individual files that are part of shipped
> RPMs. These signatures will use the Linux IMA (Integrity Measurement
> Architecture) scheme, which means they can be used to enforce runtime
> policies to ensure execution of only trusted fi
Hi Kevin,
thanks for the HOWTO.
Some comments from trying it:
>
> git push
> (This pushes the new ‘main’ branch to pagure.io)
This should be:
git push --set-upstream origin main
> git push origin :master
> (This deletes the old ‘master’ branch)
git push origin :master
remote: Branch deletion i
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210105.0):
ID: 752235 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
65 matches
Mail list logo
