Il 30/05/23 22:15, Adam Williamson ha scritto:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f563346d4d is
> similar, but this time it was ejected from its push *to stable* (not to
> testing), again allegedly for a missing tag. The builds have now
> actually been deleted(!), so that updat
Il 30/05/23 22:15, Adam Williamson ha scritto:
>
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-2b17e1e469 is stuck
> because it was ejected from its initial push to testing,
> which means the 7 day push to stable timer never really kicks in
> (it needs to be *in testing* for seven days). I
On 30/05/2023 20:37, Aoife Moloney wrote:
Jdks in fedora are already static, and we repack portable
tarball into rpms. Currently, the portbale tarball is built for each
Fedora and Epel version. Goal here is to build each jdk
(8,11,17,21,latest (20)) only once, in oldest live Fedora xor Epel and
On Tue, 30 May 2023 at 14:45, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Florian Weimer said:
> > * Chris Adams:
> >
> > > Once upon a time, Richard W.M. Jones said:
> > >> It seems as if the ISC dhcp package has been EOL'd upstream:
> > >>
> > >> https://www.isc.org/dhcp/
> > >
> > > I'm a little
> === BuildRequires ===
> repoquery -q --repo=rawhide{,-source} --whatrequires 'aspell*' | grep
> -v '^aspell' | grep 'src$' | pkgname
>
...
> hunspell-az
>
> hunspell-csb
>
> hunspell-de
>
> hunspell-en
>
> hunspell-fa
>
> hunspell-gv
>
> hunspell-ky
Apparantly, our spelling dictionaries
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 1:31 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> So, the only way I can see to do this would be to have releng manually
> tag the builds from oldest release into newer ones each time they are
> built. I do not like this for a number of reasons:
>
> * It's more manual work.
> * It bypasses a
It is built from sources of course!
What make you think it is not?
For double ensurenes, see the fesco ticket in proposal.
Thanx!
J.
On 5/31/23 11:59, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 30/05/2023 20:37, Aoife Moloney wrote:
Jdks in fedora are already static, and we repack portable
tarball
On 5/31/23 08:25, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 31. 05. 23 1:31, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
So, the only way I can see to do this would be to have releng manually
tag the builds from oldest release into newer ones each time they are
built. I do not like this for a number of reasons:
* It's more manual work.
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 1:44 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 1:31 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > So, the only way I can see to do this would be to have releng manually
> > tag the builds from oldest release into newer ones each time they are
> > built. I do not like this for
On 5/31/23 13:43, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 1:31 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
So, the only way I can see to do this would be to have releng manually
tag the builds from oldest release into newer ones each time they are
built. I do not like this for a number of reasons:
* It's
On 31/05/2023 14:53, Jiri Vanek wrote:
It is built from sources of course!
What make you think it is not?
For double ensurenes, see the fesco ticket in proposal.
IMO, repackaging prebuilt RPM packages is not building from sources.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 03:32:09PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 31/05/2023 14:53, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> > It is built from sources of course!
> > What make you think it is not?
> > For double ensurenes, see the fesco ticket in proposal.
>
> IMO, repackaging prebuilt RPM packages is no
This proposal has now been submitted to FESCo for voting
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3005
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code
This proposal has now been submitted to FESCo https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3006
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
This proposal has now been submitted to FESCo https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3007
___
devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 10:00:53 PM EDT Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, May 26, 2023, at 10:20 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > sbattach --detach signature /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI
> > openssl pkcs7 -inform DER -in signature -text -print_certs >
> > shim-certs.txt>
> > Issuer: C=US, ST=Was
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 5:14 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 10:11:21AM -0400, David Cantrell wrote:
> > On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 11:09:39AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > https://github.com/libguestfs/libguestfs/issues/121
> > >
> > > We use dhclient to get a DHCP
On 5/31/23 9:44 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 03:32:09PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 31/05/2023 14:53, Jiri Vanek wrote:
It is built from sources of course!
What make you think it is not?
For double ensurenes, see the fesco ticket in proposal.
IMO, repackaging
> == Benefit to Fedora ==
>
> java maintainers will finally some free time... No kidding -
> maintenance and *certification* of so much supported JDKs on so much
> Fedora versions is brutal. By building once, and repack, we will
> regain cycles to continue support Fedora with all LTS and one ST
On 5/31/23 16:25, Robert Marcano via devel wrote:
On 5/31/23 9:44 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 03:32:09PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 31/05/2023 14:53, Jiri Vanek wrote:
It is built from sources of course!
What make you think it is not?
For double ensurenes,
On 5/31/23 17:02, David Schwörer wrote:
== Benefit to Fedora ==
java maintainers will finally some free time... No kidding -
maintenance and *certification* of so much supported JDKs on so much
Fedora versions is brutal. By building once, and repack, we will
regain cycles to continue suppor
On 2023-05-29 10:50, Ben Cotton wrote:
I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but I'm not sure I'm in favor of
it. It certainly beats a company using a shared account against policy
to allow for multiple maintainers. On the other hand, what are the
practical use cases here? As Kevin and Zbigniew sa
On 5/31/23 9:18 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
NetworkManager has defaulted to it's own dhcp client by default for
some time and systemd-networkd has it's own as well, I suspect actual
users are quite minimal. I'm not sure if anything like cloud-init uses
it but I also doubt it.
I'll come out of my
V Wed, May 31, 2023 at 05:27:47PM +0200, Jiri Vanek napsal(a):
> Long story short yes, if yo wish to distribute jdk *binary* it have to pass
> java compliance suite.
[...]
> In addition, this kit complicne tests are proprietary, close source and
> licensed.
That sounds like an effectively nonfree
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2023-05-30)
===
Meeting started by sgallagh at 17:01:37 UTC. The full logs are available
at
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2023-05-30/fesc
On 31/05/2023 15:44, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
We do similar things in other cases, see for example shim-unsigned.rpm +
shim.rpm
Shim is a special case:
1. Shim need to be signed by Microsoft on their own infrastructure and
this signature will be built directly into PE file.
2. Shim runs on UEFI,
On 31/05/2023 17:02, David Schwörer wrote:
Could you explain what certification means?
It sounds like you run some very expensive tests, and building is actually fast.
You can't distribute any package named Java or OpenJDK unless it passes
the Oracle test suite.
I think Fedora should drop op
> Am 31.05.2023 um 18:52 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
> :
>
> On 31/05/2023 17:02, David Schwörer wrote:
>> Could you explain what certification means?
>> It sounds like you run some very expensive tests, and building is actually
>> fast.
>
> You can't distribute any package named Java or
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 08:25:23AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 31. 05. 23 1:31, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > So, the only way I can see to do this would be to have releng manually
> > tag the builds from oldest release into newer ones each time they are
> > built. I do not like this for a number of r
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 06:48:37PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 31/05/2023 15:44, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > We do similar things in other cases, see for example shim-unsigned.rpm +
> > shim.rpm
>
> Shim is a special case:
> 1. Shim need to be signed by Microsoft on their own infrastr
Once upon a time, Aoife Moloney said:
> Now last step is ahead - to build portable LTS JDKs 8,11,17 and 21 in
> oldest live Fedora, and repack everywhere. java-latest-openjdk, which
> contains latest STS jdk - currently 20, soon briefly 21 and a bit
> alter 22... Should be built in latest live EPE
I also have a recently updated F38 with shim-x64-15.6-2.x86_64. The
BOOTX64.EFI file has two certificates
Subject: C=US, ST=Washington, L=Redmond, O=Microsoft Corporation,
CN=Microsoft Windows UEFI Driver Publisher
Subject: C=US, ST=Washington, L=Redmond, O=Microsoft Corporation,
CN=Micros
On 31/05/2023 19:24, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
Can you point to the specific guideline that this violates ? I know we've
always expected that apps are built from pristine upstream source, but I'm
not finding the specific guideline that describes this right now.
This:
All program binaries and
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 04:31:01PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, the only way I can see to do this would be to have releng manually
> tag the builds from oldest release into newer ones each time they are
> built. I do not like this for a number of reasons:
>
> * It's more manual work.
> * It by
> Can you clarify this a bit? It sounds like some versions of the JDK in
> Fedora will actually be built in EPEL. I feel that all Fedora packages
> should actually built for Fedora, not RHEL.
>
> Also, what exactly does "latest live EPEL" mean - how is 8 the latest?
>
> I guess basically, can yo
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 07:32:09PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 31/05/2023 19:24, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > Can you point to the specific guideline that this violates ? I know we've
> > always expected that apps are built from pristine upstream source, but I'm
> > not finding th
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 12:50 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 31/05/2023 15:44, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > We do similar things in other cases, see for example shim-unsigned.rpm +
> > shim.rpm
>
> Shim is a special case:
> 1. Shim need to be signed by Microsoft on their own infrastructure
> This:
>
> ...
> All program binaries and program libraries included in Fedora
> packages must be built from the source code that is included in the source
package.
>
> Source:
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-pac...
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2907
> That sounds like an effectively nonfree software. Users cannot build and
> distribute the binaries because the required tools are nonfree.
Not exactly. You can build it and use it freely. Unless you distribute it to
others and call it java...
J.
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engin
Once upon a time, Jiri Vanek said:
> I have fixed typo in the proposal " Should be built in oldest live EPEL"
> instead of " Should be built in latest live EPEL", which was wrong.
At the moment though, the oldest live EPEL is 7, not 8.
> I do not have hard requirement to build java-latest-openj
Once upon a time, Vitaly Zaitsev said:
> >All program binaries and program libraries included in Fedora
> >packages must be built from the source code that is included in
> >the source package.
So... aside from making an exception in the guidelines, it'd also be
trivial to put the entire "real" s
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 07:38:38PM +0200, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> > Can you clarify this a bit? It sounds like some versions of the JDK in
> > Fedora will actually be built in EPEL. I feel that all Fedora packages
> > should actually built for Fedora, not RHEL.
> >
> > Also, what exactly does "latest
On 5/31/23 13:08, Peter Boy wrote:
>
>
>> Am 31.05.2023 um 18:52 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
>> :
>>
>> On 31/05/2023 17:02, David Schwörer wrote:
>>> Could you explain what certification means?
>>> It sounds like you run some very expensive tests, and building is actually
>>> fast.
>>
>>
Il 30/05/23 20:37, Aoife Moloney ha scritto:
> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
> by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
I think it's worth to mention that many layered container images are
published directly on the Fedora's Quay.io organisation (
https://quay.io/organization/fedora).
The builds are not happening in OSBS or the Fedora infrastructure but IIRC
it's a GitHub Action that does the build and pushes the con
> Am 31.05.2023 um 20:27 schrieb Demi Marie Obenour :
>
> On 5/31/23 13:08, Peter Boy wrote:
>> .. ..
>> Did you ever develop in Java? It doesn’t sound like you are even minimally
>> familiar with Java. A little expertise would really be beneficial for devel
>> mailing list.
>
> Can you expl
On 5/31/23 2:02 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Vitaly Zaitsev said:
All program binaries and program libraries included in Fedora
packages must be built from the source code that is included in
the source package.
So... aside from making an exception in the guidelines, it'd also be
Michael Cronenworth wrote on Wed, May 31, 2023 at 10:47:24AM -0500:
> I'm not using NetworkManager due to an issue with IPv6 and SLAAC. Clients
> under the server get an initial SLAAC IP from NetworkManager, but after the
> IP expires they never get a new IP. I've asked upstream about it and didn't
On 5/31/23 3:15 PM, Dominique Martinet wrote:
Could that be the ipv6 "privacy" features?
No, it is not an issue with privacy.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
F
This is exciting news related to the RISC-V ecosystem.
I expect that the RISC-V Software Ecosystem (RISE) Project will be a
leading organization to help open source projects by providing free
RISC-V CI services to them, and sponsoring the free RISC-V SSH servers
on the clouds to them. It is like wh
Aoife Moloney wrote:
> As described in
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs ;
> during last year, packaging of JDKs had changed dramatically. As
> described in same wiki page, and individual sub changes and devel
> threads, with primary reason this - to lower maintena
Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> The prebuilt RPMs are compiled on Fedora infrastructure too, so I don't
> see how that violates the 'build from source' requirement.
The plan is now to build the prebuilt RPMs on RHEL+EPEL instead of the
current Fedora release, which means they would not be built from sourc
Jiri Vanek wrote:
> Long story short yes, if yo wish to distribute jdk *binary* it have to
> pass java compliance suite.
Only if you ship it as "Java" and/or "OpenJDK". If you ship it as, e.g.,
icedtea-11, nobody can force you to run the JCK.
(And the binary names "java" and "javac" are interfa
Peter Boy wrote:
> If you're serious about developing Java applications, you're not going to
> use an uncertified JDK to do it.
Huh? I develop Java applications for a living, and I could not care less
about whether the build of OpenJDK I am running is JCK-certified and/or
named "OpenJDK", as lon
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 3:45 AM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > As described in
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs ;
> > during last year, packaging of JDKs had changed dramatically. As
> > described in same wiki page, and individual sub
Neal Gompa wrote:
> Because the alternative is no Java runtime at all, and that's even
> less acceptable.
I do not see why the way the packaging used to work all these years could
not be kept unchanged.
The only issues that were pointed out were related to the Java TCK (that it
takes too long t
Hey,
Neal Gompa writes:
> Keep in mind that this isn't exactly the first time we've done this
> either: the .NET runtime is similarly screwy for its bootstrap
> process, and that's split across a couple of source packages.
>
> At this point, we hold our noses and hope for the best. At least
> th
* Jiri Vanek:
> This was heavily discussed when we moved to portable build in rpms -
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/JdkInTreeLibsAndStdclibStatic
> Long story short yes, if yo wish to distribute jdk *binary* it have to
> pass java compliance suite. Thus, If I build different binary for
58 matches
Mail list logo
