re if it's accurate for Fedora.
Thanks.
--
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng
Noob here.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
ew.
>
> I'll provide Fedora builds and repo later.
You can build it on copr!
--
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng
Noob here.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
I've taken rawhide/f20 and el6 branch of netpipe, anyone else
comaintainers are welcome.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
I just found that auto requires no longer works as expected. My package
postgrey contains on binary writing in perl but auto requires returns
nothing.
I'm using rawhide, similar to f20 IMO.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
The original maintainer orphaned it because it depends on kernel module
more and more.
Any thoughts?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Jan 15, 2014 10:19 PM, "Michael Schwendt" wrote:
>
> > Anyone being familiar with "sunpinyin" please help with this
"re-review":
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1043504
Well, the assignee is one of the Chinese packagers, still active in chinese
list.
I will see what I can do.
--
devel mailin
IMO a SOP need to be documented or linked to selinux-policy package update also.
BTW not all people run enforcing mode in daily time, so sometimes
problems may not be found easily.
Thanks.
--
--
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng
Noob here.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel
I first thought it was just kind of something like what gentoo packages do
in their ebuilds, but then I also found that it's useless sometimes as
described by Richard.
Hereby comes a question, do we have any plans of let users install packages
from sources(crazy of course...) with bcond defined al
Seriously, it's harmful to provide unstable packages to users.
And I don't think Fedora has a long term support.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Jan 22, 2014 10:03 AM, "Mauricio Tavares" wrote:
> Still, it makes sense to have a place to beta test either the
> package or the packaging (how to create a proper package?) itself.
It's hard to say how to create a proper package testing in one slot of
pkgdb. Also it may be a burden when
Jon please don't rebuild oyranos, I'm working on this now.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Swap with this one if you want:
stjerm - A roll-down, quake-like terminal emulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1055915
--
--
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng
Noob here.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
It built very well(I did it this afternoon), you can check it out from Koji.
Hmm...Only some tiny issues need to be solved.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Jan 24, 2014 7:14 AM, "Adam Williamson" wrote:
> In other words: Christopher, if you're currently doing this, please move
> the packages to a COPR or other venue more appropriate for this purpose,
> and stop doing it.
No absolutely not. I don't have any thing *
Which poor sod will be the victim in 7 days at least before pushing to
stable? ;)
Then comes another question, does security updates need to be treat as
special? It's just an original update with a tag "security alert", but
users still need to wait 7 days unless they enable updates-testing.
--
de
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> It's not 7 days at least. It's 0 days at least. It's 7 days at least *if
> you get no positive karma*.
Yes, but nearly 90% of these security updates receive no karma
feedback still, they lack tests.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fed
Maybe we can learn some metrics from other distros as well. See how
they handle such hot potatos when meeting zombie packagers.
But, never deem that 5k components is the best number, comparing to
other Linux, we are far away behind. They can be used still at the
moment, why do we burden ourselves
I hope when receiving emails from you we can see your real name also.
Currently only shows nonamedotc. No name? :)
Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Hi,
Here is an interesting package icecat[1], which is a "more free"
version firefox.
Do we allow this in Fedora now?
Thanks.
[1]--https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1048493
--
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng
Noob here.
http://cicku.me
--
devel mailing
Required By
apache-commons-logging
avalon-logkit
fop
hadoop-common
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Please use your real name for the email address/Bugzilla account.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Hi all,
Can someone tell me why this library is still at a very old version
packaged in Fedora? I've seen RFEs about updating it to the latest version,
but maintainer Adam Jackson hasn't done neither any to this package still
so far, nor response to any bugs.
Is this library disallowed now becaus
Add in "Keywords" field:
FutureFeature
Or edit the title with [RFE] prefixed?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Yes please take it.
This package on EPEL has permission problem.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> npajkovs:
Weird, In Dec 2013 he(staff@RH) did an update to ipraf-ng
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Ok thanks Adam. So the question is, do we need this library still?
Being as oyranos maintainer I've removed it as BR from f21 since upstream
even did drop it.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://
On 4/17/16, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to take over maintenance of the surf package for Fedora.
Good luck with the name collision...Someone asked me to rename it to
surf-browser[1].
[1]---https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554101
--
Yours sincerely,
Ch
of tools and would love to be a
> little involved as potentially a co-maintainer but definitely a
> tester...
Same here. I don't have much experience with Java, but if I can help
with packaging in any way, let me know.
Christopher
___
On 03.04.20 22:36, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> So... could we please get a way to express this in rpm with a sane syntax:
>
> %define_cond docs 0%{?fedora} > 0
Oh please, yes.
Christopher
___
devel mailing l
On 17.04.20 16:07, Kamil Paral wrote:
> Especially the one in Fedora 15 (GNOME edition) and 16 was outstanding.
> Can we do more of those, please?
Not weighing in on the merits of the current art, but 16 is still my
favourite default artwork of any distro, ever.
___
ces, immediately crashed, whereas the "official binaries" worked.
That is just incredibly broken.
Things like this are the reason why I think the build-from-source
principle is important, regardless of the inconvience it undeniably causes.
Christopher
__
.
Throw multi-threading into the mix and this will easily add up to the
memory usage you're seeing (It totally killed my test server, that's for
sure.
I have no idea what hardware koji is using, so even single-threaded,
this might be an issue, but I'd still give it a try.
Christoph
On 14.10.19 23:07, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how long did the build take on your machine there?
Almost 3 hours.
Christopher
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel
reason not to allow that via 'provides:' without 'conflicts:'
What I like about this approach that all this magic only comes into play
when resolving dependencies. In all other circumstances they are
packages like any other, and are treated as such.
C
On 10/20/2019 11:28 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Hi Christopher,
>
> welcome to Fedora. sshguard review is more than enough for a first package,
> quite a complicated beast. I'll sponsor you into the packager group.
>
> Zbyszek
Hi,
sorry for the late rep
g OK and 'X -> default' or 'default -> X' requiring user intervention
4) where (2) cannot be achieved, we use compat packages as before
though I freely admit that I absolutely cannot judge how difficult that
is to actually i
ds against the default repo version of
wxGTK, i.e. 3.0.4, so it does not seem to be required.
Christopher
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/audacity-git/ (ignore stated pkg
version, package pulls master on install)
___
devel mailing
On 07.12.19 12:46, Antonio Trande wrote:
> I'm interested.
>
I'd be happy to co-maintain, if desired.
> On 07/12/19 12:20, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>> On 07. 12. 19 11:53, Henrique Castro wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>> Pymol is a package that, integrated with python-rdkit and other python
>>> packages, makes
Hi all,
since I recently submitted my package for sshguard [1] for review [2],
this is probably a good time to introduce myself (some of you might
remember me from the packaging list). I'm also looking for a sponsor,
assuming the package is positively reviewed.
I"m Christopher, 35yr
On 2/12/2020 11:01 AM, Vojtěch Trefný wrote:
> If nobody wants to maintain this package I can do that. It's definitely
> easier than rewriting our code to something else.
I can take it, or co-maintain, whichever works for you.
christopher
__
with a bit more experience would offer to co-maintain.
Alternatively, you can just add me (lcts) as a co-maintainer.
Christopher
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 5:28 PM David Schwörer wrote:
> This will make Fedora an even more
> attractive OS for Fusion Physicists.
>
Wow, welcome David!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@
Hi,
Does anyone know how to contact Pradeep?
I have the following bug open:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1655974
I have followed Unresponsive Maintainer policies and am posting this in the
hope of getting some traction.
Thanks
--
Christopher Brown
ing to the Fedora community?
> == Documentation ==
> Release notes need to be written, and documentation describing how to opt out.
Documentation would certainly be necessary, but not sufficient. A good
(prominent) UI for opting out is needed, or make it opt-in.
--
Christopher
___
Hello,
As per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package
I'd like to take over python-tenacity so I can help maintain this as part
of RDO.
I did ask for commit access here:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2045
but it was ju
...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
&g
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019, 12:05 pm Randy Barlow On Thu, 2019-01-10 at 14:14 +, Christopher Brown wrote:
> > I did ask for commit access here:
> >
> > https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2045
> >
> > but it was just orphaned. Not sure why. I've read the meeting l
I’m concerned about IBM’s sluggish organization. It is not “seems like” but
for real that IBM has a contrary leadership style comparing with Red Hat,
isn’t it?
--
Yours sincerely,
Christopher Meng
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Just a slight addition about "archaic email" and related comments:
Email and its capability for being used in conjunction with OpenPGP
ensures two major institutions in kernel development and elsewhere:
"Trusting the developers, not infrastructure" [1], and, assume "any part
of the infrastruct
On 4/21/23 16:30, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
On 4/21/23 15:25, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Just a slight addition about "archaic email" and related comments:
Email and its capability for being used in conjunction with OpenPGP
ensures two major institutions in kernel development and
On 4/21/23 17:27, Daniel Alley wrote:
If one uses OpenPGP and if people verify it
As you mention, that's a big "if"
Absolutely, and if the majority does not verify in the devel mailing
list, it is clearly an indicator that this type of security is not
relevant here ;) But finally, I am not su
Several users experience an issue with Fedora's `libheif` package, which
can be easily reproduced:
See
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/unknown-update-error-with-libheif/81302/6
With regards to our default dnf repositories: our package has weak
dependencies that are not satisfied by ou
Hi,
I saw that some users filed kernel bug reports, which lacked
information. Then I wanted to check the kernel bug report template and
found out: there is no longer a template.
So in the past, once the component "kernel" was chosen, the user was
provided with a template of the bug report, w
On 6/9/23 02:24, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 09:21:38PM +0200, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Hi,
I saw that some users filed kernel bug reports, which lacked information.
Then I wanted to check the kernel bug report template and found out: there
is no longer a template.
So in the
Hi Peter,
I have not much experience with nested virtualization in particular. But
although I am quite sure that it will not fail without host-passthrough,
I cannot imagine it to be sufficiently efficient without making use of
host-passthrough in production (and also not effective in many use
if necessary, open a topic there. We had
nested virtualization topics in the past, so maybe someone there can
help you with that.
Cheers,
Chris
On 28/12/2022 09:34, Peter Boy wrote:
Hi Chris,
Am 27.12.2022 um 23:01 schrieb Christopher Klooz:
...
The Red Hat Docs you refer to differ to th
A fresh installation of Fedora 37 has by default the "--supervised"
option active in its gpg-agent systemd file
(/usr/lib/systemd/user/gpg-agent.service).
According to GnuPG Docs [1], this option is deprecated. Once gpg-agent
is invoked, the log of "systemctl --user status gpg-agent.service"
:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 3:37 PM Christopher Klooz wrote:
A fresh installation of Fedora 37 has by default the "--supervised"
option active in its gpg-agent systemd file
(/usr/lib/systemd/user/gpg-agent.service).
According to GnuPG Docs [1], this option is deprecated. Once gpg-agent
Hi,
I just saw that a package (x11docker) seems to be orphaned: we ship a
very old release (many releases since June 2021), and when reviewing the
release notes of subsequent releases on github of that package, I think
this old release (from June 2021) should no longer be deployed: see
https:
No worries. Thanks!
On 1/27/23 19:41, Davide Cavalca wrote:
On 2023-01-27 10:34, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Hi,
I just saw that a package (x11docker) seems to be orphaned: we ship a
very old release (many releases since June 2021), and when reviewing
the release notes of subsequent releases on
Hi all,
Does anyone know about the maintainer "Fab"?
I have tried to contact him through
asciidoc-maintain...@fedoraproject.org on 29th January and through
f...@fedoraproject.org on 11th February, but did not received an answer
from either.
asciiDoc has not been updated for two years with 1
Thanks for the information. I filed a ticket, so everyone should get an
email, including Fab by his private mail address:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2171184
On 2/18/23 14:06, Ben Beasley wrote:
Fabian Affolter has been consistently active in Fedora. At the same time, he
maint
I just would like to shift for a moment attention to a new opportunity that is
on the rise.
Some of you already saw that we have now a local UK SIG and a Local London
Meetup [1].
I am currently talking to people from SuSE in UK and there is interest to talk
about making this a joint / neutral
On 18/08/2024 14.22, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 8:16 AM Andrew Bauer
wrote:
I've got a question regarding a new crypto library that falls under this policy:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/CryptoPolicies/
Per the documentation, I should contact the Fed
On 05/09/2024 16.24, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 5:21 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Do you want to make Fedora 41 better? Please spend 1 minute of your time
and try to run:
dnf --releasever=41 --enablerepo=updates-testing --assumeno
distro-sync
It looks good. I assume the rp
The below is a duplicate from discourse (I suggest to focus the
discussion there):
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/potential-security-issue-for-beginners-non-experts-when-release-is-end-of-life-fedora-doesnt-consider-the-behavior-of-beginners-non-experts-sufficiently/87311/1
I just bec
It used to be different, but since GitLab changed their UI, I also would
no longer choose it over alternatives (so, unfortunately: +1 for the UX
mess & the preference for alternatives). The remaining advantage of
GitLab is the time-effective drag/drop issue board, but that cannot
balance the re
Because not everyone is active on discourse, I thought it makes sense to
link this here for people from the area in or close to London:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/local-meetup-london-2024/98029
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedor
I would like to avoid duplicates and unnecessary redundancy, but
especially for the issue discussed below it might be worth to also
review the discussion on discussion.fp.org -> I am not convinced if it
is that easy for all users when it comes to existing network
configurations / setups, especi
On 24/12/2023 04.45, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Kevin Kofler via devel writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Christopher Klooz writes:
>
>> Btw, does anyone know if this (in the practically-same manner) is
really
>> already introduced in Windows, Mac, Android by default? Globall
MAC randomization if they are affected negatively could be a
good mitigation without increasing the stuff in the installer.
[1]
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f40-change-proposal-wifi-mac-randomization-system-wide/99856/22
On 24/12/2023 11.19, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 24/12/2023
On 29/12/2023 17.31, Sergio Pascual wrote:
Hello, I would like to bring attention to this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2250192
This problem prevents Brasero from creating CD images in F39.
Brasero complains about "old version of cdrdao", but the version in F39 is
the latest (
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is already at 3.1.11.1.
Among the updates since 3.1.3, there have been two security-critical
(including the medium CVE-2023-35936. Security fixes are in 3.1.4 & 3.1.6).
The actu
Thanks! :)
On 09/02/2024 13.18, Luna Jernberg wrote:
CCed his work email in case he looks there
-- Forwarded message -
Från: Christopher Klooz
Date: fre 9 feb. 2024 kl 13:05
Subject: Unresponsive maintainer: petersen / Pandoc package not updated
since June 2023: Security
PS Special thanks to Neal Gompa for pinging me in Matrix. 🙏
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, 20:05 Christopher Klooz, wrote:
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is already at 3.1.11.1.
Among the updates since 3.1.3,
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, 20:05 Christopher Klooz, wrote:
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is already at 3.1.11.1.
Among the updates since 3.1.3, there have been two security-critical
(including the medium CVE-2023
996301 - that would be
appreciated.
Thanks, Jens
PS Special thanks to Neal Gompa for pinging me in Matrix. 🙏
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, 20:05 Christopher Klooz, wrote:
I cannot reach the maintainer petersen (see mail below): The package
"pandoc" remains at 3.1.3 in Fedora, but pandoc is al
I just tried an update (`dnf update`, F36).
Three packages that are to be updated are from the fedora-cisco-openh264
repository.
In all three cases, I get the dnf output that these packages have not
been signed, which finally makes the GPG verification to fail.
The packages are:
gstreamer
On 26/08/2022 01:28, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Everything should be back to working. Try a 'dnf --refresh...' or a
'dnf clean all'.
Yes, the packages are no longer in the update list. So the errors are
gone for now. Thanks!
It's not fully clear yet some of the events. ;(
The person who used to
The current issue on 5.19.12 made it necessary for some users to change
their kernel on boot to avoid 5.19.12 until the update to 5.19.13 was
pushed to stable. Obviously, the option to easily boot recent kernels
can be necessary in several circumstances, especially for non-advanced
users it has
On 05/10/2022 17:33, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 11:16 AM, Christopher Klooz wrote:
However, on ask.fp, a user mentioned that the grub menu is no longer
enabled by default on single boot systems so that changing the kernel is
no longer easily possible, and put forward
https
On 05/10/2022 18:39, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 05/10/2022 17:33, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 11:16 AM, Christopher Klooz wrote:
However, on ask.fp, a user mentioned that the grub menu is no longer
enabled by default on single boot systems so that changing the
kernel is
On 05/10/2022 20:28, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 10/5/22 19:59, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 05/10/2022 18:39, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 05/10/2022 17:33, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022, at 11:16 AM, Christopher Klooz wrote:
However, on ask.fp, a user mentioned that the grub
Just tested and added karma to f36 and f37. Thanks!
On 01/11/2022 18:22, Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I've just pushed the updates for OpenSSL fixing 2 CVEs evaluated as
HIGH. Could you please check the freshly pushed builds to get
necessary karma ASAP?
Many thanks!
--
Dmitry
Yes, F40 beta is affected, along with rawhide, but not F38/F39.
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/warning-malicious-code-in-current-pre-release-testing-versions-variants-f40-and-rawhide-affected-users-of-f40-rawhide-need-to-respond/110683
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/urgent-security-alert
On 29/03/2024 21.01, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 06:46:59PM +, Christopher Klooz wrote:
Yes, F40 beta is affected, along with rawhide, but not F38/F39.
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/warning-malicious-code-in-current-pre-release-testing-versions-variants-f40
On 29/03/2024 22.10, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29 2024 at 08:16:55 PM +00:00:00, Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
These are the exact builds which were vulnerable. Note the tags are
all empty because Kevin untagged them last night, so you'll probably
need to cross-reference these with bod
On 30/03/2024 15.45, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30 2024 at 12:26:48 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
If I got Rich right, the malicious code is likely to be broken on F40,
No, that is not correct, as explained by [1] and [2]. We have already asked Red
Hat to investigate
On 30/03/2024 20.08, Sandro wrote:
On 30-03-2024 13:26, Christopher Klooz wrote:
I don't know how the assumption came up that F40 is only affected if users
opted in for testing, but that interpretation already ended up in the Fedora
Magazine and in the official linkedin post of Fedo
On 30/03/2024 15.45, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30 2024 at 12:26:48 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
If I got Rich right, the malicious code is likely to be broken on F40,
No, that is not correct, as explained by [1] and [2]. We have already asked Red
Hat to investigate
On 31/03/2024 16.56, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 12:55:23 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
In case someone from the Fedora Magazine is in the devel mailing list and reads
this:
I'm really frustrated with our communication regarding this issue. Does anybody
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I'm really frustrated with our communication regarding this issue. Does anybody
know who can fix this?
The Fedora Magazine article has been fixed (thanks!).
"*Fedora Linux
On 31/03/2024 20.52, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I'm really frustrated with our communication regarding this issue. Does anybody
know who can fix this?
The Fedora Mag
On 31/03/2024 22.30, Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
Am 31.03.24 um 21:33 schrieb Sandro:
On 31-03-2024 20:54, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.52, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
On 31/03/2024 23.11, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 08:55:37PM +, Christopher Klooz wrote:
The repo files should be the same on Fedora containers, so if the container is
F40 and the testing repo is enabled, it might have installed the malicious
build.
Right, if it was dnf
On 31/03/2024 21.33, Sandro wrote:
On 31-03-2024 20:54, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.52, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 20.21, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 09:56:04 AM -05:00:00, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I'm really frustrated with our communic
On 01/04/2024 16.32, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31 2024 at 06:52:53 PM +00:00:00, Christopher Klooz
wrote:
"Fedora Linux 40 branched users (i.e. pre-Beta) likely received the potentially
vulnerable 5.6.0-2.fc40 build if the system updated between March 2nd and March 6th.
F
On 31/03/2024 23.08, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 10:30:23PM +0200, Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
Not sure, if it was already mentioned -> containers. I had here a toolbox
environment with F40. That I had not in my first actions
on the screen. The last state had 5.6.0-3 installed
On 01/04/2024 19.27, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 05:07:13PM +, Christopher Klooz wrote:
On 31/03/2024 23.08, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 10:30:23PM +0200, Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
Not sure, if it was already mentioned -> containers. I had here a tool
On 08/04/2024 11.31, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 12:22:35AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
I've noticed a trend in proposed changes in the way Fedora works.
I am fed up of this salami tactic as well. When we complain about the new
stuff, we in
901 - 1000 of 1066 matches
Mail list logo
