On Tue, Dec 15, 2015, at 06:43 PM, Japheth Cleaver wrote:
>
>
Perhaps RPM (or yum/dnf, via plugin) could write a duplicate copy of
all config files into a tree somewhere? (E.g., /usr/lib/config/ or
/usr/share/config/?)
I mentioned this above, but might as well repeat since it was misse
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015, at 06:19 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> For some reason the patch is conditional on the existence of
> /sbin/new-kernel-pkg (and hence on grubby being installed), whereas I
> believe the patch should be unconditional, because we always want to
> have a kernel in /boot on Fed
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, at 08:28 AM, Neil Horman wrote:
>
> I would question why its necessecary to keep systemd out so ardently. If you
> build your container layers properly, you can effectively put systemd in a
> base
> container and layer other applications in child containers that inherit from
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Can you give realistic examples for these? Can you explain what you
> are intend to run as PID 1 in them instead?
Nothing, if the pid namespace did zombie collection in the kernel,
you don't need a separate init.
> What is cleaning u
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, at 10:54 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Because microservice containers are a valid goal, and allowing them
to be more minimal while still pulling in glibc etc. is useful (from
the start of this thread).
> Note that PID 1 is in more ways different than just reaping
> processe
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, at 01:19 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>
> In either case, you're going to wind up butchering a fair amount of what the
> rpm
> is going to be doing anyway. If its so important to minimize that storage,
> rpm
> dependencies shouldn't really be a big deal, because you know you're g
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, at 04:00 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> If its so important to not use up that small
> additional amount of ram and cpu, so be it, but that seems like a different
> question than the one being addressed.
That is primarily what I'm talking about indeed.
The disk usage does matter
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016, at 09:46 AM, Jan Kurik wrote:
> = Proposed System Wide Change: Change Proposal Name NewRpmDBFormat =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NewRpmDBFormat
It'd be interesting to know the technical details, worth reposting once there's
a design document or prototype PR.
I
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016, at 04:16 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> The issue is that blacklists are terrible from a security standpoint.
> That means that every new obscure system call added to the kernel will
> be available by default in your program.
https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/iss
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>
>
On Jan 19, 2016 7:41 AM, "Colin Walters" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016, at 04:16 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
>
>
>
> > The issue is that blacklists are te
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016, at 08:05 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> There are actually some very real security reasons not to let mock
> pull arbitrary configuration files from local directories. It would
> provide way, way too much power to the local developer to build
> arbitrary chroot cages on the m
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016, at 12:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> pygobject3 -- Python 2 bindings for GObject Introspection ( master f23 f22 )
In practice this is mostly a mirror of upstream that has automatic commits
from kalev, but I'll take it as primary point of contact for any downstream
issues.
If
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, at 05:54 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > NAICT, DNF, like Yum before it, offers no option I can recognize from its
> > man
> > page to download less than all the to-be-updated/installed packages before
> > proceeding to install any packages. Thus it downloads (typically hundred
On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 10:19 +0200, Jan Synacek wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> what should I do with the spec file of a package (ftp) with no upstream and
> no upstream source?
> I mean the URL and Source0 lines. Should I just let them there, put a note in
> a comment or
> just remove them?
Upload it t
On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 10:08 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> /var/run/$name.pid is the standard pid file location for daemons and has been
> so
> for ages. A lot of distros depend on this, and we used to depend on it until
> we
> moved to systemd which no longer cares about pid files.
Right, so wh
On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 13:58 +0100, Andrew Price wrote:
> If Type=forking is set and PIDFile is unset, systemd will try to guess
> the PID of the main daemon process. I'm not sure what the guessing
> strategy is but specifying the PIDFile explicitly is probably safer,
> particularly for daemons
On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 10:31 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 13:58 +0100, Andrew Price wrote:
>
> > If Type=forking is set and PIDFile is unset, systemd will try to guess
> > the PID of the main daemon process. I'm not sure what the guessing
> > s
the patch in the archives. Well, I'll attach it again,
since I still have it sitting around in my libffi git checkout.
>From ce7211733bd2d1748c3dcd3d3717850e28d4594d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Colin Walters
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 10:03:59 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Revert to previous ABI
On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 22:52 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> all we would gain is a way to distinguish an offical
> build vs a scratch build in koji or a build someone did to mimic our
> environment.
I think what people mainly want here is a means to protect against
man-in-the-middle attacks between
On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 07:22 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> I'll note that this does slightly undercut one of the tenants of UsrMove --
> that people won't have to guess as to which directory a file lives in; it's
> always in /usr/bin. That will still hold true for someone who is the author
> of
On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 12:27 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Even in less extreme situations than this, it's a fair point that often one
> can't run binaries from the system where you need to look at the logs, and
> needing special tools (rather than just any viewer or editor) to analyze
> those log
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 10:42 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> FWIW this change caused a segfault in OpenStack
This phrase is very dramatic. I'd say "triggered a double free in an
untested libguestfs error path" is more accurate and less dramatic.
Really it had nothing to do with hard links at
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:59 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I'm not even sure
> how to do that because we want the atomic behaviour of hard links, and
> we want to have qemu running as a different user (for security, oh the
> irony), so there's no other obvious way to code it.
Can you link to
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 17:59 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> There's a lock (building_lock) which stops two threads from the same
> process from entering the appliance building code in parallel.
>
> There's also a lock (fcntl held on the file 'checksums') which stops
> two processes owned by the
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 12:18 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> I think that the best course of action would to rethink UsrMove as
> UsrMerge which I would then take to the rest of the FPC as getting rid of
> the prohibition on packages listing /bin, /sbin/ lib, /lib64 as the location
> in the file.
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 13:36 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Does 'new automatic partitioning variant' mean 'another option in the
> drop-down box in Installation Options', more or less?
Exactly that - at the moment.
However...what we really lack here is some sort of explanation of the
trade
On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 10:17 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Far better to encourage people to explicitly use /usr/bin/python2 and
> /usr/bin/python3 explicitly and discourage any use of plain /usr/bin/python
Note the GNOME discussion here:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/20
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 17:28 +0200, Thomas Moschny wrote:
> In my opinion, the best solution would be to automatically keep a copy
> of the original configuration file (maybe RPM could do that - always
> wondered why it doesn't, or one could use a tool like etckeeper).
You might be interested to kn
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 14:42 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> So I put in rpmconf this code (little bit simplified here):
> if [ -x /usr/share/rpmconf/$PACKAGE ]; then
> /usr/share/rpmconf/$PACKAGE
> fi
Have you looked at Debconf? In a past life I wrote the Debcon
On Fri, 2013-07-26 at 13:57 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 2) We still need to consider use-cases where a cron job or other
> long-running service needs to use credentials given to it by the user,
> though they are no longer signed in. With the current approach, we
> still need to be concerned
On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 13:16 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> I noticed this:
>
> $ rpm -qf /usr/etc
> filesystem-3.2-12.fc19.x86_64
A quick git annotate shows it originates from:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/filesystem.git/commit/?id=cd01d2d6d54f59ef8e177d0391bc734fba470ef4
With no comm
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 22:57 -0430, Robert Marcano wrote:
> Do you know there are GNOME JavaScript applications? And that
> JavaScript is being encouraged as a language for desktop applications?
> So all those libraries that can be used on desktop and web clients
There's *very* little JavaScript c
On Wed, 2013-08-14 at 13:00 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> * These products would be Fedora Workstation, Fedora Server, and Fedora
> Cloud (precise definitions to be developed)
Why not derive these definitions from the current Red Hat Enterprise
Linux products?
--
devel mailing list
devel@li
I think the most practical thing is to build version N of self-hosting
systems using version N-1 (in addition to supporting building N with N).
If you are using the latest to build the latest, you can more easily get
into unstable states.
For example, if a new version of the Fedora kernel broke vi
On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 11:39 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> http://miroslav.suchy.cz/blog/archives/2013/08/30/copr_implemented_using_obs/index.html
>
> I would like to ask *you* what is your opinion?
I think it's absolutely essential that were COPRS to be an OBS instance,
it still used mock to bu
On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 09:01 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 11:39 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> > http://miroslav.suchy.cz/blog/archives/2013/08/30/copr_implemented_using_obs/index.html
> >
> > I would like to ask *you* what is your opinion?
>
On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 10:01 +0300, Oron Peled wrote:
> * From pid you can find the real executable (/proc/pid/cmd).
And this is the step that's worthless:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=533493
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/m
On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 10:56 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Since the OCaml native code compiler has produced DWARF information
> for some time, I just started to build debuginfo packages.
>
> For example:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=4407232
> has:
> /usr/lib/debug/.b
On Wed, 2013-10-16 at 20:39 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> What I can do those packages enter in F20 ?
Bodhi updates have to be created by a human, and then other humans need
to provide sufficient karma.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailma
On Mon, 2013-03-25 at 15:03 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> automake -f -a -c
>
> to force it to copy in all needed files again.
Just run:
autoreconf -v -f -i
always. Better, ensure the upstream has an autogen.sh containing
whatever they need to do to build from actual revision control (as
op
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 15:17 -0400, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> Is anybody on here using Fedora for Gnome development (silly question, I
> know)? If so, can you point me to a web page that describes how to setup
> Fedora specifically?
The tool used by most developers and release-team members is JHBui
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 16:26 -0400, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> When I ran this (which is where I ran into problems) jhbuild installs
> python3 and its dependencies, which is what's borking my day job
> development.
That's odd. How did you install jhbuild?
Oh...did you run "jhbuild bootstrap"? Do
On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 15:31 -0400, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> When python3 is installed then, with both projects, Cmake finds Python
> 3.
This seems like either a bug in Cmake or your project (not sure which) -
if it's possible to explicitly specify that you want Python 2, then you
should be doin
Hi,
For the next GNOME 3.10 cycle I'd like to port our dependencies to
mozjs17, the new Spidermonkey release.
See:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=735599
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2013-March/msg00135.html
gjs is already ported and hard-depends on it, and I w
On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 21:29 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> From technical perspective, there's zero need to change how
> multiversion packages work. Its a widely used (at least both in rpm and
> dpkg worlds) and well-understood mechanism to slap extra qualifiers at
> the end of the name to ac
On Mon, 2013-04-15 at 09:12 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> which I interpret to mean that after using -fstack-protector-all and
> removing prelink, SELinux would become obsolete because no executable
> can be exploited.
No; there are plenty of exploits which aren't due to buffer overflows.
Pa
On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 20:31 -0700, Ravindra Kumar wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> It is going to very useful for users if we install open-vm-tools
> inside a VM on VMware always.
>
>
> For this, I'm proposing following design:
> 1. Add open-vm-tools to the core package group
>
> 2. Modify Anaconda to unins
On Thu, 2013-05-16 at 09:47 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> And then you can install both versions, so that you can use
> both apps linked against the old and new version, but
> only one -devel package, as there can be only 1 unversioned
> symlink for ldd, so installing both + the -devel for the
> n
On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 16:54 +0200, Phil Knirsch wrote:
> But rpm could just do a git-tar-tree behind the scenes, which sounds
> easy enough.
It's not quite that easy, given the possible presence of git
submodules.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1591387/need-to-handle-git-submodules-in-git
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 10:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> We could of course build the smarts into the fedpkg layer - have some
> fedpkg commands for checking out and building tarballs of SCM-hosted
> content - but then you've just moved the security risk Panu mentioned to
> that layer; if we do
On Sat, 2013-05-25 at 11:15 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
[The build hosts do not have outside network access]
> That's very specific to the Fedora build environment. Difficult to
> replicate in the field without a huge local build structure!
If you do it using firewalls, yes, quite annoying.
On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 20:13 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in upstream GNOME, we're starting to convert the 'make check' style
> tests in many modules into installed tests
The most important URL is this one:
https://live.gnome.org/GnomeGoals/InstalledTests
The most recent status updat
Hi David,
On Thu, 2013-06-06 at 11:55 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 12:08 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> > libproxy taken.
>
> I'm also very interested in libproxy.
Great! Can you help out with testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970282#c4
?
--
devel
On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 20:42 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Without further analysis, it doesn't tell us much. Does the code attempt
> to open a file O_NOATIME and then fall back to trying it without?
It's likely:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=680326
Code:
https://git.gnome.org/brow
On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 22:14 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 20:42 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> >> Without further analysis, it doesn't tell us much. Does the code attempt
> >
On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 10:03 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> Why would anyone write software that is incorrect enough the OS spits it back
> as EINVAL?
One example is the btrfs ioctl() for reflink:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=626497
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.
On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 17:18 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Eric Smith
> wrote:
> > I have gsmartcontrol working with consolehelper in F17, but it fails
> > to launch in F18 and F19, and logs messages like this:
> >
> > Jun 12 19:33:30 localhost /etc/gdm/Xsession[2
On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 14:34 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> refuse to use our own bug tracker ( Like the Red
> Hat's Gnome developers do )
Stop saying that, it's not true.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 15:16 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> Maybe you should accept the truth that is instead of accusing others
> of lying here.
I was not accusing you of lying, merely of perpetuating what I consider
an inaccurate characterization of reality.
Could the team do more?
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 13:15 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> I think most "traditional" system admins see a running NM daemon as an
> additional point of failure in a static network. If my server's network
> setup is static, I don't want a daemon running attempting to "manage"
> it. If it has a bug,
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 12:13 -0600, Eric Smith wrote:
> Does NM in F19 support statically assigning multiple subnets to the
> same physical interface, WITHOUT using VLANs?
Yes. You can easily do this in the GNOME Control center, just try it.
Click "Manual", and then the "+" will allow adding multi
On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 14:29 +0200, Jan Kaluža wrote:
> This is usually fixed by sending some signal to daemon in postscript
> informing it that logs should be reopened. That way, no messages are
> lost. The worst thing which can happen is that some messages get logged
> in the rotated file for
On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 01:44 +0800, P J P wrote:
> - Original Message -
>
> > From: Colin Walters
> > Subject: Re: logrotate(8) and copytruncate as default
> > It's worth noting that all of these problems go away with the systemd
> > journal.
>
On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 23:38 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Why would you want this? I mean, we rate-limit per-service anyway, so
> the issue of one app flooding evreything else should be mostly
> non-existant. And hence, what you are asking for is some policy control
> about what to delete fir
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016, at 09:18 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Also, keep in mind that Flatpaks are not the only new type of software
> we intend to support in Fedora. I know other folks are looking into
> supporting Docker containers; I believe that's a Server WG initiative?
One of the thing
rpm-ostree 2016.4:
https://github.com/projectatomic/rpm-ostree/releases/tag/v2016.4
is now in Bodhi:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-2b9342c5cc
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-bfecf6abed
Remember, to try it, you can rebase an existing Atomic Host system u
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016, at 08:33 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> Another thing I think is cool is that we use bubblewrap[3] to
> run %post scripts, which greatly helps avoid system damage from badly written
> scripts, and helps ensure that system changes are under control of rpm-ost
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016, at 03:04 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> I want to add a couple more to the scope: dnf and PackageKit. I don't
> care *how* dnf and PackageKit get started. If they're making changes,
> systemd should *not* zap them on logout.
PackageKit has been a daemon from the start (and
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 07:32 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> Hi,
> Is there some notion or definition of a Fedora minimal or base image?
A lot depends on whether "image" is a container or OS, which mostly
boils down to "contains a kernel".
For containers I would look at:
`docker run --
Now that Cloud -> Atomic and will be focusing on Project Atomic, can we move the
Docker base image into this group from the "Fedora Base" group?
It never really made sense to me in Base; in:
$ git log --format='%ae' fedora-docker-base.ks | sort -u
admil...@redhat.com
den...@ausil.us
jpazdzi...@re
Hey, so as part of the discussion about NetworkManager vs systemd-networkd,
one thing that happened is networkd started exposing its DHCP code as
a shared library, and NetworkManager learned to use it if one specifies
```
[main]
dhcp=internal
```
in /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf. I hav
On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 22:49 +0100, Andreas Tunek wrote:
> Maybe glib is a better place for these kinds of functions?
Already exists:
http://developer.gnome.org/gio/2.34/GResolver.html
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 09:53 -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> as legal has said we cannot pregenerate initramfses
Really? Why?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 14:30 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> This is interesting, in that it's a feature that's occasionally requested
> by various users and administrators. However, this is rather limited in
> that only systemd stuff is using it now, and it's tied to the journal API.
Actually, we
On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 13:21 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> and at the end of the road we will be on
> the windows way "you touched anything on the system and
> so please reboot now"
That's not true - no engineer involved in operating systems development
wants that. However:
1) Modern Windows requ
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 14:43 +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
> If we want the "system default" for the LFS APIs to change, surely it is
> safer and more correct to change the system (libc) default and have
> _FILE_OFFSET_BITS defined to 64 eveywhere?
The first option on the table should be patching upst
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 12:44 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Well, in that case I suppose we'd need to add a new tag-set, something
> like rawhide-pending
In other words, another layer.
I'll only repeat this maybe every 6 months or yearly, depending on how
annoying people find me. But basical
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 13:17 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> If the issue was only 'newer is better' then rpm can easily get around
> it. Hell, so can yum, now.
But koji, createrepo and such can't, right?
> The issue is that we have nothing that even resembles a backward-compat
> process for user DATA
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 16:58 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> We don't ship in a way that easily allows this though, now. Admittedly,
> this is due to the sheer *amount* of stuff involved in just maintaining
> single versions of things, and how much that would jump if we started
> having multiple ve
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014, at 04:58 PM, Jon Kent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We use yum wrapped up in a python script that runs from a master
> server and uses ssh to log into server/servers and run the
> requested command
I'd recommend Ansible, it comes with built in primitives for interacting
with yum declarati
Recently, I've ended up interacting with Fedora packages that use several
different "higher order" or "layered" tools on top of fedpkg.
I created this page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Layered_build_scripts_for_package_maintainers
which attempts to enumerate the ones I know of. It's certain
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014, at 02:17 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
> and then a
> 'systemctl mask ...' command to mask dnf makecache timer/service using
> sudo/su";
This one should help with that one:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/pull/186
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedorapr
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015, at 04:06 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > == Scope ==
> > * Other developers:
> > *** Use systemd-tmpfiles instead of placing content in /var (TODO: better
> > docs
> > for this)
> Is this a strict dependency or a nice-to-have item? That is, are we talking
> about having to
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015, at 04:41 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> If it's installing a regular file, then it won't work - the package (daemon)
> needs to create it on start.
I filed a bug about this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182785
Though I wonder if this shoul
Hi Kevin,
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015, at 05:20 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> * customize your installation by adding/removing packages (and if it were
> not prevented, the customizations would not persist across updates),
First of course, while that's accurate for the rpm-ostree technology
today, the F
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015, at 07:31 AM, Honza Horak wrote:
> Let me emphasize especially need for somebody who will be able to look
> closely at and contribute to release engineering tools.
>
> I think it's clear that no bigger change how the fedora looks will
> happen without touching the tools we u
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015, at 07:02 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
> I have hard time figuring out what exactly is the purpose of including the
> factory reset feature in your proposal. No offense but unless I'm missing
> something, it seems to me that you are trying to solve some of ostree
> problems
> in
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015, at 06:27 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
> You are probably right, I might have misunderstood what you actually propose.
> Does it mean that you actually don't require this part to be implemented at
> all and you can go with what's in /var without any distribution-wide changes?
Fed
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015, at 08:22 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> Hi all,
> since the "Python 3 as a Default" change [1] has been accepted a while ago
> and is scheduled for F22, I'd like to share with you the status.
>
> The proposed change [1] mentions several goals that should be reached to
> prono
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> How exactly is Fedora Atomic generated? It seems that fedpra-cloud-atomic.ks
> has no %packages section...
> I can find out how we're doing with Atomic assuming I know how it's
> constructed :)
It uses rpm-ostree; the input manifest
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015, at 08:07 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Which is something I find a really questionable idea btw. There's a
> lot of stuff systemd does, and it's naive to believe you can just not
> do them and get away with it in a container.
The discussion is more subtle than that - with
Right now we have:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/AtomicHost
Which I think encompasses:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Bare_Metal_Atomic
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Vagrant_Box_Atomic
Any objections to consolidating?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.o
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015, at 11:09 AM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> So - I have no objections to consolidating, but I do wonder if the
> AtomicHost one is explicit enough. Some folks were expressing confusion
> about what the change was, exactly. (I forget who, it was either in
> #fedora-cloud or #atomic
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015, at 01:32 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> tl;dr Shall we consider requiring a lesser package review for packages
> that are not present on Product or Spin install media?
It's worth noting here that having two levels is not really going
to be new to the ecosystem; e.g. Ubuntu h
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>
> communication would have avoided some of the discussion in
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149568
Which btw, caused
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1192276
Could you review?
I'm fixing this in OSTree too, ht
There are patches waiting in:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1116651
And I think almost every poster so far in this thread has the technical
knowledge to review them.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora C
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017, at 08:14 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> 3) The downside of (1) is that the plugin registration scripts are baked
> into vagrant plugins, I had to apply some hacks to keep the backward
> compatibility with Vagrant plugins currently in Fedora.
While you're working on this, can you
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> First of all, I am still not fond of moving the plugins.json into /usr.
Why is that? It's like the fontconfig one, which was discussed in FESCo:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1635#comment-51133
and approved:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/16
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017, at 06:00 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> Hi,
> For several packages it is possible to automate build, test and
> package updating on multiple fedora releases (+epel) in a single
> keypress using the cockpituous (sic) tools [0]. These tools hide quirks
> and requirement
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017, at 09:52 AM, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> In order to make even smaller Fedora base images, it was proposed to switch
> libcurl back to OpenSSL. The Fedora Crypto Consolidation project, which
> motivated the switch of libcurl from OpenSSL to NSS ten years ago, is now
> deprecated an
201 - 300 of 563 matches
Mail list logo
