https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System ---
libu2f-host-1.0.0-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System ---
libu2f-host-1.0.0-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #29 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
jjelen's scratch build of
yubico-piv-tool?#f493f908260c8e3946798b6730c4e20e37b367fa for
git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/yubico-piv-tool?#f493f908260c8e3946798b6730c4e20e37b367fa
and rawhide fa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System ---
libu2f-host-1.0.0-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install i
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |ON_QA
Resolution|DUPLICA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System ---
libu2f-host-1.0.0-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-3edb5a0c25
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC lis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System ---
libu2f-host-1.0.0-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-f51a4a41c2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC lis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
Seth Jennings changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DEFERRED|DUPLICATE
--- Comment #24 from Seth J
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
Seth Jennings changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #22 from Seth Jennings ---
Unversioned .so files belong in the -devel package per the guidelines (rpmlint
complains).
Yes, this libu2f-host review and the libu2f-server review (1259460) both need
some attention. The packages are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #21 from Baptiste Mille-Mathias
---
Hi gents,
As it seems there is no review done yet on this package, perhaps you should ask
some on the developers mailing-list?
I've quickly look at the packages, is there any reason the *.so fi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #20 from Andy Lutomirski ---
I went ahead and submitted a review request for the hidraw part: bug 1273188
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this p
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #19 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Seth, if you want to own this, can you close this bug and open a new one? I
think that's required for the semi-automatic review magic.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
Seth Jennings changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #18 from Seth Jennings ---
Now that my first package, yubioath-desktop, is fully complete and know the
process and I'm coming back to this.
Based on Andy's previous submissions + changes to address Till's feedback in
comment 15:
h
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #17 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Sure! Or we could co-maintain.
I want to remove the udev policy from here in favor of:
https://github.com/amluto/u2f-hidraw-policy
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #16 from spartacu...@gmail.com ---
Andy, are you still interested in maintaining this? If not, I can pick it up.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #15 from Till Maas ---
Sorry, I did not noctice your update until now.
There are still some issues:
- The license of the library is actually LGPLv2+ only the command line tools
are GPLv3+
- There is more documentation that is not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #14 from Andy Lutomirski ---
I updated to the new version, make those changes, and dropped the udev rule.
I'll make another new package with a udev rule, since I think it should be
separate.
Spec URL:
http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #13 from Till Maas ---
some further remarks:
- COPYING should probably be marked as %license
- The manpage pattern should be: %{_mandir}/man1/u2f-host.1* - so it also works
when the man page is not compressed at all
--
You are re
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
Till Maas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||opensou...@till.name
--- Comment #12 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #11 from Andy Lutomirski ---
This is now getting ridiculous. When fixing the _udevrulesdir thing, I clearly
failed to redo the mock build, and I was missing BR: systemd. Sorry!
Spec URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/libu2f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #10 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Spec URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/libu2f_host_0.0-4/libu2f-host.spec
SRPM URL:
http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/libu2f_host_0.0-4/libu2f-host-0.0-4.fc20.src.rpm
Koji scratch build: http://k
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
Finnbarr P. Murphy changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j321...@gmail.com
--- Comment #9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #8 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Adam, Patrick, are either of you planning on reviewing this? The bug is still
unassigned.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about chan
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #7 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Spec URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/libu2f_host_0.0-3/libu2f-host.spec
SRPM URL:
http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/libu2f_host_0.0-3/libu2f-host-0.0-3.fc20.src.rpm
The only changes are a bump
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #6 from Adam Goode ---
No rush. Solving it in systemd is a nice solution.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #5 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Will do for -3. Want a new version now or later?
FWIW, I'm hoping to get rid of that udev rule entirely. I send a patch to
systemd to handle U2F devices for real instead of trying to list all
vendor/p
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #4 from Adam Goode ---
I think you want to use the _udevrulesdir macro.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #3 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Spec URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/libu2f_host_0.0-2/libu2f-host.spec
SRPM URL:
http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/libu2f_host_0.0-2/libu2f-host-0.0-2.fc20.src.rpm
Description: libu2f-host prov
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #2 from Andy Lutomirski ---
I'm going to have to send a new version with a trivial update: libu2f-host
needs a udev rule to work correctly as non-root, and I didn't include it in
this version. I post an update later today.
--
Yo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155826
--- Comment #1 from Andy Lutomirski ---
Created attachment 949602
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=949602&action=edit
Self-review
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always n
33 matches
Mail list logo
