Fix the R-waveslim license declared in the spec file
For what it is worth while updating R-waveslim I noticed that the license is wrong as it says GPLv2+ while it is BSD on my defense I should point that the homepage of the package: http://r-forge.r-project.org/projects/waveslim/ says GPL. I am now fixing it in the update package. -- José Abílio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: unable to push to git: id.fedoraproject.org redirects to localhost
Am 14.03.20 um 10:35 schrieb Felix Schwarz: > I just tried to push some changes to git but was unable to do. ... > > What I can do to get this fixed? I tried again and somehow it worked the second time. Felix ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Intent to request a FESCo exception for python2 for ardour5
Hi, I’m going to ask a FESCo exception for python2 for package ardour5. Python2 is only needed to build the package using the WAF build system. Ardour has been undergoing a complete rewriting for 2 years, no stable versions have been released in the last 2 years, so we are stuck with ardour 5.12, which still uses python2 to build. What do you think about that? Ciao Guido FAS: tartina ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: RFC: entering luks password on grub level for devices without keyboards
On la, 14 maalis 2020, Marius Schwarz wrote: Hi all, bevor we start, it is a VERY VERY SPECIAL situation i will talk about now. It could get fixed by a UNUSUAL approach. The device we talk about as an example is the SURFACE PRO Tablet Series from Microsoft WITH a LUKS encrypted installation on the drive. Situation: If you encrypt the fedora ( or any ) installation with luks, as security of a mobile device indicates, you end up without the possibility to enter the password, when you do not have an in/external keyboard at hand. As tablets do not come with a keypad ( called TypoCover by MS ) by default, it's not possible to enter the password when Plymouth asks for it. There is simply no keyboard available, AND additionally since surface pro 4+, touch does not work with upstream kernel, so adding an OSK isn't helping. Solution until now: TypeCover or external Keyboard OR no encryption for the device. You can set up clevis to use any automated policy you want. For example, clevis supports TPM2 pin which would allow you to bind your LUKS keys to a TPM2 chip in Surface devices. All Windows 10-capable hardware has internal TPM chip, this is true for my Surface Pro 2017. Please see https://blog.dowhile0.org/2017/10/18/automatic-luks-volumes-unlocking-using-a-tpm2-chip/ https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/automatic-decrypt-with-tpm2-on-silverblue/8424/2 and https://github.com/latchset/clevis/issues/34#issuecomment-369560587 for more details. With this setup you wouldn't need to use any keyboard to enter your passkey as TPM2 is always present. -- / Alexander Bokovoy Sr. Principal Software Engineer Security / Identity Management Engineering Red Hat Limited, Finland ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora-Cloud-31-20200315.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: RFC: entering luks password on grub level for devices without keyboards
On 14.03.2020 13:05, Marius Schwarz wrote: > If you encrypt the fedora ( or any ) installation with luks, as > security of a mobile device indicates, you end up without the > possibility to enter the password, when you do not have an in/external > keyboard at hand. You should use TPM 2.0 LUKS unlock instead of using passwords. -- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Non-responsive maintainer: pocock
On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 2:06 PM Dakota Williams wrote: > > On 3/6/20 1:21 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote: > > > > > > On 05/03/2020 21:26, Julian Sikorski wrote: > > > >> I would like to take this opportunity to remind about the PR that I have > >> prepared - let us not duplicate the work: > >> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/asio/pull-request/1 > >> I have rebuilt all asio's dependencies and only encountered issues with > >> abiword and OpenSceneGraph - both were complaining about error not being > >> a member of asio::placeholders. Same issues were found by gentoo, I have > >> linked the relevant bug reports in the PR. Is this something you would > >> be able to advise about? I am happy to share full build logs if needed. > > > > I haven't personally looked at asio 1.14.0 yet so I don't have the > > solution off the top of my head. These are the type of issues I > > normally deal with in upstream development. > > > > From a strategic perspective, I feel it is most efficient to try and > > coordinate with the upstreams and other distributions so that everybody > > is supporting the same asio in each of the major distributions. > > > > In any C++ library, there are small API changes from time to time > > leading to the type of problem you describe. > > > > If upstreams are using travis-ci, we are testing against version 1.12.2 > > from Debian/Ubuntu and may not be aware of issues in asio 1.14.0. Even > > if you patch for the issue, it may be completely untested upstream. > > That is why it is so vital to resolve the Debian/Ubuntu lag. > > > > Is there a convenient way for upstreams to make CI builds on the latest > > Fedora rawhide in parallel with our travis-ci Ubuntu builds? > > > >> Please also note that I have checked both fale and uwog's recent > >> activity with fedora-active-user and neither seem to have been active > >> lately. > > > > Thanks for this feedback. Dakota, do you want to be promoted to admin > > on asio? > > > > Is either of you happy to be co-maintainer of resiprocate with me? I > > opened an issue to unretire it. I do upstream releases and I run the > > latest version for fedrtc.org (using CentOS/EPEL) so it is important for > > me that it supports Fedora and any Fedora issues are given the attention > > they deserve during the release process. > > > Sure, admin is ok with me. Co-maintainer of resiprocate would also be > something I'd be willing to take on. It's been a couple of weeks now, and I don't see "raineforest" listed as admin for asio[1]. Can you please add him as requested? Also, resiprocate[2] was retired three months ago after being orphaned for 6 weeks for failing to build for Fedora 31[3]. It will need to go through a whole new review process *after* asio is updated. [1]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/asio [2]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/resiprocate [3]: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8917#comment-610267 -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Intent to request a FESCo exception for python2 for ardour5
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 6:23 AM Guido Aulisi wrote: > > Hi, > > I’m going to ask a FESCo exception for python2 for package ardour5. > Python2 is only needed to build the package using the WAF build system. > > Ardour has been undergoing a complete rewriting for 2 years, no stable > versions have been released in the last 2 years, > so we are stuck with ardour 5.12, which still uses python2 to build. > > What do you think about that? Does it fail to build if you update the bundled copy of Waf to a version that works with Python 3? -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Review swap
Hi, I hope someone is interested to swap reviews? I would like to package the python3 bindings to the eccodes package that I maintain, which has been split to a separate repository by upstream. See my review request here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808878 Thanks, Jos de Kloe ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Intent to request a FESCo exception for python2 for ardour5
Il 15/03/20 11:22, Guido Aulisi ha scritto: > Hi, > > I’m going to ask a FESCo exception for python2 for package ardour5. > Python2 is only needed to build the package using the WAF build system. > > Ardour has been undergoing a complete rewriting for 2 years, no stable > versions have been released in the last 2 years, > so we are stuck with ardour 5.12, which still uses python2 to build. > > What do you think about that? > > Ciao > Guido > Maybe it's time to package it from a commit checkout? Master branch has had 3600+ commits since v5.2... I suppose it has gained support for Python3. Mattia ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Intent to request a FESCo exception for python2 for ardour5
On su, 15 maalis 2020, Guido Aulisi wrote: Hi, I’m going to ask a FESCo exception for python2 for package ardour5. Python2 is only needed to build the package using the WAF build system. Ardour has been undergoing a complete rewriting for 2 years, no stable versions have been released in the last 2 years, so we are stuck with ardour 5.12, which still uses python2 to build. What do you think about that? Just package git master in Rawhide. It has been migrated to waf 2.0.19 two months ago and builds just fine in Fedora 32 environments with Python 3 only. -- / Alexander Bokovoy Sr. Principal Software Engineer Security / Identity Management Engineering Red Hat Limited, Finland ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Intent to request a FESCo exception for python2 for ardour5
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 2:37 PM Alexander Bokovoy wrote: > > On su, 15 maalis 2020, Guido Aulisi wrote: > >Hi, > > > >I’m going to ask a FESCo exception for python2 for package ardour5. > >Python2 is only needed to build the package using the WAF build system. > > > >Ardour has been undergoing a complete rewriting for 2 years, no stable > >versions have been released in the last 2 years, > >so we are stuck with ardour 5.12, which still uses python2 to build. > > > >What do you think about that? (snip) > Just package git master in Rawhide. It has been migrated to waf 2.0.19 > two months ago and builds just fine in Fedora 32 environments with > Python 3 only. I think FESCo would agree to temporarily continue building it with python2, given that upstream has already worked on supporting building with python3 eventually. At least, I would approve such an exception request (and other, similar requests for firefox, chromium, etc. have already been approved). But, if you think a current git snapshot would be an appropriate target for packaging, that solves the problem as well (I don't know how stable their development branch is). Fabio > -- > / Alexander Bokovoy > Sr. Principal Software Engineer > Security / Identity Management Engineering > Red Hat Limited, Finland > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1808079] perl-Cache-FastMmap for EL8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808079 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Cache-FastMmap-1.48-4. ||el8 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-03-15 13:45:12 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- perl-Cache-FastMmap-1.48-4.el8 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Beware: java-1.8.0-openjdk SIGSEGVs / SIGABRTs in rawhide
Hi everybody, The latest java-1.8.0-openjdk update for rawhide (the first build with GCC 10) seems to have introduced some serious problems - including crashes and segmentation faults during package builds for Java packages. The broken update landed in rawhide with the Fedora-Rawhide-20200313.n.0 compose: java-1.8.0-openjdk-1:1.8.0.242.b06-0.0.ea.fc32 -> java-1.8.0-openjdk-1:1.8.0.242.b08-0.fc33 I haven't been able to reproduce the crashes reliably, so I assume it's something that's either randomly triggered, or dependent on the specific hardware / architecture (but this seems to affect at least x86_64, i686, and aarch64, so I'm not so sure it's architecture related). koschei started complaining about a whole lot of Java packages since the update landed: https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/affected-by/java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless?epoch1=1&version1=1.8.0.242.b06&release1=0.0.ea.fc32&epoch2=1&version2=1.8.0.242.b08&release2=0.fc33&collection=f33 The same java-1.8.0-openjdk update has also landed in f32 updates-testing, but I haven't been able to reproduce any crashes with that version (so far), so I'm not sure if this is also affecting the f32 update, or if it's isolated to rawhide. Here's the - seemingly unaffected - f32 update for the same version: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-af190951f6 I've reported this issue here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813550 Does somebody have experience with debugging the JVM? Please help :D Fabio ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora 32 compose report: 20200315.n.0 changes
OLD: Fedora-32-20200314.n.0 NEW: Fedora-32-20200315.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:1 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 0 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of upgraded packages: 0 B Size of downgraded packages: 0 B Size change of upgraded packages: 0 B Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B = ADDED IMAGES = Image: Container_Base docker ppc64le Path: Container/ppc64le/images/Fedora-Container-Base-32-20200315.n.0.ppc64le.tar.xz = DROPPED IMAGES = Image: Container_Minimal_Base docker ppc64le Path: Container/ppc64le/images/Fedora-Container-Minimal-Base-32-20200314.n.0.ppc64le.tar.xz = ADDED PACKAGES = = DROPPED PACKAGES = = UPGRADED PACKAGES = = DOWNGRADED PACKAGES = ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Test-Announce] 2020-03-16 @ ** 15:00 ** UTC - Fedora QA Meeting
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2020-03-16 # Time: ** 15:00 ** UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! We just signed off on Beta, and I figure everyone needs something to do while we all self-isolate anyway, so what's more fun than a QA meeting?! (Don't answer that, please...) Daylight savings time started in many places last week, so the meeting time in UTC hsa changed. If you put your clocks forward recently, the meeting will be at the same *local* time as always for you. If you didn't, the meeting will be one hour *earlier* in local time. You can always check the current UTC time by running 'date -u'. If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this email and suggest them! Thanks. == Proposed Agenda Topics == 1. Previous meeting follow-up 2. F32 Beta release tasks, Final plans 3. COVID-19 impact on Fedora 32 validation 4. Test Day / community event status 5. Open floor -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Test-Announce] 2020-03-16 @ ** 16:00 ** UTC - Fedora 32 Blocker Review Meeting
# F32 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2020-03-16 # Time: ** 16:00 ** UTC # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Hi folks! We have 4 proposed Final blockers to review (and two Beta AcceptedPreviousRelease blockers to check in on), so let's have a Fedora 32 blocker review meeting tomorrow! Remember that daylight savings time started last weekend, so the meeting is now at 16:00 UTC, not 17:00 UTC. If you have time today, you can take a look at the proposed or accepted blockers before the meeting - the full lists can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ . We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F32 can be found on the wiki [0]. For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting Have a good day and see you tomorrow! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora-32-20200315.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Failed openQA tests: 10/171 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-32-20200314.n.0): ID: 546101 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546101 ID: 546166 Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_software_raid URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546166 Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-32-20200314.n.0): ID: 546058 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546058 ID: 546084 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546084 ID: 546108 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_background URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546108 ID: 546115 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546115 ID: 546127 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546127 ID: 546194 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546194 ID: 546201 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546201 ID: 546207 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_realmd_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546207 ID: 546208 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_realmd_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546208 Soft failed openQA tests: 17/171 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) New soft failures (same test not soft failed in Fedora-32-20200314.n.0): ID: 546037 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546037 ID: 546111 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_printing URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546111 Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-32-20200314.n.0): ID: 546036 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546036 ID: 546039 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546039 ID: 546041 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546041 ID: 546044 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546044 ID: 546045 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546045 ID: 546065 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546065 ID: 546094 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_printing URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546094 ID: 546096 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_update_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546096 ID: 546110 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546110 ID: 546128 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546128 ID: 546137 Test: x86_64 universal install_serial_console URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546137 ID: 546155 Test: x86_64 universal install_anaconda_text URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546155 ID: 546190 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546190 ID: 546193 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546193 ID: 546200 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546200 Passed openQA tests: 144/171 (x86_64) New passes (same test not passed in Fedora-32-20200314.n.0): ID: 546144 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546144 Skipped non-gating openQA tests: 1 of 173 Installed system changes in test x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload: Average CPU usage changed from 30.89523810 to 15.35714286 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/545905#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546082#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload: Mount /run/user/0 appeared since previous compose Used mem changed from 875 MiB to 732 MiB System load changed from 1.03 to 1.25 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/545923#downloads Current test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/546100#downloads Installed system changes in test x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi: Used mem changed from 754 MiB to 847 MiB Used swap changed from 1 MiB to 7 MiB System load changed from 0.76 to 1.03 Average CPU usage changed from 27.96190476 to 11.05238095 Previous test data: https://openqa.fedoraproject.o
Re: Review swap
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 6:35 AM Jos de Kloe wrote: > I hope someone is interested to swap reviews? > I would like to package the python3 bindings to the eccodes package that > I maintain, which has been split to a separate repository by upstream. > See my review request here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808878 I can take this review. I've got a new dependency of sagemath that needs a review. Can you review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813713 in exchange? -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: RFC: entering luks password on grub level for devices without keyboards
Am 15.03.20 um 13:32 schrieb Vitaly Zaitsev via devel: > On 14.03.2020 13:05, Marius Schwarz wrote: >> If you encrypt the fedora ( or any ) installation with luks, as >> security of a mobile device indicates, you end up without the >> possibility to enter the password, when you do not have an in/external >> keyboard at hand. > You should use TPM 2.0 LUKS unlock instead of using passwords. > I knew someone would bring this up: TMP does not protect your drive, as you could boot with "init=/bin/bash 1" . As long as grub can intercept the boot process TPM is off limits. We had a corresponding security discussion in the SYSTEMD HOMED thread, explaining this. I did not bring this up, if TPM solo would be acceptable ;) Best regards, Marius Schwarz ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora-Cloud-30-20200316.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Passed openQA tests: 1/1 (x86_64) -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
