Re: Yubikey single-factor authentication disabled

2013/3/7 Clive Hills > I suppose I have to bite and ask why yubikey is regarded as single-factor? > I guess it isn't something I know as well as something I have? > > Spot's poll is interesting - I see SecureID hard tokens leading the hard > tokens featured (7am UTC Thursday) but how does an indi

File utf8-all-0.010.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by ppisar

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-utf8-all: 159ac1b5f6b4a8daae35fcf4fed2f794 utf8-all-0.010.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/li

[perl-utf8-all] Import

commit 0e21b1f7ef329458d0e8ca8aa30ba6e17e481455 Author: Petr Písař Date: Thu Mar 7 09:10:50 2013 +0100 Import .gitignore |1 + perl-utf8-all.spec | 69 sources|1 + 3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 0 dele

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 16:13:47 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 14:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: [...] > > ==11843== 56 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 6 of 6 > > ==11843==at 0x4A06409: malloc (in > > /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linu

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 09:42 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 16:13:47 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 14:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > [...] > > > ==11843== 56 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 6 of 6 > > > ==11843==at 0x4A06409

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 19 - March 4 update

- Original Message - > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > On 06/03/13 04:39 AM, Dan Mashal wrote: > > > >> Took libindicator too. Is this deprecated upstream? > > > > > > No, there are commits right up to late Feb in launchpad. But then I > > don't > > immediately

File version-0.9902.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by jplesnik

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-version: edb0ac88be8bed3e370ce12e74261998 version-0.9902.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/lis

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:10:56AM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 09:42 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 16:13:47 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 14:38 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > [...] > > > > ==11843== 56 bytes in 1 blocks

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:55:58AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > The answer seems to be no. This is on a very up to date Rawhide: > > Breakpoint 2, __GI___strdup ( > s=0x6021e0 "unconfined_u:unconfined_r:svirt_socket_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023") > at strdup.c:40 > 40 { > (gdb) bt > #0 __GI__

rubygem-fast_gettext license change

Hi all, I have updated rubygem-fast_gettext to 0.7.0 version in rawhide and it changed license from Public Domain to MIT. Please note that there are also some bit licensed under the same terms as Ruby. Vít -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mai

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd/udev Predictable Network Interface Names

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:28 PM, wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: devel-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org [mailto:devel- >> boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Michal Schmidt >> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:22 PM >> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> Subject: Re: Propose

rubygem-pg licesne change

Hi all, I have updated rubygem-pg to 0.14.0 version in rawhide and it is now shipped under the same terms as Ruby, i.e. BSD or Ruby licenses and some bits are distributed under PostgreSQL license Vít -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:38:54 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > ==11843== 56 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 6 of 6 > ==11843==at 0x4A06409: malloc (in > /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) > ==11843==by 0x38EAC861F9: strdup (strdup.c:42) > ==11843==

Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > So just a couple of notes on the proposal: > > It's phrased in very technical terms here - probably a wise choice - but I > think it's worth noting one of the angles we took in discussing it in > person at FUDCon is that it has the potentia

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 19 - March 4 update

On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 01:20:22PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Package rubygem-acts-as-list (orphan) I've taken this one. Anybody want to co-maintain? > Package spicebird (orphan) -- Darryl L. Pierce http://mcpierce.multiply.com/ "What do you care what people think, Mr. Feynman?" pgptvdt

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 19 - March 4 update

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 07:50:59AM -0500, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 01:20:22PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > Package rubygem-acts-as-list (orphan) > > I've taken this one. Anybody want to co-maintain? > > > Package spicebird (orphan) Second thought, I've decided again

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 13:42 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:38:54 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > ==11843== 56 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 6 of 6 > > ==11843==at 0x4A06409: malloc (in > > /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:20:40 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > It is kind of funny that gcc generates better/fuller > debuginfo with higher optimizations these days. There is even -Og for debugging as the best of -O0 and -O2 but I do not have much practical experience with it yet. Jan -- devel mail

Re: Testing valgrind in rawhide (separate valgrind-debuginfo package)

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:20:40PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 13:42 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:38:54 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > ==11843== 56 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 6 of 6 > > > ==11843==at 0x4A06409:

Re: Mediawiki 1.20.2 has landed

On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 21:08 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 03/06/2013 10:41 AM, James Laska wrote: > >* Fedora 18 > >* mediawiki-validator - > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5086055 > >* mediawiki-semantic - > >

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 19 - March 4 update

Dne 7.3.2013 14:10, Darryl L. Pierce napsal(a): On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 07:50:59AM -0500, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 01:20:22PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: Package rubygem-acts-as-list (orphan) I've taken this one. Anybody want to co-maintain? Package spicebird (orphan

Re: rawhide report: 20130307 changes

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:10:08PM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: > [kdebase3] > kdebase3-pim-ioslaves-3.5.10-21.fc18.x86_64 requires > libsasl2.so.2()(64bit) > [kdevelop-python] > kdevelop-python-1.4.1-2.fc19.i686 requires libpython2.7-kdevelop.so.1.0 > kdevelop-python-1.4.

Re: rawhide report: 20130307 changes

On 7.3.2013 16:00, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:10:08PM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: [kdebase3] kdebase3-pim-ioslaves-3.5.10-21.fc18.x86_64 requires libsasl2.so.2()(64bit) [kdevelop-python] kdevelop-python-1.4.1-2.fc19.i686 requires libpython2.7-kd

Fwd: problem with extended attributes

hi possibly better suited to the devel-list setfattr does not work here on F17/F18 with the latest kernels which is a huge problem with netatalk, especially if you try to build and get working netatalk-3.0.x the machines are booted with "selinux=0" at the kernel-line but this should and must not

Review Request 16: Initial Packaging Work

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/16/ --- Review request for blockerbugs. Bugs: 337 https://fedorahosted.org/

Re: Yubikey single-factor authentication disabled

On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 07:09:13 + Clive Hills wrote: > I suppose I have to bite and ask why yubikey is regarded as > single-factor? I guess it isn't something I know as well as something > I have? The way we had yubikeys deployed before (and what this thread is talking about) was single factor.

Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 21:07:45 -0800 Adam Williamson wrote: > > Sure. Note however that we don't currently run autoqa on rawhide > > builds and that was at least the initial target for this. ;) > > Um. I think we do? I see results from rpmguard (and other tests) for > builds with 'fc19' in them a

Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

On 5. 3. 2013 at 18:50:45, Colin Walters wrote: > 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

Re: New Fedora openid provider (fas-openid) in service

On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 07:21:49PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On 06/03/13 06:41 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > >I encountered an issue recently with pypi.org, where it was treating > >http://sgallagh.id.fedoraproject.org and > >https://sgallagh.id.fedoraproject.org as separate accounts (up to

Re: New Fedora openid provider (fas-openid) in service

Once upon a time, Toshio Kuratomi said: > Note -- I made the same decision but I found out from puiterwijk that that > should be raising an error in the relying party (the website asking that you > auth with fedora's openid). The reason? We don't have SSL certificates for > all possible [usernam

asciidoc ownership

I orhpaned asciidoc, although I expect Stanislav to pick it up. Thank you Stanislav. thanks, -chris -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Problem in rawhide with ld and weak symbols?

Building LibreOffice for x86_64 starting to fail in an odd way recently, , I stripped that down to what I would assume is a newly introduced bug in how ld resolves weak references? Given a test.s of

Re: Problem in rawhide with ld and weak symbols?

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > Building LibreOffice for x86_64 starting to fail in an odd way recently, < > http://koji.fedoraproject.**org/koji/getfile?taskID=** > 5091173&name=build.log&offset=**-4000

Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

Le Jeu 7 mars 2013 17:27, Jan Zelený a écrit : > Also, you still have to put this information into the old package somehow, > i.e. rebuild it. If you don't do that, you will miss a piece of the > timeline. > > Much easier to bump epoch or release IMO. You may possibly work around this problem by

yum >= 3.4.3-70: yum check reports "X has installed obsoletes Y"

Hi, Starting approx one week ago, yum check all returns messages such as fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch has installed obsoletes redhat-logos: fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch has installed obsoletes gnome-logos: fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch fedora-rel

Re: Problem in rawhide with ld and weak symbols?

On 03/07/2013 08:31 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote: On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Stephan Bergmann mailto:sberg...@redhat.com>> wrote: Building LibreOffice for x86_64 starting to fail in an odd way recently,

Re: Mediawiki 1.20.2 has landed

On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 21:08 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 03/06/2013 10:41 AM, James Laska wrote: > >* Fedora 18 > >* mediawiki-validator - > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5086055 > >* mediawiki-semantic - > >

Re: yum >= 3.4.3-70: yum check reports "X has installed obsoletes Y"

On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:08:08 +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: > Hi, > > Starting approx one week ago, yum check all returns messages such as > > fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch has installed obsoletes redhat-logos: > fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch > fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch has installed

File URI-Escape-XS-0.10.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by eseyman

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-URI-Escape-XS: 23453334534498de37a758de3b077793 URI-Escape-XS-0.10.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/m

[perl-URI-Escape-XS] Initial import.

commit ed5c6653106508d7247fa475538377f7578b2559 Author: Emmanuel Seyman Date: Thu Mar 7 21:24:24 2013 +0100 Initial import. .gitignore |1 + perl-URI-Escape-XS.spec | 65 +++ sources |1 + 3 files changed,

Re: yum >= 3.4.3-70: yum check reports "X has installed obsoletes Y"

On 07.03.2013 21:24, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:08:08 +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: Hi, Starting approx one week ago, yum check all returns messages such as fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch has installed obsoletes redhat-logos: fedora-logos-19.0.0-1.fc19.noarch fedora-logos-

Re: yum >= 3.4.3-70: yum check reports "X has installed obsoletes Y"

On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:36:12 +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: > >> It started with yum-3.4.3-70.fc19. Is this a bug in yum >= 3.4.3-70, or > >> is this a problem with my rpm db? Both yum erase and rpm -e >> installed obsolete package> tell me that the indicated package is not > >> installed. > > You mis

Re: yum >= 3.4.3-70: yum check reports "X has installed obsoletes Y"

On 07.03.2013 22:03, Michael Schwendt wrote: On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:36:12 +0100, Sandro Mani wrote: It started with yum-3.4.3-70.fc19. Is this a bug in yum >= 3.4.3-70, or is this a problem with my rpm db? Both yum erase and rpm -e tell me that the indicated package is not installed. You mis

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 19 - March 4 update

On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 04:44 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > Well, I'm the maintainer of bamf-qt, same reason as Adam's - > my try to package Unity-2d before they decided to get rid of > QML based one and now, finally, decided to go back to the QML > path ;-). So we will see if we could continue w

Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 07:48 -0500, Mark Bidewell wrote: > Are there any records of these FUDCon discussions? Creating defined > core of functionality seems like it could solve several problems. I > would be curious as to what ideas we proposed on that. I don't know for sure, but I'm not aware of

Re: [emelfm2] remove vendor tag from desktop file. https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/247

On 03/06/2013 06:06 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: And rest assured, "dropping very old obsoletes" isn't controversial in general. That's my opinion. What's controversial is how to do it. It ought not be done with just a "clean up spec to follow current guidelines" entry. Point at a commit where y

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 19 - March 4 update

On 03/07/2013 05:13 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: Eh. Given that Canonical now appear to be building Ubuntu OS, I have very little interest in trying to package Unity any more. I don't think it would make sense to package any of the bits individually unless you buy into their whole roadmap which in

Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

On 03/07/2013 05:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: I don't know for sure, but I'm not aware of any, sadly. A lot of the discussion happened in a big free-for-all that ensued from the flaming wreckage of spot's talk on a proposed new release cycle (not spot's fault, but the discussion of his proposa

Re: yum >= 3.4.3-70: yum check reports "X has installed obsoletes Y"

On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 22:03 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > The Yum changelog is not detailed enough to tell, If I may. The handling of both this and the bundled presto^Wdeltrarpm new yum ..features on the part of the current yum developers is disappointing. I am trying to find the devel mail

Re: [emelfm2] remove vendor tag from desktop file. https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/247

On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:56:32 -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Agreed but I just get a general feeling that some package maintainers > don't really want others touching their packages. Some don't like it that another name appears in "their" %changelog. Some even overwrite/revert changes with their

Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/07/2013 05:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> >> I don't know for sure, but I'm not aware of any, sadly. A lot of the >> discussion happened in a big free-for-all that ensued from the flaming >> wreckage of spot's talk on a proposed new r

Re: Maintainers wanted for packages from 2013-02-27 FESCo Meeting

On Sáb, 2013-03-02 at 10:26 +0100, Michael Scherer wrote: > Le vendredi 01 mars 2013 à 00:24 +, Sérgio Basto a écrit : > > Hi, I also use clamav as daemon and I use fedora package, recently I > > upgrade the box, that use clamav, to Fedora 17. I had to do a new > > clamd.service based on what

dial-up comps group?

I see all the various desktop envs install the 'dial-up' group, which has: ppp isdn4k-utils linux-atm lrzsz minicom ModemManager rp-pppoe wvdial efax pptp statserial I can see people perhaps using ModemManager (when they have some

Re: dial-up comps group?

On 3/7/2013 8:50 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: I see all the various desktop envs install the 'dial-up' group, which has: ppp isdn4k-utils linux-atm lrzsz minicom ModemManager rp-pppoe wvdial efax pptp statserial I can see pe

Re: MariaDB replacing MySQL

On 03/06/2013 08:44 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: File conflicts within the server packages might still be a concern, I don't know. Per the decision quoted above, FESCo would prefer the maintainers of the two servers to agree on a solution. If the maintainers don't reach a solution or if one of th