On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> libmatekeyring
> obsoleted by: mate-desktop
> mate-keyring
> obsoleted by: mate-desktop
We know about these 2 and will obsolete them soon.
Thanks,
Dan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproje
On 12/04/2013 12:10 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
>
> This is just a pain. Can someone explain to me why this is good?
>
Good or not, this is not the right question to ask.
* Is this necessarry, and are the benefits worth the pains? *
This change is Sofa King stupid. Why couldn't we have just enabl
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Brendan Jones
wrote:
> On 12/05/2013 12:28 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Brendan Jones
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/05/2013 12:11 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 12/04/2013 04:56 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
>
>
> Patc
On 12/05/2013 12:28 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Brendan Jones
wrote:
On 12/05/2013 12:11 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 12/04/2013 04:56 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
Patching is not a problem. Unnecessary is the question. Explain to me
(not you in particular Rahul) how
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Brendan Jones
wrote:
> On 12/05/2013 12:11 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
>>
>> On 12/04/2013 04:56 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> Patching is not a problem. Unnecessary is the question. Explain to me
>>> (not you in particular Rahul) how these printf's can possibly be
>
It seems that this package is no longer needed. Please let me know
there is a reason that we should keep it. Will retire on all Fedora
releases next week.
Thanks,
Dan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On 12/05/2013 12:11 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 12/04/2013 04:56 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
Patching is not a problem. Unnecessary is the question. Explain to me
(not you in particular Rahul) how these printf's can possibly be exploited?
char *output;
output = get_user_input(...);
printf
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 05:11:16PM -0600, Ian Pilcher wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 04:56 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
> > Patching is not a problem. Unnecessary is the question. Explain to me
> > (not you in particular Rahul) how these printf's can possibly be exploited?
>
> char *output;
>
> output =
On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 21:38:49 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 02:58:47PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 12:08:08 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > > I've read this several times, and
> > >
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unver
On 12/04/2013 04:56 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
> Patching is not a problem. Unnecessary is the question. Explain to me
> (not you in particular Rahul) how these printf's can possibly be exploited?
char *output;
output = get_user_input(...);
printf(output);
What happens when the user enters %
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 11:56:23PM +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
> Patching is not a problem. Unnecessary is the question. Explain to
> me (not you in particular Rahul) how these printf's can possibly be
> exploited?
Google for sudo format string exploit
Yours Tony
pgpit7eFTE85S.pgp
Description:
On 12/04/2013 09:39 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
Overkill if you ask me,
It might be appear to be one till it ends up avoiding or mitigating a
security issue. It is just a bunch of trivial changes and I am sure you
can ask for help f
Am 04.12.2013 21:15, schrieb Sérgio Basto:
> On Qua, 2013-12-04 at 12:42 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> Basically it landed too late to get into Beta, and we don't want to
>> ship final with a brand new kernel. It will be a update after
>> release.
>> This allows the installer images to use a know
Thanks to those that were able to join us for the status meeting today, for
those unable the minutes are posted below:
Minutes:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-12-04/fedora-meeting-1.2013-12-04-21.00.html
Minutes (text):
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 07:18:31AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > Dne 4.12.2013 12:37, Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
> > > (tkinter is actually a subpackage of python itself)
> >
> > I guess you know what I mean here, but to be clear:
> >
> > tkinter is only an exam
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 02:58:47PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 12:08:08 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> > I've read this several times, and
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UnversionedDocdirs
> >
> > and I still don't understand what this message mean
python-ordereddict is obsolete also:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=100
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Once again, there are obsolete packages still found in Rawhide. "Obsolete"
here really means they are obsoleted (=replaced!) by some other package.
"Undead" here means they are not marked "dead" in dist git.
Please note that retiring packages is easier nowadays:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_
Hi
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
>
> Overkill if you ask me,
>
It might be appear to be one till it ends up avoiding or mitigating a
security issue. It is just a bunch of trivial changes and I am sure you
can ask for help for patches if needed.
Rahul
--
devel mailing l
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Qua, 2013-12-04 at 12:42 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> Basically it landed too late to get into Beta, and we don't want to
>> ship final with a brand new kernel. It will be a update after
>> release.
>> This allows the installer images to use
On Qua, 2013-12-04 at 12:42 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Basically it landed too late to get into Beta, and we don't want to
> ship final with a brand new kernel. It will be a update after
> release.
> This allows the installer images to use a known stable kernel, and
> folks who want the new one t
On 12/04/2013 07:59 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
I'm sorry, but I can't see why any of my packages (10+) are at risk
This is just a best practice to mitigate any risks that might exist just
like any of the other security improvements
Below are the minutes from today's Blocker Review Meeting. We made it
through all the listed blocker and freeze exception proposals. Looking
forward to the Go/No-Go Meeting tomorrow...
==
#fedora-blocker-review: F20-blocker-review
===
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 19:33:32 +,
Sérgio Basto wrote:
Hi,
kernel 3.12 is out a long time, and still do see it on Fedora 20, to me
doesn't make sense update it , just after lunching , should be test on
test before .
The politic of update stable kernel is fast to please me , sometimes in
m
On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 19:35:43 +
Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> Hi,
> kernel 3.12 is out a long time, and still don't see it on Fedora 20,
> to me doesn't make sense not update it, you will go update just after
> lunching ? Should be test on test before . The politic of update
> stables kernel is far
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> Hi,
> kernel 3.12 is out a long time, and still don't see it on Fedora 20, to me
> doesn't make sense not update it, you will go update just after lunching ?
> Should be test on test before .
> The politic of update stables kernel is far to
Hi,
kernel 3.12 is out a long time, and still don't see it on Fedora 20, to me
doesn't make sense not update it, you will go update just after lunching ?
Should be test on test before .
The politic of update stables kernel is far to please me , sometimes in
middle of a stable release you bump a
Hi,
kernel 3.12 is out a long time, and still do see it on Fedora 20, to me
doesn't make sense update it , just after lunching , should be test on
test before .
The politic of update stable kernel is fast to please me , sometimes in
middle of a stable release you bump kernel , almost without testi
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 07:11:40 PM Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote:
>> > Hi list(s),
>> >
>> > We still doesn't have gnat compiler for %{arm} in Fedora. We (Ada
>> > community) have compiled
On Wednesday, December 04, 2013 07:11:40 PM Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote:
> > Hi list(s),
> >
> > We still doesn't have gnat compiler for %{arm} in Fedora. We (Ada
> > community) have compiled gcc with ada support using gcc-4.8.2 src.rpm
> > and test
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Pavel Zhukov wrote:
> Hi list(s),
>
> We still doesn't have gnat compiler for %{arm} in Fedora. We (Ada community)
> have compiled gcc with ada support using gcc-4.8.2 src.rpm and tested in.
> It seems workable. At least we were able to compile most of the
> packag
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
===
#fedora-meeting: FESCO (2013-12-04)
===
Meeting started by sgallagh at 17:59:34 UTC. The full logs are available
at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2013-12-04/fesco.2
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/605
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/605/0001-Ticket-605-support-TLS-1.1-adding-backward-compatibi.patch
Description: commit 88d4beccb9d9f7bb89f5e24c47828d7516ba7ca8 always
expected the NSS version supporting TLS 1.2. It broke the build on
the
Hi
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Brendan Jones wrote:
>
> I'm sorry, but I can't see why any of my packages (10+) are at risk
>
This is just a best practice to mitigate any risks that might exist just
like any of the other security improvements we make from time to time.
Even if you don't see
On 12/04/2013 07:29 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 07:10:39PM +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
This is just a pain. Can someone explain to me why this is good?
If you read the bug description you'll see the link which
answers your question.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 07:10:39PM +0100, Brendan Jones wrote:
>
> This is just a pain. Can someone explain to me why this is good?
If you read the bug description you'll see the link which
answers your question.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Format-Security-FAQ
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange
This is just a pain. Can someone explain to me why this is good?
Original Message
Subject: [Bug 1037125] hydrogen FTBFS if "-Werror=format-security" flag
is used
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 11:33:47 +
From: bugzi...@redhat.com
To: brendan.jones...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.r
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2013-12-05 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2013-12-05 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PST
2013-12-05 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EST
2013-12-05 1
Hi list(s),
We still doesn't have gnat compiler for %{arm} in Fedora. We (Ada community)
have compiled gcc with ada support using gcc-4.8.2 src.rpm and tested in.
It seems workable. At least we were able to compile most of the
packages from the stack with it.
I'd like to discuss way how to ge
Good day all,
Please join us today (Wednesday, December 4th) at 4PM EST (9PM UTC)
for the Fedora ARM status meeting in #fedora-meeting-1 on Freenode.
On the agenda so far..
1) Kernel Status Update
2) Aarch64 - Status Update
- Images
3) F20 TC4 - Testing Summary
4) F21 Wish list
5
Hi,everyone
http://www.redhat.com/archives/shrike-list/2003-April/msg00069.html
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/StackTraces
http://old-en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Debuginfo
This document said:"passing -g to gcc or g++". And "Note that the default
CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS of the distro already contain -g
Hi,
Thanks for replying to my query. I also got same help on #fedora-kde
channel.
Regards,
Parag
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Dne 4.12.2013 15:47, Florian Weimer napsal(a):
On 12/04/2013 03:26 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
I got a format-security flag FTBFS bug[1] for fontmatrix package
which I maintain in Fedora. I am confused on how to fix line 86 qDebug()
from http://fpaste.org/58952/13861663/ to fix this FTBFS.
C
On 12/04/2013 03:26 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
I got a format-security flag FTBFS bug[1] for fontmatrix package
which I maintain in Fedora. I am confused on how to fix line 86 qDebug()
from http://fpaste.org/58952/13861663/ to fix this FTBFS.
Can someone help to fix this?
This should do it
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FESCo
meeting Wednesday at 18:00UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net.
*That's today: sorry about the late message. There's no surprise new
business, though.*
To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at
http://fedoraprojec
Hi,
I got a format-security flag FTBFS bug[1] for fontmatrix package which I
maintain in Fedora. I am confused on how to fix line 86 qDebug() from
http://fpaste.org/58952/13861663/ to fix this FTBFS.
Can someone help to fix this?
Regards,
Parag.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=
On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 12:08:08 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I've read this several times, and
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UnversionedDocdirs
>
> and I still don't understand what this message means.
My message or a specific bugzilla ticket?
> How would this cause subpackag
On Út, 2013-12-03 at 22:28 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 12/03/2013 07:58 PM, Tomas Mraz wrote:
>
> > I'd suggest to follow the "Medium term goals" from the page. That means
> > to choose the backend from one of the following libraries (in the order
> > of preference).
> > 1. NSS
> >
commit 667e7ee070e27bc7007b564e953249b085bd50a8
Author: Petr Písař
Date: Wed Dec 4 13:58:50 2013 +0100
Filter private module Locale::Codes::LangFam_Retired from dependencies
perl-Locale-Codes.spec |7 +--
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Local
Matthew Miller writes:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:42:44PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> The only issue compared to TC3 is one more file with wrong selinux
>> context (/var/log/cron).
>> So, for TC4:
>> # restorecon -R -v -n -e /proc -e /sys -e /dev -e/run -e/tmp /
>> restorecon reset /var/
A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Fennec:
5c2ea67ed482dfa6f4c536eb720538e7 Fennec-2.011.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/listin
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 08:39:21AM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> End of August I've opened tickets about duplicate and potentially
> conflicting (because if noarch <-> arch differences) %doc files.
> The response from packagers has not been brilliant so far.
>
> These are _package bugs_ specifi
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 12:02:53PM +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
> [libguestfs]
> 1:libguestfs-1.25.12-1.fc21.i686 requires libprocps.so.1
> [open-vm-tools]
> open-vm-tools-9.4.0-1.fc21.i686 requires libprocps.so.1(LIBPROCPS_0)
> open-vm-tools-9.4.0-1.fc21.i686 requires libp
Compose started at Wed Dec 4 07:15:03 UTC 2013
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[avro]
avro-mapred-1.7.5-1.fc20.noarch requires hadoop-mapreduce
avro-mapred-1.7.5-1.fc20.noarch requires hadoop-client
[blueman]
blueman-1.23-7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037241
Dhiru Kholia changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1038083
Referenced Bugs:
https://bug
#fedora-meeting: Env and Stacks (2013-12-03)
Meeting started by mmaslano at 16:02:38 UTC. The full logs are available
at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2013-12-03/env_and_stacks.2013-12-03-
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 09:54 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 00:07:22 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > If you mentioned a list of bugs or at least a shared string from the
> > descriptions of all of them, maybe provenpackagers could take some time
> > to help out. (Well, I g
> I'd suggest to follow the "Medium term goals" from the page. That means
> to choose the backend from one of the following libraries (in the order
> of preference).
> 1. NSS
> 2. GNUTLS (with nettle as crypto backend, but nettle never used
> directly by applications)
> 3. Op
On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 00:07:22 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> If you mentioned a list of bugs or at least a shared string from the
> descriptions of all of them, maybe provenpackagers could take some time
> to help out. (Well, I guess we could go digging in your bugzilla
> history, but it seems lik
# F20 Final Blocker Review meeting #4
# Date: 2013-12-04
# Time: 17:00 UTC (12:00 EST, 09:00 PST)
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net
Well folks, we still have proposed blockers on the list, so you know
what that means: time for some more blocker review in just eight short
hours
On 2013-12-04, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Petr Pisar wrote:
>> [snip] and GPLv2 and GPLv3+.
>
> Huh? WTF is upstream smoking there?
>
Upstream releases a tar ball bundling a lot of subprojects. Thus the
complicated license. I do a licence review each new release and I always
find new licenses. This tim
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 08:39 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> End of August I've opened tickets about duplicate and potentially
> conflicting (because if noarch <-> arch differences) %doc files.
> The response from packagers has not been brilliant so far.
>
> These are _package bugs_ specific to Fe
62 matches
Mail list logo
