devel November 2019

devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

226 participants
297 discussions

[HEADS UP] -Wl,--as-needed is added in rawhide
by Igor Gnatenko 26 Jun '22

26 Jun '22

It's in redhat-rpm-config-118-1.fc30. If it causes any problems for you - let me know. In the meantime, you can use `%undefine _ld_as_needed` to disable it. Thanks for attention! -- -Igor Gnatenko

4 4

Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: iptables-nft-default
by Ben Cotton 04 Nov '21

04 Nov '21

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/iptables-nft-default == Summary == Make iptables-nft the preferred iptables variant. == Owner == * Name: [[User:psutter| Phil Sutter]] * Email: psutter(a)redhat.com == Detailed Description == <code>iptables-nft</code> package provides alternative implementations of iptables, ip6tables, ebtables and arptables and associated save and restore commands. These use nftables internally while providing the same look'n'feel as the original tools. Users may choose between both implementations using <code>alternatives</code> tool. Upstream considers the traditional implementations legacy and therefore renamed the binaries adding '-legacy' suffix. In Fedora, same has been done to <code>arptables</code> and <code>ebtables</code> packages, namely renaming them to <code>arptables-legacy</code> and <code>ebtables-legacy</code>. Legacy <code>iptables</code> and <code>ip6tables</code> remain in <code>iptables</code> package, which in fact is the only one other packages depend upon. To change the status quo, two measures are planned: === Raise priority of nft-variants in <code>alternatives</code> === Currently, legacy variants are installed with priority 10 and nft variants with priority 5. This must be changed as otherwise installing <code>iptables-legacy</code> in a system with <code>iptables-nft</code> installed would change the active alternative (since they are in automatic mode by default). On the other hand, existing systems using legacy variants should not be changed by a system update. Therefore nft variants' priorities should be chosen to match legacy ones. === Rename <code>iptables</code> package === New name should be <code>iptables-legacy</code> which aligns with ebtables and arptables and reflects upstream status. To resolve dependencies, <code>Provides: iptables</code> statement will be added to <code>iptables-nft</code> package. This should automatically change the default variant to nft. == Benefit to Fedora == * RHEL8 ships nft-variants exclusively, make Fedora align with that by default while still providing the option to fall back to legacy tools. * New features and improvements are likely to hit nft-variants due to the possibility nftables backend allows for. Although at this point some legacy features (e.g. ebtables among match) are still missing, others are already there (like, e.g. xtables-monitor tool) or are being upstreamed right now (improved tool performance when dealing with large rulesets). == Scope == * Proposal owners: Changes are rather simple: Rename <code>iptables</code> package, add <code>Provides:</code> line to <code>iptables-nft</code> package, change priorities used when calling <code>alternatives</code>. * Other developers: N/A The changed tools may cause regressions among packages using them and it affects only new installations (or those manually switched over). So while no explicit effort is required from them, they should be made aware of the change so they take a possible regression in iptables into account, quickly test against legacy variant and file a ticket (or complain to the right person) if that fixes the problem. * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8934 #8934] * Policies and guidelines: No change required * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) == Upgrade/compatibility impact == Due to the package rename and <code>Provides:</code> line, upgrades will pull in <code>iptables-nft</code> package. But due to the equal alternatives priorities, existing choices won't be changed and so existing installations shouldn't be harmed (apart from forced installation of <code>iptables-nft</code> package). Sadly, there are a few known issues, like e.g. missing support for ebtables broute table or among match and a few iptables targets/matches. Users depending on such features are advised to install <code>iptables-legacy</code> package and switch variants using <code>alternatives</code>. == How To Test == Any users of iptables/ebtables/arptables should switch to nft-variants using alternatives tool (if necessary) and check that everything works as before. Any issues should be reported despite the known compatibility issues described above since knowledge about who uses the missing features is valuable information for both up- and downstream. == User Experience == Ideally look'n'feel shouldn't change. Since iptables-nft does not need a lock file anymore, no problems with stale xtables-lock or parallel iptables calls in different mount namespaces are expected anymore. Given the changes currently being upstreamed, users dealing with large rulesets should see a performance increase when manipulating the ruleset (lower run-times of iptables or iptables-restore, packet processing speed should not really change). == Dependencies == Other packages depending on iptables: * NFStest * clatd * ctdb * fail2ban-server * firewalld * fwsnort * iptstate * libvirt-daemon-driver-network * libvirt-daemon-driver-nwfilter * moby-engine * nfacct * origin * podman * psad * python3-ipatests * ravada * rkt * shorewall * shorewall-init * shorewall-lite * shorewall6 * shorewall6-lite * sshuttle * sslsplit * ufw Since nft-variants are supposed to be drop-in replacements, no outside contribution is needed in order to perform this change. == Contingency Plan == * Contingency mechanism: Nothing needs to be done, the change should be atomic. * Contingency deadline: N/A * Blocks release? No == Documentation == * https://wiki.nftables.org/wiki-nftables/index.php/Legacy_xtables_tools * Man pages: ** [http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/xtables-nft.8.html xtables-nft.8] ** [http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/xtables-legacy.8.html xtables-legacy.8] ** [http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/xtables-monitor.8.html xtables-monitor.8] -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis

6 10

Fedora 32 System-Wide Change: glusterfs dropping 32-bit arches
by Kaleb Keithley 19 Oct '21

19 Oct '21

There is a proposal[1] in upstream GlusterFS to drop 32-bit arches. The original proposal was to drop 32-bit with GlusterFS-7. GlusterFS-7 will land in Fedora 31/rawhide soon. More than likely though it will not be official until GlusterFS-8, which will probably land, accordingly, after Fedora 31 GA in Fedora 32/rawhide. [1] https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/702 -- Kaleb

11 25

git push permission denied
by Neal Becker 10 Feb '21

10 Feb '21

I just had to setup a new machine, and new ssh keys. I visited https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/user/edit/xxxx I chose my new id_rsa.pub to upload. But I get: git push --verbose Pushing to ssh://nbecker@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/mercurial Permission denied (publickey). fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly Hints?

4 5

Server Side Public License (SSPL) v1
by Tom Callaway 21 Jan '21

21 Jan '21

After review, Fedora has determined that the Server Side Public License v1 (SSPL) is not a Free Software License. It is the belief of Fedora that the SSPL is intentionally crafted to be aggressively discriminatory towards a specific class of users. Additionally, it seems clear that the intent of the license author is to cause Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt towards commercial users of software under that license. To consider the SSPL to be "Free" or "Open Source" causes that shadow to be cast across all other licenses in the FOSS ecosystem, even though none of them carry that risk. It is also worth nothing that while there is a draft for a "v2" of the SSPL: A) It is not final. B) It is not in use anywhere at this time (as far as we know). C) The intent of the v2 draft text is not changed from the v1 license currently in use. We have updated our "Bad License" list to include SSPLv1. No software under that license may be included in Fedora (including EPEL and COPRs). Thanks, Tom Callaway Fedora Legal

4 6

Re: NeuroFedora review swaps
by Ankur Sinha 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 15:47:00 +0100, J. Scheurich wrote: > > > I'd like to get this package reviewed please: > > > > - python-pyscaffold: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669913# > > > > Would anyone like to swap reviews? > > I would review it for wdune sponsoring. Sorry---I'm not current with the wdune scenario. I assumed you meant that you'd review it unofficially as part of the work to get sponsored to the packagers group: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group… I'm not a sponsor yet so I cannot sponsor you to the group myself, but once you've done a few reviews, a sponsor will be happy to take a look at them and guide you through the sponsorship process. If you've submitted a review ticket for wdune already, I will be happy to review it and provide comments. -- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha https://ankursinha.in Time zone: Europe/London

6 27

Reproducible builds/bootstrap
by Pablo Greco 09 Oct '20

09 Oct '20

I'm starting to work on a project to make Fedora fully reproducible and bootstrappable from scratch. I know it is a long term plan and still working on the steps, but it would be good to know the current status, if there is an internal interest in this, if someone is already working (or planning to). Thanks for the info. Pablo

8 11

Headsup: dbus 1.12.10-1.fc29 is missing systemd dbus.service file, breaking almost everything
by Hans de Goede 04 Aug '20

04 Aug '20

Hi All, Just a quick headsup for users following Fedora 29, the dbus 1.12.10-1.fc29 build is missing the systemd dbus.service file, breaking almost everything. Instead it contains a dbus-daemon.service file, but the dbus.socket file expects a matching dbus.service, not dbus-daemon.service. So either hold of on applying updates until this is fixed or exclude dbus. Regards, Hans

17 28

Ditch RPM in favor of DPKG
by Dridi Boukelmoune 19 Jul '20

19 Jul '20

Greetings packagers, I know how important RPM is to the Fedora Project, but it breaks everything downstream and we'd be better off using DPKG as we should have from day one. I'm calling this initiative fedpkg: Fedora Embraces DPKG. A bit of background here: I build both RPMs and DEBs for $DAYJOB and until recently my workflow was quite painful because I needed extra steps between git checkout and git push that involves a VM, because what we ship as apt is in reality apt-rpm. It finally got enough on my nerves to locally build the things I needed and after a month I have already amortized my efforts with the time I save not having to deal with needless extra hoops. In order to successfully build debs on Fedora I needed 4 packages that I'm now submitting for review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=gnu-config https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=strip-nondeterminism https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=sbuild https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=apt I need more than reviews here. Three of those packages are heavy on Perl code, and I'm not a Perl Monk. I tried to CC perl-sig as per the guidelines [1] (also tried with the mailing list address) but bugzilla replied kindly: CC: perl-sig did not match anything Apt is a mix of C, Perl and C++ code, so I would be reassured if I could have a C++ co-maintainer too. I'm only a C developer so if something goes wrong outside of the C realm that would be helpful. Two of those packages should be runtime dependencies of debhelper. The current apt package should be renamed to apt-rpm, I will look up the procedure for that to happen. I understand that when someone sees they should run "apt-get install foo" somewhere on the web it's helpful for non-savvy users that this JustWorks(tm) [2], but apt-rpm is dead upstream and it shouldn't be advertised as apt. I hope I CC'd everyone that should get this heads up, and hope to find help for the reviews and co-maintainership. The packaging does nothing fancy, there are quirks here and there but overall it was rather easy to put together. And of course I would be happy to help with reviews too in exchange. And thanks again to the mock developers, its design is so much better than either sbuild or pdebuild that I barely have pain points left when it comes to RPM packaging. Thanks, Dridi [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/#_perl_sig [2] I'm not against apt-rpm in the base install for example

17 44

Default editor for LXQt spin
by Raphael Groner 25 Jun '20

25 Jun '20

Hi, writing to general devel list intentionally. No idea if all members of lxqt-sig list can read here, too and especially @zsun. Is there any sense why @lxqt-sig is member of packaging for featherpad? LXQt SIG decided to have enki in the spin as the default editor. Featherpad is not part of LXQt upstream. @lupinix Could you remove lxqt-sig from the members in pagure? Regards, Raphael

3 2

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

devel November 2019