#6333: delete errant rhos-8.0-rhel-7 from erlang dist-git
----------------------+------------------------
Reporter: jeckersb | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: git
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
----------------------+------------------------
I accidentally pushed a rhos-8.0-rhel-7 branch to the fedora remote on the
erlang repo, and the commit hook won't let me delete it by pushing an
empty ref overtop. Please delete this branch manually (or better, tell me
how to delete it if I can do it myself!
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/erlang.git/log/?h=rhos-8.0-rhel-7
Thanks!
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6333>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6261: Create secondary release staging SOP
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 23 Final | Component: other
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
Should be similar to the one for primary I guess:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stage_final_release_for_mirrors
It came up when I noticed that the CHECKSUM files for secondary test
releases are not signed:
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora-
secondary/releases/test/23_Alpha/Server/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Server-23
-ppc64le-CHECKSUM
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6261>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6289: Add license information to new sphinx docs
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 22 Final | Component: other
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
With the conversion from the wiki to sphinx, the license information of
the content got lost. The wiki contains the statement {{{Content is
available under Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported unless otherwise
noted.}}}.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6289>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6334: script needed for openh264
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: ausil | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 24 Alpha | Component: koji
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
a basic outline of the steps needed
koji move-pkg <source tag> <dest-tag>
list the latest rpms in the tag
sign the rpms something like "NSS_HASH_ALG_SUPPORT=+MD5 sigul sign-rpms
--v3-signature --store-in-koji fedora-24
/mnt/koji/packages/openh264/1.5.2/0.3.git21e44bd.fc24/*/*rpm -o
tmp/signed/"
import the signatures into koji "koji import-sig tmp/signed/*"
write out the signed rpms
mash the repo
sign the repo metadata
tar up the repo
create email attching the tarball and send it to the folks over at cisco.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6334>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6286: Please sign all RC and TC images
-------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: genodeftest | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: koji
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-------------------------+------------------------
Current situation: TC and RC images are provided on an server that does
not force encryption ( http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/ ) and
does not provide any signatures (see e.g.
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/23_RC10/Workstation/x86_64/iso/
).
Attacker model:
* many government intelligence agencies including (but not limited to) NSA
and GCHQ
* some companies
* criminals
have an interest to intrude PCs of most people in the world. Especially
testers (often software developers themselves) are at risk for being
attacked since they are a high-value target for redistributing malware.
Having unsigned software to download is one way to make this possible.
Please provide Signatures for all RC and TC images in the future.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6286>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6339: Please drop epel-rpm-macros from buildsys group
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: remi | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 24 Alpha | Component: koji
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
This package brings a very low benefit and create very bad issues.
Broken SCL build: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1301358
Even if SCL are not allowed in Fedora, this is a huge blocker for some of
us (working on RHSCL or CentOS-SCL)
More, the spec file in EPEL can now be incompatible with RHEL / CentOS
build system (where these macros don't exists).
If really you want such things, please open a RH bug to have them include
upstream.
Having such workaround only in EPEL seems a terrible bad idea.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6339>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6262: drop rawhide-stable tag and consider master branch to be always stable
-------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: till | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: other
Keywords: meeting | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-------------------------+------------------------
Since we require patch reviews for the rel-eng pagure repo and use it for
running buildbranched/buildrawhide, we can IMHO drop using the rawhide-
stable tag and just consider the master branch to be always stable enough
to run the scripts from it directly.
AFAICS only ansible needs to be adjusted to change the crontab to not
checkout rawhide-stable but master for primary and secondaries systems.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6262>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6346: Don't include 32-bit krb5-server{,-ldap} in 64-bit trees
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: rharwood | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 24 Alpha | Component: mash
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
The plugins in krb5-server and krb5-server-ldap are only used by the KDC,
so there's no point in including versions of them that don't match
architecture of the KDC binary. To that end, could we stop distributing
the 32bit version of krb5-server and krb5-server-ldap (i.e.
krb5-server.i686, krb5-server.s390, krb5-server.ppc) in the 64-bit tree?
Thanks!
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6346>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6342: Broken dependencies - stable release not in repository after 5 days
---------------------+------------------------
Reporter: ondrejj | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: koji
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
---------------------+------------------------
According to bodhi, python-configargparse package should be in stable
repository 2 days ago and has been released 5 days ago, but still not in
testing and/or stable repositories for Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-291dc1c23f
[root@work ~]# dnf --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=updates --enablerepo
=updates-testing list python2-configargparse
Last metadata expiration check performed 0:31:50 ago on Wed Jan 27
09:19:09 2016.
Installed Packages
python2-configargparse.noarch 0.9.3-3.fc23
@updates
[root@work ~]#
Should be version 0.10.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6342>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6302: Please whitelist nosync for multilib
----------------------+------------------------
Reporter: msimacek | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: | Component: mash
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
----------------------+------------------------
nosync is a small library used by mock. It is installed in
/usr/lib/nosync/nosync.so, because it's supposed to be used only via
LD_PRELOAD (mock first copies it to buildroot). It seems that mash doesn't
recognize it as multilib, because it's not in standard library location.
Could it be whitelisted for being multilib?
See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283736
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6302>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project