Re: upgrade tinyproxy for f29?

[Michael Adam <madam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 09:38:44PM +0200, Michael Adam wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 7:07 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
> zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 06:29:34PM +0200, Michael Adam wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 5:23 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 4:07 PM Michael Adam <madam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Tinyproxy just released a new version 1.10 which is has been overdue
> > > > > and containes 2 CVE fixes apart from several enhancements.
> > > > >
> > > > > I created builds for rawhide already.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was wondering if it is still possible to get tinyproxy to this
> > > > important
> > > > > update in f29, since no other packages depend on it, afaict.
> > > > >
> > > > > If so, what do I do? Just update the scm branch and bring it in
> > through
> > > > Bodhi?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for the swift response!
> > >
> > > (And apologies for any cluelessness about newer aspects of the fedora
> > > process - it's been a while since i did these things, and it worked a
> > little
> > > differently then...)
> > >
> > >
> > > > Sounds like a reasonable course of action. Is it backward compatible
> > > > in terms of any interface people might use?
> > >
> > >
> > > There are a few config file additions.
> > > The location of the binary has changed from /usr/sbin
> > > to /usr/bin . Otherwise no Interfaces i'm aware of.
> >
> > You should create a compat symlink from the old location to the new
> > location, at least in the stable releases, in case somebody calls the
> > binary by path.
> >
>
> Good point.
>
> - Is there an established way to create such a "compat symlink"?

ln -s ../bin/NAME %{buildroot}/usr/sbin/NAME

would be the standard way.

> - What do you mean by "stable releases"?
>   Does F29 (which is not released yet) qualify as that?
I meant F28 and F27, but since this costs so little, I'd do the same
for F29 too.

Hmm, ok. I guess it is not a problem at this point

if f29 thereby goes one build ahead of master.

If needed later, we can still bump master's release number..

Thanks - Michael

 

Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx