On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 12:29 AM Michael Adam <madam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:ln -s ../bin/NAME %{buildroot}/usr/sbin/NAMEOn 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"?
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 pointif f29 thereby goes one build ahead of master.If needed later, we can still bump master's release number..
This is wrong, rawhide version should be always newer. You can either bump release in rawhide and do no changes there or bump release after %{?dist} in f29/f28.
Thanks - Michael_______________________________________________Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
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
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
-Igor Gnatenko
_______________________________________________ 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
