On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 12:26 PM Petr Menšík <pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Sahana and Jakub,
openssl-pkcs11 module failed during rebuild. It has no separate bug yet, but missing pkcs11 engine for OpenSSL 3.0 bind build makes freeipa server fail to even start.
Filled bug #2005832 [1]. CentOS Stream 9 build of openssl-pkcs11 were successful, I think there are missing changes required on Rawhide. Please include required fixes also in Rawhide.
Hi Petr,
Jakub has fixed it in openssl-pkcs11-0.4.11-6.fc36.
Is there any timeline, when would be FTBFS bugs filled?
Yeah I wanted to file them 3/4 weeks after the introduction of OpenSSL 3.0.0.
So tentatively around mid october.
Thank you,
Regards,
Sahana Prasad
I did not yet found any bug on openssl-pkcs11. I would expect openssl engine packages would be ready before mass rebuild. Could it be fixed soon please?
Cheers,
Petr
1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2005832
On 9/20/21 10:47, Sahana Prasad wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 12:50 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 5:09 AM Sahana Prasad <sahana@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> The side-tag was merged yesterday. OpenSSL 3.0.0 is available in rawhide now.
> You can continue to port your changes for OpenSSL 3.0.0 now.
>
> The following packages FTBFS (attached), kindly have a look at them.
> I haven't reported FTBFS bugs right away. As I know many packages have the porting ready already
> and they were waiting for 3.0.0 to land in rawhide.
> Some packages fail due to usage of deprecated functions. Consider treating those warnings as not errors
> for a quick fix and you could slowly stop using deprecated functions in the future.
>
> Thanks Miro for your help with building packages in the side-tag and getting a list of failed packages.
>
> We will try a rebuild of all these failed packages after 3/4 weeks and report bugs for failing packages then.
>
I noticed that the changelog for the openssl package got truncated. Is
there a reason for this? The spec file wasn't significantly rewritten,
nor was there some other condition invalidating the entire recorded
history of the package. Would you kindly please restore the changelog
to the spec file?
Hi Neal,
I will restore it.Thank you,Regards,Sahana Prasad
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure-- Petr Menšík Software Engineer Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/ email: pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
