On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 05:41:31PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 03. 12. 21 16:06, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 03. 12. 21 15:59, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 03. 12. 21 15:49, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > On 03. 12. 21 15:45, Kamil Dudka wrote: > > > > > On Friday, December 3, 2021 2:58:24 PM CET Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > > > > > It seems that libarchive still requires libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) > > > > > > But on x86_64, opae-devel provides that with: > > > > > > ExclusiveArch: x86_64 > > > > > > I'll report that. > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2028852 > > The problem is now fixed. The bundled openssl in opae worries me still, but > that's not causing issues in dependency resolution any more. Bundling pre-built openssl is a serious problem, because Fedora is required to strip various functionality from openssl at the source level. We cannot ship these binaries in the RPM, nor can we even have them in the source tarball AFAIK. IOW, stripping the dependancies from the RPM here is not sufficient. IIUC, the tarball needs to be unpacked, the openssl binaries removed, and a new tarball created for import into Fedora dist-git lookside archive storage. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ 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
