Adam,
What is the position on openSSL 1.1.1?
The openSSL team has targeted Sept 11 as the release date, and I have
not seen any other word on the user list. Of course there may be
different discussion elsewhere.
For all the features of TLS 1.3, you want openSSL 1.1.1.
Speaking of TLS 1.3, I don't know what else needs to be done for support
of it, but there is an intentional change in versions from the draft to
the RFC...
Disclaimer: I have a personal need of 1.1.1, as the PR that addressed
my problems with creating EDDSA certs did not make the pre9 version, but
it is in the master now.
Bob
On 9/7/18 8:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi folks! As we've only got a week to go for Beta, here's an update on
blocker bug status.
tl;dr action summary
====================
Accepted blockers
-----------------
1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1582524
ACTION: QA / reporter to verify whether fixed in 3.2.0-2.fc29
2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1596540
ACTION: dnf team to fix bug and send out update
3. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1616167
ACTION: FESCo to decide on how much fixing is needed
4. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615969
ACTION: nirik to build for for f29 and edit update
5. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572916
ACTION: kernel team to report whether anything still needed
Proposed blockers
-----------------
1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624972
ACTION: blocker reviewers to vote on status, QA to verify fix
2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1626413
ACTION: bcl to ensure fix is ready in case of need
3. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1616269
ACTION: adamw to send out call-for-testing mail
Bug-by-bug detail
=================
Accepted blockers
-----------------
1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1582524 - dnf - POST
dnf doesn't follow default profile for an enabled non-default stream
This is reported to be fixed in 3.3.0, but I'm not 100% sure if it's
fixed in 3.2.0-2.fc29, the build currently in F29. I've asked for
clarification in the bug.
2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1596540 - dnf - ASSIGNED
RuntimeError: C++ std::exception: Exec failed: no such table: main.trans_cmdline
This is one of several crasher bugs reported with DNF 3+ which seem to
relate to the history database. This one has a clear reproducer in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1596540#c30 , and dmach
committed to a fix there. We are waiting on that fix.
3. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1616167 - dnf - NEW
dnf doesn't record modular metadata in a local database
This one was referred to FESCo: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1974 . It
will be discussed on Monday, and a decision made about to what extent
it needs to be addressed for Beta and/or Final.
4. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615969 - grub2 - VERIFIED
AArch64 - Error when booting "error: out of memory."
This was fixed by grub2-2.02-52.fc29, but that build is the one which
broke many x86_64 UEFI installs and thus was unpushed. We need a new
grub2 build which retains the fix for this bug and also fixes the
x86_64 UEFI bug. As pjones is apparently away ATM, I have asked nirik
if he can do this.
5. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572916 - kernel - NEW
kernel after 4.17.0-0.rc2.git0.1.fc29 waits for random entropy on boot
This one's been sitting on the blocker list a long time, I'm not
sure if anything more is needed here. I have asked the kernel folks for
an update.
Proposed blockers
-----------------
1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1624972 - lightdm - MODIFIED
No GUI desktop
This looks like a clear blocker (Xfce ARM image failing to boot - Xfce
is the blocking desktop on 32-bit ARM), but it also seems like a
probable fix has been identified and we only need to push it.
2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1626413 - lorax - NEW
Add dependency on librepo
It seems that lorax has a librepo dep it does not express, but this was
hidden by dnf depending on librepo; apparently newer dnf builds no
longer do, so lorax needs to express the dependency. This is
technically not a blocker so long as the newer dnf builds aren't
actually in stable themselves, but as we're likely to need one to fix
the accepted DNF blockers, we'll want to have the lorax fix ready to
go.
3. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1616269 - xorg-x11-server - NEW
[abrt] xorg-x11-server-Xwayland: OsLookupColor(): Display server crashed
This is a graphical environment crash which is clearly hardware-
dependent to some degree. We need to find out how many other folks are
running into it in order to decide whether it's a blocker. I will send
out a call-for-testing email about this one soon.
Thanks folks!
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to test-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/test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
