Fedora Weekly News Issue 89

Thomas Chung tchung at fedoraproject.org
Mon May 28 09:01:53 UTC 2007

= Fedora Weekly News Issue 89 =

Welcome to Fedora Weekly News Issue 89[1] for the week of May 20th
through May 26th, 2007. The latest issue can always be found here[2]
and RSS Feed can be found here[3].

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue89

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/LatestIssue

[3] http://feeds.feedburner.com/fwn

   1. Fedora Weekly News Issue 89
         1. Announcements
               1. Fedora Project Web gets a face lift
               2. Fedora 7 RC2 "Fedora" spin i386 available
         2. Planet Fedora
               1. Spank that webpage, it's been born again
               2. We're golden
         3. Marketing
               1. Fedora 7 at Respins.org
               2. Release Announcement Talking Points
         4. Developments
               1. Could A Truly Minimal Install Be Added in F7 Or F8?
               2. Mdraid and Hidden Partition Area Upgrade Blocker Solved
               3. Status Of Support for IWP3945abg Wireless In Fedora 7
               4. Fedora7RC2 Torrent
               5. Upgrade FC6 To F7t4 Fails On LVM Fstab Naming
               6. Guidelines For Huge SPEC Changelogs
               7. IPv6 Explicitly Disabled.
               8. The Future Of the Bootloader
               9. Wireshark Included On F7 Media
              10. KDE4 For Fedora8 Draft Document Discussion
         5. Maintainers
               1. No More New Packages For Fedora 7
         6. Documentation
               1. Future of The Software Management Guide
               2. Language Codes
               3. Live CD Guide
         7. Infrastructure
               1. Image Standard
               2. Pushing Updates
               3. Static Content
         8. Artwork
               1. Fedora 7 CD/DVD Labels And Covers
         9. Security Week
               1. A Mighty Number Falls
               2. 28% of software is unpatched
        10. Security Advisories and Package Updates
               1. Fedora Core 6 Security Advisories and Package Updates
               2. Fedora Core 5 Security Advisories and Package Updates
        11. Events and Meetings
               1. Fedora Ambassadors Meeting Minutes 2007-05-24
               2. Fedora Documentation Steering Committee 2007-05-27
               3. Fedora Engineering Steering Committee Meeting 2007-05-17
               4. Fedora Engineering Steering Committee Meeting 2007-05-24
               5. Fedora Packaging Committee Meeting 2007-05-23
               6. Fedora Release Engineering Meeting 2007-05-21
        12. Feedback

== Announcements ==

In this section, we cover announcements from various projects.

=== Fedora Project Web gets a face lift ===

MikeMcGrath announces in fedora-announce-list[1],

"The Fedora Project website has gotten a face lift:


Prior to today that site went straight to the wiki, which is largely
developer content with good (but somewhat hard to find) docs. Now
we're expanding on fedoraproject.org and adding some more user-centric
content like that found at http://docs.fedoraproject.org/

The websites team has been hard at work at this for a while and we're
all excited to release it today.

Help get the word out and digg[2]."

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2007-May/msg00006.html

[2] http://digg.com/linux_unix/Fedora_Project_gets_a_web_face_lift

=== Fedora 7 RC2 "Fedora" spin i386 available ===

JesseKeating announces in fedora-devel-list[1],

"I've uploaded the i386 DVD and rescue image for the "Fedora" spin of Fedora 7
RC2.  You can find it at http://torrent.fedoraproject.org

The x86_64 iso set is still uploading, to be followed by the PPC iso set.
I'll reply to this once they are ready for torrenting.  Happy testing!"

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01628.html

== Planet Fedora ==

In this section, we cover a highlight of Planet Fedora - an
aggregation of blogs from world wide Fedora contributors.


=== Spank that webpage, it's been born again ===

KarstenWade points out in his blog[1],

"Breathing new life into this URL: http://fedoraproject.org

In anticipation of heavy server loads during the upcoming Fedora 7
release, we decided to post a series of lightweight, static HTML pages
as the front of fedoraproject.org. Those pages quietly went live

[1] http://iquaid.livejournal.com/18843.html

=== We're golden ===

PaulFrields points out in his blog[1],

"From the IRC buffer of #fedora-devel, looks like Fedora 7 will be in
General Availability on 31 May. To all those who repeatedly tested and
fed back bugs and information, a hearty and heartfelt thank you. I'm
sure the actual release engineering folks will have more to say about
this shortly; stay tuned."

[1] http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/~paul/wordpress/?p=785

== Marketing ==

In this section, we cover Fedora Marketing Project.


=== Fedora 7 at Respins.org ===

KarlieRobinson reports in fedora-marketing-list[1],

"On May 12, I went to a Bar``Camp at RIT [2] and Saw a presentation on
F7 by Luke Macken.
That reminded me of how cool the Re-spin feature on 7 is.
My hope is that we can encourage the community to get creative with
Fedora by giving them an outlet for their work.
To that end, Webpath Technologies has created respins.org[3]."

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-marketing-list/2007-May/msg00064.html

[2] http://barcamp.org/BarCampRochester2

[3] http://respins.org

=== Release Announcement Talking Points ===

KarstenWade reports in fedora-marketing-list[1],

"Please help us get these completed[2]:
Um ... by tomorrow.  Seriously.  Or there won't be any time at all for
Ambassadors et al to write up their local version[3]. "

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-marketing-list/2007-May/msg00061.html

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/ReleaseAnnouncements/TalkingPoints

[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/ReleaseAnnouncements#Schedule

== Developments ==

In this section, we cover the problems/solutions,
people/personalities, and ups/downs of the endless discussions on
Fedora Developments.


=== Could A Truly Minimal Install Be Added in F7 Or F8? ===

An often debated Fedora Project issue has been, which packages should
be available bundled in an installable image. Many different reasons
have been offered to define what are necessary packages to include,
such as size.  As a consequence of these protracted discussions over
whether there should be "everything" installs or "Windowmaker
flavored" installs, Fedora has been made more flexible to allow users
to compose their own spins.  This progress of customization was
demonstrated when "Mark" raised a request[1] for a "minimal" install.
FlorianLaRoche suggested[2] using kickstart, while JesseKeating
thought[3] that redefining the Core and using Pungi (the Fedora
Project's FL/OSS installation-tree/ISO composer [2a]) is the best

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01393.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01425.html

[2a] https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/pungi/wiki/PungiDocs

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01394.html

After Jesse asked that Mark propose suggested changes to the comps
groups for installation, Mark noted[4] that he had little programming
ability.  NicolasMailhot explained that this was not needed and
AhmedKamal posted[5] a link to a guide for minimizing CentOS install
size to circa 400MB. Nicolas posted[6] a summary of what to do in
order to see a minimal-install produced.

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01400.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01422.html

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01424.html

=== Mdraid and Hidden Partition Area Upgrade Blocker Solved ===

The summary of ReleaseEngineering's IRC meeting was posted by
JohnPoelstra[1] and contained three salient issues:

 1. The need for testers to be aware of a respin of the initial
release candidate (see "Fedora7RC2 Torrent" below);
 1. The continuing need for testers of the iwl3945 wireless (see
"Status Of Support for IWP3945abg Wireless In Fedora7" below);
 1. Upgrade problems with mdraid/dmraid.  WillWoods identified the
latter as being the most serious, since it affected a large set of
committed users whom it would be good to keep.  The iwl3945 issue is
dealt with in a separate section of this FWN issue.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01380.html

The new libata drivers caused a problem[2] for JarodWilson as they
were able to read the hidden protected area[3] of one of the drives in
an mdraid set, which caused a discrepancy between the partition table
and what the BIOS reports as the last usable drive sector.  The older
PATA drivers seemed to pay attention to the information passed by the
BIOS.  Jarod followed up by removing the affected drive and confirming
that without it he could upgrade from an mdraid'ed FC6 to F7.  Jarod
then investigated passing the module parameter 'libata.ignore_hpa=1'
on the boot commandline and reported[4] it did not work and anyone
using anaconda to upgrade a similar setup would be out of luck.
However, adding "options libata libata.ignore_hpa=1" to
/etc/modprobe.conf and then doing a "yum upgrade" should work[5].

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01389.html

[3] http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Hidden_Protected_Area

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01572.htm

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01586.html

Following on from a suggestion from BrunoWolff that users might want
to look into removing the HPA before upgrading, JarodWilson found a
tool called "setmax" that Bruno built with minor problems[5a], but the
licensing is unknown.  AlanCox cautioned[6] that this might not be a
good idea, especially with laptops.  Alan also noted[7] that Fedora
could benefit from advance testing by Ubuntu in this area, where it
seemed reasonably certain that if anaconda could be convinced to
ignore HPA, then there would not be problems.

[5a] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01690.html

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01615.html

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01614.html

JeremyKatz saved the day[8] by patching anaconda to recognize and use
"libata.ignore_hpa=1" on the commandline and TonyNelson tested[9] this

[8] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01604.html

[9] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01695.html

=== Status Of Support for IWP3945abg Wireless In Fedora 7 ===

A query[1] from DeependraShekhawat about whether users should continue
to use the ATrpms repository for drivers for IntelProWireless3945ABG
was answered quickly[2] by KevinKofler with the information that
Fedora would be shipping iwlwifi patched into the kernel.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01515.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01517.html

A further query from SteveHill led AndyGreen and JarodWilson to
attempt[3][4] to straighten out the terminology.  The old version of
the driver is named "ipw3945" and uses the "80211" kernel stack.  An
initial newwer version of the driver using the new "mac80211" kernel
wireless stack was initially named "iwlwifi" and then renamed to
"iwl3945".  The thinking behind this is that iwlwifi is now a project
name for a collection of drivers.

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01521.html

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01534.html

The problem of getting NetworkManager (NM) and IPW3945 hardware to
play nice together was mentioned[5] by LamontPeterson. AndyGreen
followed up on this, reporting[6] that with a specific kernel
(2.6.21-1.3194.fc7) it was possible for NetworkManager to scan and
detect networks, but that associating failed intitially with WPA2
requiring a restart of NM, nm-applet, and wpa-supplicant.
ToddZullinger reported[7] that he had no problems with NM and the
older ipw3945, but no success with the new iwl3945 driver.
RalfErtzinger confirmed[8] Todd's happy experiences with the older
driver but by contrast was successful with the new iwl3945 except for
the issue of the LED lights not working.

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01551.html

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01553.html

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01554.html

[8] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01588.html

Deependra and SteveHill were still having problems with the newer
driver. After suggestions that testers should move to the latest
kernel (available from Koji[9]) Deependra posted[10] logs of his
failure with the latest kernel. JohnLinville tried[11] to help out by
sacrificing some chickens, AndyGreen suggested disabling[12] the
closed, proprietary hardware scan in order to reduce confusion, but
Deependra still had no luck[13].  OlaThoresen reported[14] some
progress, but still no working interface.

[9] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01538.html

[10] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01549.html

[11] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01557.html

[12] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01563.html

[13] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01623.html

[14] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01569.html

In discussion with Deependra over whether iwl3945 ought to be shipped,
AndyGreen argued[15] that the old ipw3945 driver wasn't an option
because of the licensing of the regulatory daemon being unacceptable
to the Fedora Project.  Andy offered some other compelling reasons:
the iwl3945 driver, although unstable, was working well for many
users, and Intel were very actively working with JohnLinville to
improve it.  Deependra was unhappy with this, prompting DaveHollis to
share[16] a workaround that allows both drivers to be present.

[15] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01530.html

[16] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01540.html

=== Fedora7RC2 Torrent ===

JesseKeating posted[1] that the latest and greatest version of F7
available for testing was the "Fedora" spin of F7 Release Candidate 2
(F7RC2), available as a torrent.  The i386 version was followed
shortly by the x86_64 version and then the PPC version[1a].  Jesse
clarified that this would be the final release before GA, as long as
nothing really terrible was wrong[2].

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01628.html

[1a] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01659.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01630.html

A worried SteveHill wondered[3] if the 3194 kernel (which fixes a lot
of problems for people using IPW3945ABG hardware as reported elsewhere
in this FWN issue) would be in F7rc2.  JeremyKatz confirmed[4] that it
would and the reason it hadn't shown up in rawhide was because it was
more recent than that.

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01639.html

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01652.html

DavidNielsen queried whether the version of anaconda fixed the RAID
HPA issues (covered in this version of FWN) and was assured[5] by
JeremyKatz that they were (version

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01653.html

SeanDarcy and ChelbanVasile appeared[6] to have found an AMD64 kernel
bug. Sean further found a problem with the incorrect (older) kernel
being selected as default in grub.conf when upgrading from F7t4 to
F7rc2.  JesseKeating confirmed that this was a known bug and WillWoods
added[7] the information that it only appeared to happen with F7t4 and
the Red Hat Summit Preview, but should be alright for FC6 upgraders.
OttoHaliburton seemed to have contradictory[8] experience.

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01718.html

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01717.html

[8] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01719.html

=== Upgrade FC6 To F7t4 Fails On LVM Fstab Naming ===

An upgrade from FC6 to F7t4 failed[1] for SeanDarcy, necessitating the
manual removal of LVM partitions from /etc/fstab until after the
upgrade.  Sean wanted to know[2] why the install insisted on using
labels instead of the simpler /dev naming convention.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01660.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01666.html

ChuckAnderson answered[3] that LABELs were unchanging, as opposed to
/dev names. While Sean conceded that LABELs had advantages, he
pressed[4] the point that the upgrade should not abort, and Mike
agreed that it sounded like an anaconda bug.  TillMaas thought[5] that
LABELs could still be improved in respect of having unique names.

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01671.html

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01679.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01703.html

Addressing the immediate practical problem, MikeChambers suggested
trying an upgrade to the very newest version of F7 (which was then
F7RC2 instead of F7t4) and this worked perfectly[6] for Sean.

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01713.html

=== Guidelines For Huge SPEC Changelogs ===

Some of the RPM packages maintained by the Fedora Project were
observed[1] by MichaelSchwendt to have very large %changelog sections
in their spec files due to the packages being in maintenance since the
1990s. Michael wasn't making a big deal about it, but was interested
to know whether there were plans for dealing with what are sometimes
bloated and inaccurate records of changes.  NigelJones concurred[2],
giving the specific example of anaconda's spec file being 5 times as
large as the actual code.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01646.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01647.html

MamoruTasaka suggested[3] copying vim's approach, which was welcomed
by KarstenHopp[4] and others.  RalfCorsepius pointed out[5] that this
was a move from an inline changelog to a detached, separate one.
JesseKeating clarified that this was only for archived changelogs and
wondered if Ralf really needed all the history in the package.  Ralf
disavowed this and suggested manually pruning them as he does for his
own packages. Karsten reiterated this point, separately adding the
information[6] that F7 has approximately 20MB of changelogs in the
spec files, and suggesting a similar approach to Ralf of
trimming/editing the changelogs so that appropriate recent changes are
easily seen through the same rpm queries as used presently.

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01648.html

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01649.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01670.html

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01705.html

"Nodata" wondered[7] why there couldn't be a standard (presumably
networked?) place for the changelogs, which "rpm -q --changelog" would
silently examine.

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01673.html

=== IPv6 Explicitly Disabled. iwl3495 Negative Interaction With IPv6? ===

SteveHill observed[1] that IPv6 seemed to be disabled by default in
rawhide and wondered why this was so.  JesseKeating asked[2] if Steve
had enabled IPv6 during install.  DavidWoodhouse explained[3] that
this was jsut a mixup in the initscripts for F7t4, but that the actual
F7 would not suffer from this problem.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01577.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01580.html

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01583.html

Diverging slightly from the original thread title, Steve also noted[4]
a problem with IPv6 autoconfiguration when the interface required the
iwl3945 driver. After examining the bugzilla entry, David suggested[5]
using tcpdump to check whether all multicast packets were missing.
Steve wasn't convinced and thought that the problem lay in the
interface seeing its own packets and assuming that these meant the
address was in use[6].  This theory seemed to be bolstered by an
observation[7] from JohnDeDourek.

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01600.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01618.html

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01637.html

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01644.html

=== The Future Of the Bootloader ===

Our attention was drawn by KenYang[1] to an earlier (2006)
discussion[2] about whether or not Fedora could get an animated GRUB,
similar to SuSE10.2.  Included in this was a link to an interesting
exploration[3] of the GRUB code by "TheStarman".  The resulting
discussion revealed that the current perceived problems with booting
include a lengthy video modeswitch (needed to display a graphical boot
menu), and a "timeout" that needs to be long enough so that people
using ATs (assistive technologies[3a], for example, screenreaders)
have time to interact easily with the machine.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01429.html

[2] http://marc.info/?l=fedora-list&m=115693747626918&w=2

[3] http://mirror.href.com/thestarman/asm/mbr/GRUB.htm

[3a] http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gap/presentations/GUAD3C/making-apps-accessible/TOC.html

MatejCepl pleaded[4] against using SuSE's specific animated GRUB on
the grounds that it was in real-mode and thus broke Xen, and
MatthiasClasen reminded us[5] that the DesktopTeam had already made
plans to remove the GRUB menu from the startup, but that this depended
on a lot of components being changed[6] upstream, including
DRM-mode-setting being incorporated into the kernel.

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01430.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01437.html

[6] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureBetterStartup

Responding to these plans, both NicolasMailhot[7] and AlanCox
corrected one of the listed tasks that suggested setting "timeout 0"
in grub.conf to avoid pausing and displaying a splash image in the
GRUB menu during boot. Alan explained [8] that drivers or BIOSes could
steal a keystroke leading to a need to edit grub.conf with a rescue
disk. Another consideration raised[9]  by Alan was accessibility
(a11y) for people using text-to-speech screen readers.  DavidZeuthen
and JesseKeating thought that if the bootloader were completely
removed[10], it would obviate the need for making it accessible.

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01439.html

[8] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01441.html

[9] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01497.html

[10] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01558.html

The main case for retaining the bootmenu display seemed to be for
users that were dual-booting (especially for non-technical users with
dual installs of Linux and Windows). JeremyKatz noted that the GRUB
bootmenu hasn't been shown during installation by default since 2004
anyway[11] and DavidZeuthen responded that it would still be a good
idea to get rid of the timeout.  JasonTibbitts wanted a short,
interruptable timeout and drew a parallel to what happens during
hibernation, to which JesseKeating responded[10a] that this was partly
to prevent data corruption. David referenced[12] the manner in which
other OSes, e.g. Mac OSX, require special keypresses to bring up boot
menus. NicolasMailhot felt[13] that this behavior was too close to
vendor lock-in. AlanCox thought that twenty years of history of
hardware manufacturers showed[14] that this was a bad idea as the
manuals documenting this inevitably got lost.

[10a] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01511.html

[11] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01560.html

[12] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01561.html

[13] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01568.html

[14] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01612.html

ChristopherAillon spiced things up[15] by sprinkling some crack on the
discussion, suggesting modifying anaconda to detect the presence of
other OSes and renable the timeout if they were present, or to modify
GNOME's reboot dialog to allow booting to another OS.  NicolasMailhot
reacted to the latter unfavourably because it would mean that to boot
Windows, we'd have to first boot Fedora, prompting Christopher to
clarify[16] that there could also be DavidZeuthen's secret handshake
with an associated problem of non-discoverability.  AdamJackson didn't
think discoverability was that important, as evidenced by the fact
that neither Windows nor MacOSX ship with it.  AlanCox thought that
this absence was due to a cynical monetary incentive to make
interoperability hard[16a].  Christopher dismissed it as a failing
that should not be emulated in Fedora, pointing out the dual-booting
Windows for games was probably a major use-case[17].  An ensuing
discussion between David and NicolasMailhot resulted[18] in competing
claims as to whether removing the current defaults and moving the
configurability into specialised utilities and/or secret keypresses
would distress various user-cases.

[15] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01570.html

[16] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01578.html

[16a] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01613.html

[17] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01587.html

[18] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01611.html

=== Wireshark Included On F7 Media ===

Wireshark[1] is a network protocol analyzer that used to be named
"ethereal". SteveDickson wondered[2] why it was not on the F7test4
spin, while the inferior tcpdump was present. Steve suggested that
"tshark", a text-mode version should be the default, with tcpdump made

[1] http://www.wireshark.org/

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01446.html

EnricoScholz pointed to the relative smallness of tcpdump, to which
Steve replied[3] that this was a consequence of tcpdump having a
limited functionality.

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01467.html

A full response[4] from WillWoods explained that Wireshark was
actually available from the repositories, just not included in the
comps file for the default spin. Will argued that the absence of
complaints probably meant that it wasn't as appalling a choice as
Steve suggested and while agreeing that the tshark suggestion was
worthwhile pointed out that F7 was now in a freeze prior to final
release. "SteveG" suggested[5] that the absence of complaints might
have been because many testers use the rawhide network updates, not
ISO images, and that essential network troubleshooting tools really
had to be available on the ISO in case the network was broken.

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01448.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01457.html

Elaborating[6] on the advantages of wirehark over tcpdump,
SteveDickson managed to convince[7] JesseKeating (Release Manager) to
include Wireshark as part of the f7-desktop manifest.  Jesse was at
pains to point out that contrary to Steve's assertion, Wireshark had
never been a default, but had rather been an optional package in the
system-tools group for FC5 and FC6.  Although Wireshark is now on the
ISO, it will not included on the Live-CD.

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01464.html

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01498.html

NicolasMailhot and JefSpaleta were stimulated to toss around ideas
about how to easily determine a full list of packages installed by
default.  Jef thought[8] that Pungi seemed like the likely place to
obtain this information.

[8] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01480.html

=== KDE4 For Fedora8 Draft Document Discussion ===

KevinKofler sought discussion[1] of a plan for getting KDE4 into F8.
ThorstenLeemhuis thought[2] that getting release schedules for KDE4
and F8 to align properly would be difficult and that a better bet was
to maintain two repositories of KDE4, one for rawhide the other for
F7.  These would be hosted officially within the Fedora Project.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01291.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01346.html

Kevin and DennisGilmore preferred[3] the idea of trucking ahead with
the KDE4 plan but having a fallback to a usable KDE3.  Discussion
between Kevin and JeremyKatz revealed[4] that there were
potential/probable conflicts (due to clashing sonames) in the -devel
packages.  Jeremy thought there was no way that KDE3 and KDE4 could be
installed in parallel if what Kevin reported about upstream KDE were
true. Kevin was aware of the suckage and thought[5] about some
possible ways around it.

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01364.html

[4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01392.html

[5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01397.html

Jeremy emphasized[6] that concerned people really needed to make
upstream KDE understand that such conflicts were a massive problem.
Kevin then proposed[7] creating a new root in which to place the
-devel files.  NicolasMailhot was strongly against this idea[8] as it
broke the FHS and introduced a bad precedent. JeremyKatz thought[9]
that the need of ordinary users to build software without mock was
sufficiently great that it was worth deviating from standard practice
in this case.

[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01402.html

[7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01403.html

[8] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01428.html

[9] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01443.html

FlorianLaRoche was inspired by all the talk of file conflicts to
post[10] a list of all those that he could identify in FC-devel for

[10] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01427.html

== Maintainers ==

In this section, we cover Fedora Maintainers, the group of people who
maintain the software packages in Fedora


=== No More New Packages For Fedora 7 ===

With the release of Fedora 7 coming up very shortly, Jesse Keating has
sent out a warning that no more "new" packages for F7-final[1] will be
accepted. Those that did not get their new packages committed in time
must wait for the first round of Fedora 7 updates. The final kernel
built for Fedora 7[2] (kernel-2.6.21-1.3194.fc7) is also now

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-May/msg00934.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-May/msg00958.html

== Documentation ==

In this section, we cover the Fedora Documentation Project.


=== Future of The Software Management Guide ===

There has been some discussion about the future of the Software
Management Guide[1], and the possibility of pushing relevant content
to the Fedora User Guide and the Administration Guide[2]. This would
help to separate material that new users are going to deal with,
making the experience less intimidating.

[1] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/yum/

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-May/msg00102.html

=== Language Codes ===

The Documentation Project is going to be updating all the current
documents to use the en-US language code[1] instead of the ambigous
"-en". This removes any existing inconsistencies and makes it possible
to produce en-UK and en-AU versions of the documents. These change are
being saved for post-Fedora 7 release to prevent any problems arising,
and to allow sufficient time to talk with developers[2].  Changes
would appear in CVS, the toolchain, and in publication.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-May/msg00105.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-May/msg00125.html

=== Live CD Guide ===

After a request for help polishing a document about creating localized
spins of the Fedora KDE live CD[1], it was very quickly decided that a
canonical guide about creating live CDs using Fedora's new tools is an
important short-term goal[2].

The discussion then moved on to talk about creating separate user
guides for each of the official spins, with the current Fedora User
Guide forming the base for the GNOME live CD guide [3].

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-May/msg00148.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-May/msg00152.html

[3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-May/msg00158.html

== Infrastructure ==

In this section, we cover the Fedora Infrastructure Project.


=== Image Standard ===

There was some discussion[1] this week about which image format to use
project wide. There was no conclusion reached as it was decided to
forward the matter to the Board for further review.  However, the
Project Board concluded JPEG no longer seemed encumbered, image
decisions aren't their business, and you should use whatever you feel
is best[2].

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-May/msg00107.html

[2] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-May/msg00138.html

=== Pushing Updates ===

With bodhi being pushed into service shortly, BillNottingham started a
thread[1] about the mechanics of how updates are/will be pushed.
LukeMacken and others are hard at work this week to see the new system

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-May/msg00142.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-May/msg00192.html

=== Static Content ===

The project servers have been using puppet to distribute static
content among themselves. Due to the amount of files distributed,
puppet has produced a higher than comfortable load on the servers.
Discussion was had[1] on possible solutions.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2007-May/msg00170.html

== Artwork ==

In this section, we cover Fedora Artwork Project.


=== Fedora 7 CD/DVD Labels And Covers ===

Máirín Duffy sent her proposals for the CD/DVD labels and covers to
the fedora-art-list this week [1]. They were well received [2].

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-art-list/2007-May/msg00030.html

[2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-art-list/2007-May/msg00035.html

== Security Week ==

In this section, we highlight the security stories from the week in Fedora.

=== A Mighty Number Falls ===

There was much news last week regarding the factoring of a 307 digit
number[1].  Wikipedia has a nice example of what factoring means for
the RSA algorithm[2].

[1] http://actualites.epfl.ch/presseinfo-com?id=441

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA#Security

This event is probably not newsworthy to most people, but it's a huge
feat for those in the encryption industry.  The researchers took 11
months to factor this number.  This seems like a very long time, but
when you take Moore's Law into account, this 11 months will be a
couple of days in several years.  The moral of the story is that data
strongly encrypted today, can be broken tomorrow.

=== 28% of software is unpatched ===

Secunia published a report stating that 28% of software installed on a
user's computer is unpatched[1].

[1] http://www.betanews.com/article/Secunia_28_Percent_of_Software_Unpatched/1179508037

This can be a serious problem when you have to rely on more than one
vendor for your updates.  The article doesn't specify it, but it seems
this survey was conducted on Windows computers.  One of the problems
that exists in the Windows universe is that every third party vendor
has their own (if any) update system.  A system such as yum, which
supports multiple repositories, GPG signed packages, and a single
update mechanism, can be a huge advantage.

Ideally for a non-technical desktop user, their update system should
automatically update software on a regular basis.  This is the
behavior seen when a Microsoft Windows user installs Firefox, and it
has proven to be rather successful.  In the above study, only 5.4% of
Firefox users were not running the latest secure version.  I suspect
few other software projects can boast such numbers.  Whether you agree
with this method or not, there is no denying it does work.

== Security Advisories and Package Updates ==

In this section, we cover Secuirity Advisories and Package Updates
from fedora-package-announce.

=== Fedora Core 6 Security Advisories and Package Updates ===

 * 2007-05-24 [SECURITY] libpng-1.2.10-9.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-24 bind-9.3.4-5.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-24 nfs-utils-1.0.10-12.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-24 selinux-policy-2.4.6-69.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 alsa-utils-1.0.14-0.2.rc1.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 cups-1.2.10-7.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 hal-cups-utils-0.6.9-1.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 jakarta-commons-modeler-1.1-8jpp.2.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 minicom-2.2-1.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 screen-4.0.3-3.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 tomcat5-5.5.23-0jpp.2.fc6 -
 * 2007-05-21 xinetd-2.3.14-9.fc6 -

=== Fedora Core 5 Security Advisories and Package Updates ===

 * 2007-05-24 [SECURITY] libpng-1.2.8-3.fc5 -
 * 2007-05-24 [SECURITY] php-5.1.6-1.6 -
 * 2007-05-21 samba-3.0.24-6.fc5 -
 * 2007-05-21 SDL-1.2.9-6.1 -

== Events and Meetings ==

In this section, we cover event reports and meeting summaries from
various projects.

=== Fedora Ambassadors Meeting Minutes 2007-05-24 ===

 * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-May/msg00155.html

=== Fedora Documentation Steering Committee 2007-05-27 ===

 * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-May/msg00165.html

=== Fedora Engineering Steering Committee Meeting 2007-05-17 ===

 * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-May/msg00844.html

=== Fedora Engineering Steering Committee Meeting 2007-05-24 ===

 * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-May/msg00988.html

=== Fedora Packaging Committee Meeting 2007-05-23 ===

 * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-May/msg00926.html

=== Fedora Release Engineering Meeting 2007-05-21 ===

 * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-May/msg01380.html

== Feedback ==

This document is maintained by the Fedora News Team[1]. Please feel
free to contact us to give your feedback. If you'd like to contribute
to a future issue of the Fedora Weekly News, please see the Join[2]
page to find out how to help.

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/NewsProject

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/NewsProject/Join

Thomas Chung

More information about the fedora-announce-list mailing list