Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781341
Summary: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: high
Priority: unspecified
Component: fail2ban
AssignedTo: axel.thimm(a)atrpms.net
ReportedBy: vogel(a)folz.de
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: herrold(a)owlriver.com, mattdm(a)mattdm.org,
axel.thimm(a)atrpms.net, tim(a)niemueller.de,
vogel(a)folz.de, jonathan.underwood(a)gmail.com,
ruben(a)rubenkerkhof.com, wdierkes(a)rackspace.com,
triage(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
maxamillion(a)fedoraproject.org,
voronin.andrey(a)gmail.com,
bugzilla.redhat.com(a)ewood.users.cementhorizon.com
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 244275
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #244275 +++
Description of problem (copied from Bug #244275):
fail2ban doesn't require shorewall to function, and in fact, as we ship it, it
makes use of the Fedora firewall - installing an extra firewall which is the
not
used in the default configuration is a bit gratuitous and confusing to the
user.
Also, the Requires: tcpwrappers isn't needed unless the user decides to enable
the tcpwrapper action (disabled by default)
Additional information:
Bug #244275 contains suggestions and possible patches for a fix, but was closed
with NOTABUG as noted in the comment from the EPEL maintainer:
--- Additional comment from maxamillion(a)fedoraproject.org on 2012-01-12
22:46:49 EST ---
Since this is just the EPEL package and I don't maintain fail2ban for Fedora, I
will be keeping it in line with Fedora proper. Please feel free to discuss this
with the Fedora package maintainer.
As I wrote in some comments in Bug #244275, I'm interested in a fix for Fedora,
which is why I file this bug now.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246
--- Comment #99 from Amazed <fedora(a)oeconomist.com> ---
If the bug here were fixed, then we could be assured that the component were
properly identified and that this bug were not the same bug as others are
reporting elsewhere. Otherwise, it would seem that the report were being
closed as perverse response to the the opacity of the error message.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246
Mads Kiilerich <mads(a)kiilerich.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mads(a)kiilerich.com
--- Comment #98 from Mads Kiilerich <mads(a)kiilerich.com> ---
This bug has nothing to do with the initrd component.
The error message is a generic error message that grubby will use whenever shit
happens. The message is thus a _symptom_ of some problem, but all the "me
too"'s here will probably have different root causes and different solutions.
3 main places this message is seen:
* When installing a new system from scratch and kernel installation can't clone
any existing boot loader entry because they haven't been created yet - bug
730357 started with that.
* When the system have some of /etc/grub.cfg and /etc/grub2.conf and
/etc/grub2-efi.conf pointing to an invalid and unused configuration. Grubby
will complain that it was fatal for _one_ of the boot loader configurations,
but it doesn't matter at all as long the right boot loader is handled correctly
... and it usually is. Just uninstall the boot loaders you don't use and/or
remove the unused symlinks.
* When not using an initrd and grubby gets confused by inconsistencies in the
system - Bug 833011.
I suggest leaving this bug closed.
If you see this symptom for other reasons than the one mentioned above then
better file a separate bug so we don't get the different cases mixed up.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246
--- Comment #97 from Amazed <fedora(a)oeconomist.com> ---
(In reply to comment #96)
> The initial comments of this report , doesn't have nothing with grub2 ,
grub2 is plainly a version of grub. The bug is plainly the same bug, whatever
the component is principally at issue.
> So my advice is close this bug as EOL .
This bug is biting with FC 17 (see comment #94) which, far from being past EoL,
is the most recent "stable" release.
> a follow bug #730357
Better to mark bug #730357 as a duplicate of this bug. Let's not pretend that
it this is a new bug; it is over 8 years old. Wiping the slate for a bug that
went so long without being worked does not seem like a good idea.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246
Sergio Monteiro Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|sergio(a)serjux.com |
--- Comment #96 from Sergio Monteiro Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> ---
The initial comments of this report , doesn't have nothing with grub2 , which
is the real problem now.
So my advice is close this bug as EOL .
a follow bug #730357
in meantime I'm out of this report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246
--- Comment #95 from Amazed <fedora(a)oeconomist.com> ---
Since the bug is (finally!) assigned to someone, that person can sort-out which
component is principally at issue.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246
Rob Riggs <rob+redhat(a)pangalactic.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rob+redhat(a)pangalactic.org
--- Comment #94 from Rob Riggs <rob+redhat(a)pangalactic.org> ---
I have this problem now on F17 after upgrading from F15. Platform is x86_64.
Does this now belong to the dracut or grubby package? I don't think the
current component is accurate anymore.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250782
Stas Sergeev <stsp(a)list.ru> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED
Version|14 |16
Resolution|WONTFIX |---
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.