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.
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=135381
--- Comment #39 from Tako Schotanus <tako(a)codejive.org> ---
Well, I saw that the vnc server was updated recently so I made sure I updated
my system to the latest versions of all packages and now it works (except for
the euro sign on the E, but I can live with that)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=x3FYoZLPLv&a=cc_unsubscribe
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=135381
Tako Schotanus <tako(a)codejive.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tako(a)codejive.org
--- Comment #38 from Tako Schotanus <tako(a)codejive.org> ---
BTW, I know this bug is closed but I'm still seeing this problem in F18 , so it
definitely hasn't been fixed. And in Gnome 3 the keyboard preferences doesn't
seem to have a "Reset To Defaults" so I can't use the work-around that was
talked about either.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=P4aSdBVtIg&a=cc_unsubscribe
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246
--- Comment #36 from Dean Hunter <deanhunter(a)comcast.net> ---
I have tried macvtap. While it works with NetworkManager I have two problems
with this approach:
1) It requires a second network for connectivity from the VM guest to the
host.
2) It requires manual use of a GUI to set it up.
I need something that I can script, start, and come back when it is ready to
use.
So far,
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/17/html/System_Administrators_Gu…
is the most recent reference I have found. It only works if NetworkManager is
replace is replaced by network on the host, but this can be scripted. I am
using this on a server class machine so wireless networking is not important.
What do I lose with this approach?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=S8O18rFMnl&a=cc_unsubscribe
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246
--- Comment #35 from johnny.westerlund(a)gmail.com ---
If you need a simple work-around for simple bridging there is support for it in
virt-manager by using a macvtap device.
To bridge a guest to your configured em1/eth0 just edit your virtual-machine in
virt-manager
on the nic in virt-manager of the virtual machine there should be a drop drown
list for: "Source device".
Just pick "Host device eth0 : macvtap"
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=c8s8SBVfp5&a=cc_unsubscribe
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246
--- Comment #34 from Dean Hunter <deanhunter(a)comcast.net> ---
That is good and I am willing to do whatever I can to help test it.
But what we really need to know NOW is the recommended work-around. I am
willing to accept that the network management applet of the Gnome Control
Center can not be used or displays erroneous or misleading information. But
does the NetworkManager service work correctly? if so, what should the
ifcfg-br1 and ifcfg-em1 files look like? Are there steps to be taken before
configuring NetworkManager? What about routing?
These are some of the details we hope will become transparent and I am certain
you know them better than we do. There is a lot of information available that
seems dated in one regard or another and virsh iface-bridge, which seemed like
a big step forward, returns an error
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919625)
It is my understanding that a bridge could be configured to make the virtual
machine guests appear on the network as if they were network peers of the
physical machine host; they would used the same DHCP as the physical machines,
the same address range, the same DNS, etc. I have tried piecing together the
configuration, but nothing I have done quite works.
Please, is there a document you could reference or instructions you could
provide for of us that are not expert enough in the networking utilities to dig
it out on our own?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CFSI5264Nn&a=cc_unsubscribe
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246
--- Comment #33 from Dan Williams <dcbw(a)redhat.com> ---
The code is going to land, it's just not going to make the F19 feature freeze
deadline. And because of this, we want to make sure it's rock-solid before
that happens, since people don't have the heads-up that the feature process
would normally give.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LrTld1HzsJ&a=cc_unsubscribe