This package contains binary files that are typically excuted by the Flash player or another similar program. These files are not permitted in Fedora. [1] Everything we produce needs to be built from source. [2] The offending file(s) shipped in this package are: /usr/share/hop/flash/HopAudio.swf /usr/share/hop/flash/HopServevt.swf /usr/share/hop/flash/HopVideo.swf /usr/share/hop/flash/JavaScriptFlashGateway.swf /usr/share/hop/flash/HopAudio.swf /usr/share/hop/flash/HopServevt.swf /usr/share/hop/flash/HopVideo.swf /usr/share/hop/flash/JavaScriptFlashGateway.swf If these files are just a fallback for something that is now supported by modern web standards like the HTML5 <video> element, please just remove the binaries. If removing these files would seriously cripple your application, please let me know so we can figure out a solution. If you have any questions, please shout. Thanks! [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#No_inclusion_of_pre-built_binaries_or_libraries [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-August/187836.html
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 22 development cycle. Changing version to '22'. More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/HouseKeeping/Fedora22
I just updated bigloo, and of necessity updated hop as well since 2.5.0 doesn't build with the new version of bigloo. I took a look at these files. The sources for the Hop*.swf files are, as you might guess, created by hop upstream. They are in the same directory as the Hop*.swf files in the source distribution, namely share/flash. Comments at the top indicate that they are built with the mtasc compiler from http://www.mtasc.org/. The situation with JavaScriptFlashGateway.swf is less clear. There is a file named JavaScriptFlashGateway.js in the same directory, but I don't know if it is the source or, if so, how it is built. The JavaScript file's header indicates that it is (part of?) the Macromedia(r) Flash(r) JavaScript Integration Kit. It contains a license statement which appears to be loosely BSD. HTH.
Fedora 22 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2016-07-19. Fedora 22 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
jerry: the policy states that we must re-build the flash binary as part of the package build, though, we cannot simply take the pre-compiled binary from the upstream tarball and put it in our package. all the same files are still present as of F25, so re-opening. Per https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/hop/3.0.0/0.1.rc9.fc24.1/data/logs/x86_64/build.log - the most recent build log - there doesn't appear to be any build step for the .swf components, they're simply copied straight out of the 'source' tree in the install phase.
(In reply to Adam Williamson from comment #4) > jerry: the policy states that we must re-build the flash binary as part of > the package build, though, we cannot simply take the pre-compiled binary > from the upstream tarball and put it in our package. Sure, I was just trying to give the maintainer some potentially helpful information. Michel, are you around at all? We don't have mtasc in Fedora, but its website says that it has been succeeded by haxe, which we do have in Fedora. I made a quick attempt at building the sources with haxe, but it appears that both the language and the library have changed significantly; i.e., more than a small patch is going to be needed to make these files buildable with haxe. I think the best thing to do now is contact hop upstream and ask for help.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 26 development cycle. Changing version to '26'.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 26 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 26. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '26'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 26 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 26 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2018-05-29. Fedora 26 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.