KDE Live can be installed without creating a regular user - correct/wrong?

KDE Live can be installed without creating a regular user, only root. All you need to do is to not create a regular user in anaconda (only root), and then not create a regular user in the first boot utility (just click Finish). In SSDM, it is then possible to log in using the root account (not a

Re: F38 proposal: Modernize Live Media (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 10:43 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > There should be new options for resetting the persistent overlay and > booting with no persistence. The default options should boot with > persistence and setup of persistence should work. > Neal, Matt, what is the rationale for enabling

Re: [Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Prioritized bugs and issues

On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 9:29 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > We will evaluate the following nominated bugs: > > * [abrt] gnome-shell: clutter_actor_destroy_all_children(): > gnome-shell killed by SIGABRT > - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2127826 I just closed this one. > > * Systemd

Re: Chromium doesn't respond to clicks or typing in 1 external monitor

On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 2:19 PM Frederic Muller wrote: > Hi! > > This one is really weird and probably too specific: > > I start chromium and move it to my lower left monitor (I have 4 > screens). I can do nothing with it. > > I move it back to either center (the primary display) or even the

Re: Fractional scaling

On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 12:29 PM Frederic Muller wrote: > Thank you very much, just did! > It's good to post the link to the bug, in case somebody else is also affected and reading this. ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To

Re: Fractional scaling

On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 10:29 AM Frederic Muller wrote: > The same feature was working fine under F36. > This is the important part. > What should I look at now to resolve this? > Please report a bug: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter ___ test

Re: Loud PC speaker beep during reboot, sometimes

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 9:51 PM John Morris wrote: > About the only fix Linux could make is to ensure all audio channels are > muted as the system goes into shutdown, reboot, sleep or suspend. That > still won't stop a directly connected beeper though. > You're making it sound as if I wanted

Re: Loud PC speaker beep during reboot, sometimes

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 5:13 PM stan via test wrote: > I forgot to reply to this part of the message. I have been running F37 > since it was rawhide, and have never heard this beep. But, I'm running > a desktop, so that might make a difference. And a question. Are you > sure this is the PC

Re: Loud PC speaker beep during reboot, sometimes

On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 12:13 PM Alexander Ploumistos < alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote: > A few months ago I noticed some reports about such an issue, I think > it's related to systemd v251. Here are some links and a proposed > workaround: > > https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=276754 >

Re: Upgrade blocker /usr/bin/WebKitWebDriver

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 12:12 PM RS wrote: > When trying to upgrade to Fedora 37 Beta with the system-upgrade Plugin > like so: > > sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=37 > > I get the following error: > > Error: Transaction test error: > file /usr/bin/WebKitWebDriver from install of

Loud PC speaker beep during reboot, sometimes

Completely randomly, my laptop sometimes emits a loud PC speaker beep while rebooting/powering off Fedora 37. The beep is very strong, and as a PC speaker sound, it of course ignores any configured volume level, mute status, and even headphones plugged in. I fortunately am in a different room than

[Test-Announce] Fwd: Fedora IoT Test Week Occurring Now!

Forwarding a test day announcement from Geoff: Hello testers! Just a heads up: the IoT Test Week is occurring now! [0] Please add your results to the test week page [1] and feel free to chat in #fedora-test-day on libera.chat. Note, in case you tried to test earlier in the week and were faced

[Test-Announce] Fwd: Fedora IoT Test Week Occurring Now!

Forwarding a test day announcement from Geoff: Hello testers! Just a heads up: the IoT Test Week is occurring now! [0] Please add your results to the test week page [1] and feel free to chat in #fedora-test-day on libera.chat. Note, in case you tried to test earlier in the week and were faced

Re: Heads up: GNOME 43.0 megaupdate is in testing

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 6:02 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 10:30 AM Kalev Lember > wrote: > >> This is the GNOME version that's we'll be shipping F37 Final with, so >> please make sure to test it and file issues for things that would need >> fixing

Re: Heads up: GNOME 43.0 megaupdate is in testing

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 6:02 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 10:30 AM Kalev Lember > wrote: > >> This is the GNOME version that's we'll be shipping F37 Final with, so >> please make sure to test it and file issues for things that would need >> fixing

Re: Heads up: GNOME 43.0 megaupdate is in testing

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 10:30 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > This is the GNOME version that's we'll be shipping F37 Final with, so > please make sure to test it and file issues for things that would need > fixing before F37 GA. I'd suggest starting upstream at gitlab.gnome.org > for most issues, and

Re: Heads up: GNOME 43.0 megaupdate is in testing

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 10:30 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > This is the GNOME version that's we'll be shipping F37 Final with, so > please make sure to test it and file issues for things that would need > fixing before F37 GA. I'd suggest starting upstream at gitlab.gnome.org > for most issues, and

gnome-shell crash when resuming/waking up from idle

Hi folks, I wonder if I'm the only one who sees an occasional gnome-shell crash on Fedora 37 when the system is resumed from suspend, or possibly even woken up from idle (screen turned off)? It happens to me a few times per week, completely randomly, I can't reproduce it intentionally. I reported

Re: Release criteria proposal: except BitLocker-enabled installs from Windows dual-boot criterion bootloader requirement

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 9:17 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an > existing clean Windows installation. As long as the Windows > installation does not have BitLocker enabled, the installer must also > install a bootloader which can boot

Re: Release criteria proposal: except BitLocker-enabled installs from Windows dual-boot criterion bootloader requirement

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 9:17 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an > existing clean Windows installation. As long as the Windows > installation does not have BitLocker enabled, the installer must also > install a bootloader which can boot

Re: FYI: livesys and livesys-late init.d files left over after Fedora installation

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 10:46 AM Marius Schwarz wrote: > > Hi, > > if Fedora 35 Liveimage is used to install Fedora, livesys and > livesys-late initscripts are incorrectly copied onto the system > or not deleted after they lost their functionality. > That's not a bug, that's expected. They

Re: Check out the Fedora Packager Dashboard!

On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 11:43 AM Artur Frenszek-Iwicki < s...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > For example, at the top of the page, there's a bunch of numbers. I have no > idea what they mean. > Hovering over each of these displays a tooltip - which is nice - but five > seconds after that tooltip

Re: F37 seems to require a reboot after updates of firmware packages in order for firefox to run.

On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 5:32 PM stan via test wrote: > I'm running an actual install of F37. I have had this experience twice > now. I run the updates in a virtual console using dnf, they > complete successfully, they have a firmware package among the updates. > I then start X to run LXDE, and

Re: Call for testing: UEFI boot of current Rawhide images written to USB with dd

On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 1:45 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > Can anyone else try writing a recent Rawhide image - I used Fedora- > Everything-netinst-x86_64-Rawhide-20220704.n.0.iso at the time, so a > current equivalent would be > >

Re: future of dual booting Windows and Fedora, redux

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 2:32 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2022, at 4:38 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > > Currently there is this (insufficient, of course): > > https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/windows-with-encrypted-disks-bitlocker-cant-be-booted-from-the-grub-boot-menu/20

Re: future of dual booting Windows and Fedora, redux

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 6:52 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > Short term approaches: > > - Documentation: GRUB's Windows boot option may not work, how to use > efibootmgr --bootnext and --bootorder > Currently there is this (insufficient, of course):

Re: future of dual booting Windows and Fedora, redux

On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 8:06 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > a. Fix GRUB by giving it the ability to modify UEFI NRAM "bootnext" value, > so that instead of chainloading the Windows bootloader from GRUB, GRUB will > modify the system NVRAM such that the next boot (only) will directly boot > the Windows

Automated reports redirected into a new mailing list: test-reports

Hello testers and developers, please note that we've set up a new mailing list called test-reports [1] and we've redirected all automated compose/updates/test/etc reports into it. These reports were previously sent to the test list and devel list and created a lot of visual noise among regular

[Test-Announce] Automated reports redirected into a new mailing list: test-reports

Hello testers and developers, please note that we've set up a new mailing list called test-reports [1] and we've redirected all automated compose/updates/test/etc reports into it. These reports were previously sent to the test list and devel list and created a lot of visual noise among regular

[Test-Announce] Automated reports redirected into a new mailing list: test-reports

Hello testers and developers, please note that we've set up a new mailing list called test-reports [1] and we've redirected all automated compose/updates/test/etc reports into it. These reports were previously sent to the test list and devel list and created a lot of visual noise among regular

Re: F37 Change Proposal: Unfiltered Flathub (System-Wide Change)

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 8:42 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > Flathub should only be preferred when there is no Fedora Flatpak > available. > > I don't see it in the proposal. > I see: "GNOME Software will prefer Fedora flatpaks over Flathub flatpaks" What

Re: Future of Test Cases and their Management in Fedora QA

I have played with https://kiwidemo.fedorainfracloud.org for a few days and I have to say I'm quite disappointed by it :-( I thought it would be closer to what we need, with some tweaking. But currently I'm hitting serious obstacles and the user experience for a regular tester is not great either.

Re: F37 proposal: Fallback Hostname (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 4:50 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote: > I think we should add this. > > However, gnome-initial-setup is a bit late because currently anaconda > uses hostname to name your btrfs subvolumes. :( > > anaconda would perhaps be a better place, but only if it uses hostnamed > so as

Re: remove-retired-packages feedback

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 3:52 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > If you already upgraded to Fedora 36 - what is your feedback about > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/latest/release-notes/sysadmin/System_Utilities/#remove-retired-packages > > Did you run the command

Re: Plan / proposal: enable openQA update testing and potentially gating on Rawhide updates

On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 9:48 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > So, I'd like to propose that we enable Rawhide update testing on the > production openQA instance also. This would cause results to appear on > the Automated Tests tab in Bodhi, but they would be only informational > (and unless the update

Re: Updated criteria proposal: networking requirements

On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 1:36 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > Any more thoughts, comments, adjustments etc? Thanks! > Which milestone is this supposed to block? It sounds fine (to my networking layman ears). ___ test mailing list --

Re: Updated criteria proposal: networking requirements

On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 1:36 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > Any more thoughts, comments, adjustments etc? Thanks! > Which milestone is this supposed to block? It sounds fine (to my networking layman ears). ___ devel mailing list --

Re: The future of FMN (Fedora Messaging Notifications)

On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 11:40 AM Aurelien Bompard < abomp...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Hey folks! > > After spending some time evaluating our options, CPE's Advance > Reconnaissance Team came up with this proposal for the next version of FMN: > >

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 7:05 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > Hi there. We just learned that there's an opportunity to have a brand new > Fedora Media Writer 5.0 (with a completely redone UI, but using the same > background code) together with the Fedora 36 release. The timing is tight, > b

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 4:15 AM Geraldo Simião Kutz < geraldo.simiao.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > allright, with 5.0 PT-br is almost done (Rafael tod me he finished by now). > > I saw strange alignment of progress numbers at this window. attached > I'm not sure if Jan still follows this thread, can

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 3:49 PM Jan Grulich wrote: > New scratch build: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=86726403 > > A fixed link:

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 1:56 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > Hello, > when I want to download a Server image, it does not show anything, just a > 0. > > https://imgur.com/a/ZoOE1Y1 > Ouch, that's a bummer. Can you please create a report at https://github.com/FedoraQt/MediaWriter/issues ? This is the

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

I tested the Windows version on Windows 10, and found FMW to be working well, except perhaps one minor issue: Restoring a flash drive on Windows creates a FAT16 partition, which is unusable on larger drives https://github.com/FedoraQt/MediaWriter/issues/464

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

I tested the RPM and Flatpak version on Fedora 36 Workstation, using Thinkpad P1 gen3 with an Intel graphics, and so far I found these issues: "Intel 64bit" as a hardware architecture is confusing https://github.com/FedoraQt/MediaWriter/issues/451 Beta versions shouldn't be offered by default

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 9:29 AM Alex Gurenko via test < test@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Generally seems to be working as expected. But here are some notes after > testing X86_64 RPM version on F36 Beta KDE spin: > - qt6-qtsvg was missing as reported already, so first screenshots didn't >

Re: Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 10:11 PM Yosuke Matsumura wrote: > Tested on Fedora 36 Kinoite - Flatpak downloaded from ( > https://github.com/FedoraQt/MediaWriter/releases/download/latest-flatpak/org.fedoraproject.MediaWriter.flatpak). > System Info (https://paste.centos.org/view/2ecf0d35) > > * After

Please help us test: Fedora Media Writer 5.0

Hi there. We just learned that there's an opportunity to have a brand new Fedora Media Writer 5.0 (with a completely redone UI, but using the same background code) together with the Fedora 36 release. The timing is tight, but we agreed that we'd like to give it a try. We'd like to gather test

Re: Proposal: changes to "default application functionality" release criteria

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 11:35 AM Allan Day wrote: > That said, my own personal sense is that Calendar is used to some > extent, and Contacts and Photos are used much less. That is somewhat > reflected in the app reviews: > > Firefox - 7236 reviews, 3.4 average rating > gedit - 896 reviews, 4.0

Re: Proposal: changes to "default application functionality" release criteria

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 2:15 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > > 1. I know we have had GNOME Test days, but this > >stuff didn't come up. Presumably, it would have if someone had > happened > >to look at GNOME Photos. Can we formally go through > >

Re: Proposal: changes to "default application functionality" release criteria

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 12:13 AM Matthew Miller wrote: > > Time to talk about > > https://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality > again! > > Lots of desktop-app-related blockers this time around, and last time too. I > think we're hitting a

Re: F36 Upgraded, But Now: Failed to resolve allow statement

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:58 AM Garry T. Williams wrote: > Thanks, Adam. But reinstalling already failed to fix the problem for > me. Gary, have you tried reinstalling just selinux-policy, or have you tried the exact command as suggested by Adam? Because the problem was most probably in

Re: Problem: package lilv-0.24.12-4.fc37.x86_64 obsoletes lilv < 0.24.12-2 provided by lilv-0.24.12-1.fc36.i686

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 12:54 AM Reon Beon via test < test@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Fedora rawhide openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 1.7 kB/s | > 989 B 00:00 > Fedora - Rawhide - Developmental packages for the next Fedora r 27 kB/s > | 12 kB 00:00 > Fedora -

Re: Hello

Hello Elijah, welcome and thanks for your help. Be sure to subscribe to the test-announce list and we'll be glad if you help us with testing release candidates, participate in test days and debug proposed/accepted blockers [1]. Thanks. [1]

Re: Make Flatpak support explicit

On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 1:57 PM Brandon Nielsen via test < test@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Based on some discussion at today's blocker review meeting, I thought I > would take the temperature of the room for making Flatpak support > explicit in at least some of the criteria? > > The

Re: F37 Change: Legacy Xorg Driver Removal (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 10:06 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyXorgDriverRemoval > > == Summary == > > This change will remove the `xorg-x11-drv-vesa` and > `xorg-x11-drv-fbdev` driver packages, and associated support code from > the `xorg-x11-server-Xorg`

Re: Possible regression in GNOME in Fedora 36 Branched 20220401.n.0

On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 6:14 AM Ian Laurie wrote: > I've done some playing and it looks like it is the first resize after > the first login after a boot causes it. After that it doesn't seem to > happen (or it is very infrequent if it does). > I'm quite certain it's this:

Fwd: Fedora 36 validation testing event: let's do full testing of Fedora 36 Branched 20220401.n.0

-- Forwarded message - From: Adam Williamson Date: Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:30 PM Subject: Fedora 36 validation testing event: let's do full testing of Fedora 36 Branched 20220401.n.0 To: , < desk...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, , < ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org>, , <

Re: F36: Nautilus not mount SMB-Shares

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 10:36 AM Roger Grosswiler wrote: > Well, not that easy on a screenshot, but i do my best :) > > "Access to place not possible - Mount of the windows share is unsucessful: > the argument is invalid" > Thanks. Can anyone with some smb shares try it, please?

Re: regression in printing and scanning, when upgrading to f36

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 10:00 AM Zdenek Dohnal wrote: > @Chris, I've removed the weak dependency on ipp-usb in cups[1] and > sane-airscan[2], can you/I remove > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2066528 from final blocker > proposals now? > We should probably remove the blocker

Re: Fragments 1.5-4 is failing to download torrents

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 12:14 AM Antonio Dias wrote: > I'm trying to download torrents using Fragments, but it is core-dumping > with the following error: > > [2022-03-31 19:05:44.531] tr_crypto_utils: OpenSSL error: > error:0308010C:digital envelope routines::unsupported > assertion failed:

Re: F36: Nautilus not mount SMB-Shares

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:39 AM Roger Grosswiler wrote: > Hello, > > Since upgrade to F36-Beta, its no longer possible to mount SMB-Share by > Nautilus. > > Connecting to the server works fine, but after clicking on a share to get > it mounted in Nautilus, the following error occurs (sorry,

Re: [IPP-over-USB printers/scanners] Expected breakage when ipp-usb+a driver are installed

Hi Zdenek, a QA person here. This sounds like it's going to be a major headache for us (and our users), I hope I'm wrong. I initially skipped your message, because it was too technical (seemed targeted at system admins, not regular users) and I don't know half of the printer-related abbreviations

Re: Spreading test responsibilities to other teams

On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:59 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > In particular, I'd like to see the Server WG taking care of the Active > Directory tests (which is a non-trivial thing to remove our dependence > on sgallagh's setup, admittedly) and the Cloud SIG taking care of many > of those tests. The fact

Re: FESCo wants to know what you use i686 packages for

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 2:56 PM David Cantrell wrote: > If you use i686 packages for something now, please respond to this thread. > There are some game-related packages (not dependencies) which need to be installed as i686 so that they can apply to 32bit games. I know of the following: *

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 10:57 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > >> Thanks Kamil! So the next step would be to draft test cases for the >> additional blocking functionality. Do we have a plan for that? >> > > I can suggest something as I would like to convert it into OpenQA later, so > I might hit two

Re: Proposal: revise "Default application functionality" final criterion to be clearer

On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 9:35 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following > applications must start successfully and withstand a basic > functionality test: > > * web browser > * file manager > * package manager > Now that I've pushed our new

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 9:48 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > OK. I sent out the complete criterion proposal to Workstation and KDE > lists: > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desk...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/L3QVPHBPHLBT4O2IXHOE5ILCQX4EXXWJ/ > > https://lists

Re: Tweaks to printing test cases and matrix

On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 7:29 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > Going forward, openQA will file results for the "virtual printer" and > Printing_PDF tests. The "real printer" test will still require a human > to do it. > Thanks for the changes, makes sense.

Re: [Bugzilla-announce-list] Action Required: Bugzilla - API Authentication changes

, Feb 9, 2022 at 1:37 PM Jeff Fearn wrote: > On 9/2/2022 20:33, Kamil Paral wrote: > > initially I (and not just me) read the email as "update to the latest > > python-bugzilla and you'll be fine". But after I played with > > bugzilla.stage, and read the announ

Re: [Bugzilla-announce-list] Action Required: Bugzilla - API Authentication changes

On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:30 AM Jeff Fearn wrote: > Tl;dr From Monday 28th February, applications making API calls to > Bugzilla may no longer authenticate using passwords or supplying API > keys in call parameters. Instead, API keys must be supplied in the > Authorization header. > > Support for

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 9:05 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > That sounds fine to me. Lukas' is shorter, but yours to me is clearer > about the purpose of the note, so I like it more. Thanks! > OK. I sent out the complete criterion proposal to Workstation and KDE lists:

Re: Proposal: revise "Default application functionality" final criterion to be clearer

On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 9:35 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > Yes, that's correct. To fix the first problem, and for clarity, here's > a revised proposal for the entire text: > > === > > For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following > applications must start successfully and

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 3:00 PM John Mellor wrote: > I'm ok with that or something similar, but it does point out the need to > fill a large gap in keeping the machine sane when something unexpected > happens. Perhaps F36 can expedite btrfs gui and cli tools to roll back to > the last known sane

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 6:19 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2022-01-24 at 15:28 +0100, Kamil Paral wrote: > > If this is about power outages, I don't see any problem here. A power > > outage is not the package manager's failure, and so those criteria don't > > apply.

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 12:36 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2022-01-21 at 18:20 -0500, John Mellor wrote: > > > > Ok, so would that allowance not violate 2 of the proposed criteria: > > > > 1. * The displayed state of software or software sources must not > > differ from their actual

Re: Proposal: revise "Default application functionality" final criterion to be clearer

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 1:11 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi folks! So I've had this action item at meetings forever now: > > "adamw to try and clarify intent of "default application functionality" > criterion regarding arches" > > That's referring to > >

new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers (take #2)

This is another attempt at creating a new release criterion specific for graphical package managers. We already discussed it in November, but we couldn't agree easily on some particular details, and then I was gone for a long time:

Re: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 10:50 PM Maxwell G via devel < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > On Thu, 2021-09-16 at 15:17 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ExcludeFromWeakAutodetect > > > > > > == Summary == > > exclude_from_weak_autodetect

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 10:41 AM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > I assume we are talking about a GUI software manager and not DNF. > Yes. > I also assume that we want to deliver a user friendly package manager that > is a pleasure to work with. > On that assumption: > > *Scenario 1: Blocking*. You do

Re: Proposal: Migrate “Common Bugs” from the wiki to Ask Fedora

On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 1:04 AM Matthew Miller wrote: > I think the topic titles will be the same as with Common Bugs now, like > "Configured repositories in Discover jump around in the list" or "Clipboard > is not shared with KDE virtual machines". > > The site name, "Ask Fedora", makes me

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 5:49 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > Hmm, let's try something different first. I'll provide a list of scenarios > below, and I'd like everyone participating in this discussion to respond > whether they think that scenario should be blocking or non-blocking (fo

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 3:47 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > So I still disagree with you, but my position is softening. I'd rather > we have a clearly-defined and understood set of criteria that I > disagree with in some places than to try to make every criterion match > my preferences. :-) So while I

Re: Action required: Account system IRC pointer reset

On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 11:35 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > The old Fedora account system had a ‘irc nick’ field. The new Fedora > account system has > a ‘Chat nicknames’ section. In that section you can put IRC nick(s) or > Matrix Ids. > If you do not qualify them, they are assumed to be for the

Re: Proposal: Migrate “Common Bugs” from the wiki to Ask Fedora

On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 4:43 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > Specifics > - > > We’d create a new top-level category, “Common Issues”. Posting directly > in the category would not be allowed. Instead, there would be a > *subcategory*, “Proposed Common Issues”. > > New topics in “Proposed Common

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 4:47 AM Chris Murphy wrote: > When installing, removing, or updating software? If I click an install > button, the selected app should be installed or it's a blocking bug. > Same for removal, same for updating. If it lets you click install for > multiple programs in

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 4:28 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality > > "Basic functionality means that the app must at least be broadly > capable of its most basic expected operations, and that it must not >

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 3:26 PM Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > > >> "dnf install foo; dnf install bar" >> > > This is equivalent to: > > 1. Open Graphical package manager > 2. Install foo > 3. Close Graphical package manager > 4. Open Graphical package manager > 5. Install bar > 6. Close Graphical

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 3:02 PM Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > On Thu, Nov 4, 2021, 11:40 Kamil Paral wrote: > >> I'm not sure if you understood it correctly (or if I even expressed it >> correctly). The operations are of course executed sequentially, always >> (that's

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 2:19 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 6:12 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > "Multiple operations" is one of the reasons for proposing this > criterion. In this release, and previous releases, we often had a bug that > you can

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 5:15 PM Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 12:32 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > >> ~~ >> The default graphical package manager for a given software type must >> appropriately: >> * install, remove and update softwar

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 4:02 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 7:32 AM Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > * install, remove and update software, even if multiple operations are > scheduled sequentially or concurrently > > I don't like the "multiple operatio

Re: new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 3:48 PM Brandon Nielsen wrote: > On 11/3/21 6:31 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > > During the F35 release cycle, there was a dissatisfaction that we use the > "basic functionality" criterion [1] too broadly when discussing package > manager issues (like

new criterion proposal: Graphical package managers

During the F35 release cycle, there was a dissatisfaction that we use the "basic functionality" criterion [1] too broadly when discussing package manager issues (like multiple issues in plasma-discover). I was asked in the latest QA meeting to propose a specific criterion to cover package managers

Re: Keyboard layout criterion update proposal

On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 9:06 PM Adam Williamson wrote: > Hey folks! Before I forget, here's a proposal for a tweak to the > existing criterion regarding keyboard layouts: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_35_Final_Release_Criteria#Keyboard_layout_configuration > > I propose we add: > >

Re: zram0 issue on F35 Beta

On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 1:26 PM Lukas Ruzicka wrote: > I would on the contrary advise not to do it manually, as there is a > possibility to miss out a package and then the upgrade will not work. > It is easy to use *koji* on the command line: > > >1. Install koji: *sudo dnf install koji* >

Re: zram0 issue on F35 Beta

On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 10:30 AM Joachim Backes < joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I'rm running F35 Beta, and I saw the following systemtl message > concerning the zram0 device: > . > . > . > Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: dev-zram0.swap: Job > dev-zram0.swap/start failed with

[Discover] [Bug 443583] New: Toggled repos in Discover jump to the bottom of the list, and other repo names are changed to undefined

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=443583 Bug ID: 443583 Summary: Toggled repos in Discover jump to the bottom of the list, and other repo names are changed to undefined Product: Discover Version: 5.23.0 Platform: Other

Re: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 3:03 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > I've checked the status quo. > > Package "reproducer_reversed" starts supplementing package "rpm". "rpm" is > installed, but "reproducer_reversed" is not. > > 1. dnf upgarde, no rpm update available: reproducer_reversed is not pulled > in >

Re: F36 Change: Enable exclude_from_weak_autodetect by default in LIBDNF (System-Wide Change proposal)

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 8:30 AM Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > > 2. What happens if package P (already installed on the user's system) > > starts recommending package Q (not installed on the user's system)? Will > Q > > get auto-installed together with P's update, or not? I believe it's > > important

Re: criterion update proposal: Keyboard layout configuration in the Initial setup

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 3:22 PM Kamil Paral wrote: > This is related to bug 2003253 [1]. As reported in comment 1, our current > "Keyboard layout configuration" criterion [2] specifies where the > configured keyboard layout must be honored. It doesn't specify the initial >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >