On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 14:41 -0700, darrell pfeifer wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 14:05, Adam Williamson <awill...@redhat.com> > wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 21:56 -0700, darrell pfeifer wrote: > > > I also had the same problem with one core using 100% CPU, in > my case > > for Xorg. > > > I've filed a bug on this - > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619889. > -- > > > > Speaking of blockers, I don't know if this qualifies, but it pretty > much makes X unusable. > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602910 > > > I've also had trouble with the latest X not being usable at all on my > laptop (Just a small start of a gnome window in about 1/6 of the > screen) > > > I haven't filed a bug yet (gun-shy since restoring after a dead X is > really tedious, even with my "working X rpm's" backup.
Hardware specific bugs are judgment calls (that's what the 'in most cases' weasel phrase in some of the release criteria means). It depends how many people the issue is likely to effect. We'd need a hardware-specific issue to affect a huge amount of people to consider it an alpha blocker, usually. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
