rawhide report: 20141104 changes
Compose started at Tue Nov 4 05:15:02 UTC 2014 Broken deps for i386 -- [3Depict] 3Depict-0.0.16-3.fc22.i686 requires libmgl.so.7.2.0 [Sprog] Sprog-0.14-27.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.0) [alienarena] alienarena-7.66-4.fc22.i686 requires libode-double.so.3 [audtty] audtty-0.1.12-9.fc20.i686 requires libaudclient.so.2 [authhub] authhub-0.1.2-3.fc19.i686 requires libjson.so.0 [cab] cab-0.1.9-12.fc22.i686 requires cabal-dev [collectd] collectd-onewire-5.4.1-10.fc22.i686 requires libowcapi-2.9.so.7 [condor] condor-plumage-8.1.4-7.a1a7df5.fc22.i686 requires libmongoclient.so [couchdb] couchdb-1.6.1-1.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 couchdb-1.6.1-1.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_drv_version) = 0:3.0 [deltacloud-core] deltacloud-core-rackspace-1.1.3-1.fc20.noarch requires rubygem(cloudservers) deltacloud-core-rackspace-1.1.3-1.fc20.noarch requires rubygem(cloudfiles) [django-recaptcha] django-recaptcha-0.1-7.20091212svn6.fc21.noarch requires python-django14 [dnssec-check] dnssec-check-1.14.0.1-4.fc20.i686 requires libval-threads.so.14 dnssec-check-1.14.0.1-4.fc20.i686 requires libsres.so.14 [dragonegg] dragonegg-3.4-0.3.rc0.fc21.i686 requires libLLVM-3.4.so dragonegg-3.4-0.3.rc0.fc21.i686 requires gcc = 0:4.8.2-14.fc21 [edelib] edelib-2.1-5.fc22.i686 requires libedelib.so edelib-devel-2.1-5.fc22.i686 requires libedelib.so [ejabberd] ejabberd-14.07-2.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 ejabberd-14.07-2.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_drv_version) = 0:3.0 [erlang-basho_metrics] erlang-basho_metrics-1.0.0-12.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-bitcask] erlang-bitcask-1.6.3-5.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-cl] erlang-cl-1.2.1-5.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-ebloom] erlang-ebloom-1.1.2-6.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-eleveldb] erlang-eleveldb-1.3.2-6.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-emmap] erlang-emmap-0-0.10.git05ae1bb.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-erlsyslog] erlang-erlsyslog-0.6.2-7.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_drv_version) = 0:3.0 [erlang-esasl] erlang-esasl-0.1-16.20120116git665cc80.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_drv_version) = 0:3.0 [erlang-esdl] erlang-esdl-1.3.1-6.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_drv_version) = 0:3.0 [erlang-js] erlang-js-1.2.2-7.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_drv_version) = 0:3.0 [erlang-sd_notify] erlang-sd_notify-0.1-4.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-skerl] erlang-skerl-1.1.0-9.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [erlang-snappy] erlang-snappy-1.0.3-0.9.git80db168.fc22.i686 requires erlang(erl_nif_version) = 0:2.6 [eucalyptus] eucalyptus-common-java-3.3.0-0.5.20130408git32052445.fc20.i686 requires hibernate3-jbosscache = 0:3.6.10-7 [fatrat] 1:fatrat-1.2.0-0.21.beta2.fc22.i686 requires libtorrent-rasterbar.so.7 [flush] flush-0.9.12-10.fc22.i686 requires libtorrent-rasterbar.so.7 [gdesklet-SlideShow] gdesklet-SlideShow-0.9-16.fc21.noarch requires gdesklets [gdesklets-citation] gdesklets-citation-2.0-3.20120702git355e2ee.fc19.noarch requires gdesklets [gedit-valencia] gedit-valencia-0.4.0-1.20131223git94442bf.fc21.i686 requires libvala-0.24.so.0 [ghc-hjsmin] ghc-hjsmin-0.1.4.7-3.fc22.i686 requires libHSoptparse-applicative-0.9.0-ghc7.6.3.so [glances] glances-2.1.2-2.fc22.noarch requires python-psutil = 0:2.0.0 [gofer] ruby-gofer-0.77.1-2.fc21.noarch requires rubygem(qpid) = 0:0.16.0 [iwhd] iwhd-1.6-11.fc22.i686 requires libmongoclient.so [kmid2] kmid2-2.4.0-7.fc22.i686 requires libdrumstick-file.so.0 kmid2-2.4.0-7.fc22.i686 requires libdrumstick-alsa.so.0 [leiningen] leiningen-1.7.1-7.fc20.noarch requires maven-ant-tasks leiningen-1.7.1-7.fc20.noarch requires classworlds [libghemical] libghemical-2.99.1-24.fc20.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3 libghemical-2.99.1-24.fc20.i686 requires libatlas.so.3 [libopensync-plugin-irmc] 1:libopensync-plugin-irmc-0.22-7.fc20.i686 requires libopenobex.so.1 [ltsp] ltsp-client-5.4.5-8.fc21.i686 requires fuse-unionfs ltsp-server-5.4.5-8.fc21.i686 requires cdialog [meshmagick] meshmagick-0.6.0-20.svn2898.fc21.i686 requires libOgreMain.so.1.8.1 meshmagick-libs-0.6.0-20.svn2898.fc21.i686 requires libOgreMain.so.1.8.1 [monodevelop-vala] monodevelop-vala-2.8.8.1-6.fc21.i686 requires vala 0:0.25.0 [netdisco] netdisco-1.1-7.fc21.noarch requires perl(SNMP::Info::Layer2::Bay) [nodejs-muffin]
F-21 Branched report: 20141104 changes
Compose started at Tue Nov 4 07:15:02 UTC 2014 Broken deps for armhfp -- [PyQuante] PyQuante-libint-1.6.4-11.fc21.1.armv7hl requires libint(armv7hl-32) = 0:1.1.6-2.fc21 [audtty] audtty-0.1.12-9.fc20.armv7hl requires libaudclient.so.2 [authhub] authhub-0.1.2-3.fc19.armv7hl requires libjson.so.0 [avro] avro-mapred-1.7.5-9.fc21.noarch requires hadoop-mapreduce avro-mapred-1.7.5-9.fc21.noarch requires hadoop-client [blender] 1:blender-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADAStreamWriter.so.0.1 1:blender-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADASaxFrameworkLoader.so.0.1 1:blender-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADAFramework.so.0.1 1:blender-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADABaseUtils.so.0.1 1:blender-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libMathMLSolver.so.0.1 1:blender-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libGeneratedSaxParser.so.0.1 1:blenderplayer-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADAStreamWriter.so.0.1 1:blenderplayer-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADASaxFrameworkLoader.so.0.1 1:blenderplayer-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADAFramework.so.0.1 1:blenderplayer-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libOpenCOLLADABaseUtils.so.0.1 1:blenderplayer-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libMathMLSolver.so.0.1 1:blenderplayer-2.72b-1.fc21.armv7hl requires libGeneratedSaxParser.so.0.1 [cduce] cduce-0.5.5-9.fc21.armv7hl requires ocaml(Camlp4) = 0:ebd368022fd2bc7b305a42902efa4c90 [deltacloud-core] deltacloud-core-rackspace-1.1.3-1.fc20.noarch requires rubygem(cloudservers) deltacloud-core-rackspace-1.1.3-1.fc20.noarch requires rubygem(cloudfiles) [django-recaptcha] django-recaptcha-0.1-7.20091212svn6.fc21.noarch requires python-django14 [dragonegg] dragonegg-3.4-0.3.rc0.fc21.armv7hl requires gcc = 0:4.8.2-14.fc21 [edelib] edelib-2.1-5.fc21.armv7hl requires libedelib.so edelib-devel-2.1-5.fc21.armv7hl requires libedelib.so [fatrat] 1:fatrat-1.2.0-0.21.beta2.fc21.armv7hl requires libtorrent-rasterbar.so.7 [flush] flush-0.9.12-10.fc21.armv7hl requires libtorrent-rasterbar.so.7 [gdesklet-SlideShow] gdesklet-SlideShow-0.9-16.fc21.noarch requires gdesklets [gdesklets-citation] gdesklets-citation-2.0-3.20120702git355e2ee.fc19.noarch requires gdesklets [gedit-valencia] gedit-valencia-0.4.0-1.20131223git94442bf.fc21.armv7hl requires libvala-0.24.so.0 [gofer] ruby-gofer-0.77.1-2.fc21.noarch requires rubygem(qpid) = 0:0.16.0 [golang-github-influxdb-influxdb] golang-github-influxdb-influxdb-datastore-0.8.0-0.3.rc4.git67f9869.fc21.noarch requires golang(github.com/jmhodges/levigo) golang-github-influxdb-influxdb-datastore-0.8.0-0.3.rc4.git67f9869.fc21.noarch requires golang(code.google.com/p/log4go) golang-github-influxdb-influxdb-devel-0.8.0-0.3.rc4.git67f9869.fc21.noarch requires golang(github.com/jmhodges/levigo) golang-github-influxdb-influxdb-devel-0.8.0-0.3.rc4.git67f9869.fc21.noarch requires golang(github.com/influxdb/go-cache) golang-github-influxdb-influxdb-devel-0.8.0-0.3.rc4.git67f9869.fc21.noarch requires golang(github.com/bmizerany/pat) golang-github-influxdb-influxdb-devel-0.8.0-0.3.rc4.git67f9869.fc21.noarch requires golang(code.google.com/p/log4go) [gorm] gorm-1.2.18-5.fc20.armv7hl requires libgnustep-gui.so.0.23 [leiningen] leiningen-1.7.1-7.fc20.noarch requires maven-ant-tasks leiningen-1.7.1-7.fc20.noarch requires classworlds [libghemical] libghemical-2.99.1-24.fc20.armv7hl requires libf77blas.so.3 libghemical-2.99.1-24.fc20.armv7hl requires libatlas.so.3 [libopensync-plugin-irmc] 1:libopensync-plugin-irmc-0.22-7.fc20.armv7hl requires libopenobex.so.1 [ltsp] ltsp-client-5.4.5-8.fc21.armv7hl requires fuse-unionfs ltsp-server-5.4.5-8.fc21.armv7hl requires cdialog [meshmagick] meshmagick-0.6.0-20.svn2898.fc21.armv7hl requires libOgreMain.so.1.8.1 meshmagick-libs-0.6.0-20.svn2898.fc21.armv7hl requires libOgreMain.so.1.8.1 [monodevelop-vala] monodevelop-vala-2.8.8.1-6.fc21.armv7hl requires vala 0:0.25.0 [netdisco] netdisco-1.1-7.fc21.noarch requires perl(SNMP::Info::Layer2::Bay) [ocaml-pa-do] ocaml-pa-do-0.8.16-3.fc21.armv7hl requires ocaml(Camlp4) = 0:ebd368022fd2bc7b305a42902efa4c90 [openslides] openslides-1.3.1-3.fc21.noarch requires python-django 0:1.5 [openstack-nova] openstack-nova-compute-2014.1.2-1.fc21.noarch requires libvirt-daemon-xen [openvas-client] openvas-client-3.0.3-8.fc20.armv7hl requires libopenvas_omp.so.6 openvas-client-3.0.3-8.fc20.armv7hl requires libopenvas_nasl.so.6 openvas-client-3.0.3-8.fc20.armv7hl requires libopenvas_misc.so.6
Resume still broken on Thinkpad X1 Carbon
Just FYI, I tried out the F21 beta image in the vain hope that my resume problems would have magically gone away. No such luck. In case anybody is interested, here is what (little) I know... - Resume works great under F20. - Under F21, suspend seems to work fine, but there is no response to the power button (or any other input). One has to hold the power button until the firmware gets fed up and powers things down hard. - The kernel doesn't seem to matter; running an F20 kernel with F21 user space still fails. - Booting with init=/bin/bash produces a system that will not resume under either release; it fails in pretty much the same way. Single-user mode, instead, resumes properly under F20. So some sort of setup is happening that enables proper resume, but only on F20. - Running the F21 udev configuration on an F20 system still resumes properly. - As far as I can tell, the configuration of wakeup events, as found in sysfs, is the same on both systems. I'm pretty well mystified, but, given my general lack of skills in this part of the system, that's not surprising. My next step, perhaps, is to start disabling boot-time unit files until I find the one that makes resume work, then try to see what's different under F21. But if anybody has a better idea, I'm all ears. Thanks, jon -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Announcing the release of Fedora 21 Beta!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The Fedora 21 beta release is here, and - as usual - is packed with amazing improvements to Fedora, as well as fantastic free and open source software, gently harvested for your enjoyment. No bits were harmed in the making of this beta. What is the Beta Release? = The beta release is the last important milestone before the release of Fedora 21. A Beta release is code-complete and bears a very strong resemblance to the third and final release. Only critical bug fixes will be pushed as updates up to the general release of Fedora 21. The final release of Fedora 21 is [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/21/Schedule] expected in early December. Meanwhile, download the beta of Fedora 21 and help us make it even better: http://fedoraproject.org/get-prerelease We need your help to make Fedora 21 the best release yet, so please take some time to download and try out the beta and make sure the things that are important to you are working. If you find a bug, please report it: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_file_a_bug_report Every bug you uncover is a chance to improve the experience for millions of Fedora users worldwide. Together, we can make Fedora 21 a rock-solid distribution. We have a culture of coordinating new features and pushing fixes upstream as much as feasible and your feedback will help improve not only Fedora but Linux and free software on the whole. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects (See the end of this announcement for more information on how to help.) Since it's a beta release, some problems may still be lurking. A list of problems that we already know about can be found at the Common F21 bugs page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F21_bugs Fedora.Next and Fedora 21 Products == As part of the Fedora.next initiative, Fedora 21 will boast three products, Cloud, Server, and Workstation: * Cloud: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud * Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server * Workstation: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation We encourage you to visit the wiki pages providing the details of these individual products for more information. Spins - - In addition to the new Fedora products, Fedora users also have the choice of Fedora Spins that highlight user favorites like KDE Plasma Workspaces, Xfce, LXDE, and Sugar on a Stick (SoaS). If you're interested in trying out one of the spins, head over to the prelease page for Fedora Spins and grab the spins you're interested in: http://fedoraproject.org/get-spin-prerelease Fedora 21 Base - -- Each of the products will build on the base set of packages for Fedora. For instance, each product will use the same packages for the kernel, RPM, Yum, systemd, Anaconda, and so forth. The Base Working Group develops the standard platform for all Fedora products, which includes the installer, compose tools, and basic platform for the other products. The Base set of packages is not a full product intended for use on its own, but to be kept as a small, stable platform for other products to build on. Highlights in the Beta Release == In this section, we'll look at some of the things that are new or interesting in the Beta release. A Note on Shellshocked - -- You've probably read all about the Shellshocked vulnerability in GNU Bash, which affected Fedora 19, 20, and 21 Alpha. Rest assured that Fedora 21 beta has been patched to close this vulnerability. Fedora 21 Cloud === The Fedora Cloud Working Group and Special Interest Group (SIG) has been busy leading up to Fedora 21. Cloud is now a top-level product for Fedora 21, and will include images for use in private cloud environments like OpenStack, as well as AMIs for use on Amazon, and a new image streamlined for running Docker containers. Modular Kernel Packaging for Cloud - -- Space is precious, and there's little reason to include drivers for hardware that doesn't exist in the cloud. As part of the work for Fedora 21, the cloud SIG and kernel team split the kernel into two packages. One package contains the minimum modules for running in a virtualized environment, the other contains the larger set of modules for a more general installation. As a result, the F21 beta cloud image is 10% smaller than F20, making for faster deployment. Fedora Atomic Host - -- Red Hat announced Project Atomic (http://projectatomic.io/), in early April of this year as an effort to provide the tools and patterns for a streamlined operating system to run Docker containers. The Fedora 21 release will be the first to offer an Atomic host for Fedora, which includes a minimal set of packages and an image composed with rpm-ostree. While using the same RPMs as other Fedora offerings, the Atomic host will allow users to roll
Re: Systemd can not start rtkit-daemon, ntpd, cups with PrivateTmp=yes.
Gi Ed, Thank you. Best regards. Francis On 11/04/2014 01:43 AM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 11/03/14 23:55, Francis SOUYRI wrote: With and without the lastest systemd update I have the problem. I would compare how your file system is laid out with your other working systems. Since this isn't a common problem, it hasn't been mentioned on the user's list, I would take the question to the wider audience on the users list as this list is more devoted to testing of the upcoming release of F21. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F21 TC-3 installation issue [resolved, sort of]
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 03:20:21PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 15:29 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: I installed TC-3 in a VirtualBox VM (latest vbox release, 64-bit) t'other day. Mostly it went quite well with one really oddball exception. I don't know if it's a general problem (haven't seen other mentions of it) or not, but it's weird enough I thought to mention it here. When creating a user in Anaconda, I entered the password twice, as prompted, and it said they didn't match. so I did it again. and again. and again. It insisted they didn't match. tried the same thing for the root password and got the same result. So, I entered a one-character password, in both fields, and it did not say they didn't match. so I tried two chars. ok so far. by working my way up to the full password, one char at a time in both fields, it allowed me to get the whole thing in successfully. This worked for both my username and for root. Never seen any such thing before! If anyone wants me to, I can go try more installs and see if I can reproduce. If I CAN, what sorts of extra info would be helpful when i report it? Adam, et al: I did two more fresh installs last night to see if I could reproduce this, and was unable to. So, I have no idea if I was doing something wrong in the first instance, or what. So I guess it counts as resolved, for some values therof. That's, um, a rather strange one. It's hard to know what kind of info is best apart from the obvious 'how can you reproduce it' - AFAIK those are pretty standard GTK+ text entry boxes and all anaconda does is compare their contents. So basically the bug is this: 1. type 'correcthorsebatterystaple' in box 1 2. type 'correcthorsebatterystaple' in box 2 NO MATCH 1. type 'c' in box 1 2. type 'c' in box 2 3. type 'o' in box 1 4. type 'o' in box 2 5. type 'r' in box 1 6. type 'r' in box 2 (SOME TIME LATER) 49. type 'e' in box 1 50. type 'e' in box 2 MATCH right? I guess the other info is whether it depends on the actual password used, and if so, what's a password that triggers it. I definitely haven't seen that in my F21 testing. I tend to use the password '11', but I do use 'correcthorse@' sometimes for keyboard layout tests. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. -- Philippians 4:13 --- -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Note on 'systemd-216-9'
An update has been submitted for systemd today: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kmod-18-4.fc21,systemd-216-9.fc21 with a fairly short description. I wanted to flag up that, in fact, systemd-216-9 is a major change from systemd-216-8 and is not really systemd 216 at all. systemd-216-8 (and 216-1 through 216-5) and earlier) was more or less identical to upstream systemd-stable 216: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd-stable/log/?h=v216-stable . systemd 216-9 is not built from 216 at all, it is in fact systemd-217 with some particular changes (presumably intended to be the most disruptive ones) reverted. When I dropped build-related files and directories and documentation from the trees, did a context-free recursive diff, and filtered out the metadata from the diff, it still worked out at 7,000 lines worth of additions and removals between the underlying code of 'systemd-216-8' and 'systemd-216-9'. This is a lot of change to land between Beta and Final. Testers, please take care to test the update thoroughly, despite the small bump and small description it is a major change to the package. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 21 Final Test Compose 1 (TC1) Available Now!
As per the Fedora 21 schedule [1], Fedora 21 Final Test Compose 1 (TC1) is now available for testing. Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6031 . Please see the following pages for download links (including delta ISOs) and testing instructions. Normally dl.fedoraproject.org should provide the fastest download, but download-ib01.fedoraproject.org is available as a mirror (with an approximately 1 hour lag) in case of trouble. To use it, just replace dl with download-ib01 in the download URL. Installation: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test Base: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test Workstation and Desktop: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Server_Test Cloud: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Cloud_Test Summary: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Summary Ideally, all Alpha, Beta, and Final priority test cases for each of these test pages [2] should pass in order to meet the Final Release Criteria [3]. Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [4], or on the test list [5]. Create Fedora 21 Final test compose (TC) and release candidate (RC) https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6031 Current Blocker and Freeze Exception bugs: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current [1] http://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-21/f-21-quality-tasks.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Final_Release_Criteria [4] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa [5] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce-- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Note on 'systemd-216-9'
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 08:30:32 -0800, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org wrote: systemd-216-8 (and 216-1 through 216-5) and earlier) was more or less identical to upstream systemd-stable 216: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd-stable/log/?h=v216-stable . systemd 216-9 is not built from 216 at all, it is in fact systemd-217 with some particular changes (presumably intended to be the most There is a definite problem with 217 I have been seeing in rawhide. I am seeing an intermittent (very roughly 50% of boots) problem where copying logs to persistent storage hangs for a long time. This is described in: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1159641 Though I actually filed that bug because the debug-shell was shutting the system down. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F21 TC-3 installation issue
On 11/03/2014 12:29 PM, Fred Smith wrote: I installed TC-3 in a VirtualBox VM (latest vbox release, 64-bit) t'other day. Mostly it went quite well with one really oddball exception. I don't know if it's a general problem (haven't seen other mentions of it) or not, but it's weird enough I thought to mention it here. When creating a user in Anaconda, I entered the password twice, as prompted, and it said they didn't match. so I did it again. and again. and again. It insisted they didn't match. tried the same thing for the root password and got the same result. So, I entered a one-character password, in both fields, and it did not say they didn't match. so I tried two chars. ok so far. by working my way up to the full password, one char at a time in both fields, it allowed me to get the whole thing in successfully. This worked for both my username and for root. Never seen any such thing before! I have seen a similar issue when installing in a VM viewed over VNC. Occasional characters would get dropped. I ended up just carefully typing the passwords in one character at a time, making sure that there was another dot each time. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Resume still broken on Thinkpad X1 Carbon
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 09:17 -0500, Jonathan Corbet wrote: Just FYI, I tried out the F21 beta image in the vain hope that my resume problems would have magically gone away. No such luck. In case anybody is interested, here is what (little) I know... - Resume works great under F20. - Under F21, suspend seems to work fine, but there is no response to the power button (or any other input). One has to hold the power button until the firmware gets fed up and powers things down hard. - The kernel doesn't seem to matter; running an F20 kernel with F21 user space still fails. - Booting with init=/bin/bash produces a system that will not resume under either release; it fails in pretty much the same way. Single-user mode, instead, resumes properly under F20. So some sort of setup is happening that enables proper resume, but only on F20. - Running the F21 udev configuration on an F20 system still resumes properly. - As far as I can tell, the configuration of wakeup events, as found in sysfs, is the same on both systems. I'm pretty well mystified, but, given my general lack of skills in this part of the system, that's not surprising. My next step, perhaps, is to start disabling boot-time unit files until I find the one that makes resume work, then try to see what's different under F21. But if anybody has a better idea, I'm all ears. Check the modules loaded in working and non-working cases? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[IMPORTANT] Fedora 21 Schedule Change
== tl;dr Version == We are accelerating the Fedora 21 schedule so that we will enter Final Freeze one week earlier than previously described on the schedule page[1]. This means that all fixes intended for inclusion in the Fedora 21 release must be submitted for the stable repository no later than November 17th (so that we have time to do the updates push and build the Release Candidate on November 18th). The Final Release date will remain at December 9th. This essentially means that we are implementing a planned two-week Final Freeze instead of the traditional one-week freeze. == Why are we doing this? == The Fedora 21 cycle has run considerably beyond its original deadline, primarily due to the massive number of changes that we have been implementing this time around (in particular, the shift to producing three top-tier Products has had a significant impact). Because of the schedule adjustments that took place during the Alpha and Beta phases, we are now looking at an early December release for Fedora 21. With the Final Release being so close to the December holidays, any delay that occurs at this point puts Fedora at real danger of slipping out of 2014 entirely. To minimize this risk, FESCo has decided (with QA and rel-eng input), that we are going to make a one-time modification to our schedule. The historic cause of slips has been that the time between the start of Freeze and the completion of the release validation has never left enough room in the schedule to fix any blocker issues that come up. By moving up the Freeze, we hope to be able to identify these blockers faster and maintain our curernt planned release date. We are aware that shortening a schedule puts added strain on our developers, which is why we generally do not do so except at great reluctance. However, the Fedora Updates Policy[2] describes the period between Beta and Final releases thusly: The branched tree should now be stabilized and prepared for release. Major changes should be avoided during this period. So the shorter time-frame should already be dedicated only to addressing bug-fixes. Most of these can be handled with a release-day update if needed; those that are truly release- blocking will remain so (and will be allowed to be built into the release candidates during the freeze). [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/21/Schedule [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Beta_to_Pre_Release signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
One more testing request: F21 fedup using Final TC1 tree
Hi, folks! Thanks again for all the Beta validation and fedup testing lately. There's one more set of testing we could really use results for quickly. The Final TC1 compose has been done so early partly with the goal of providing a fedup upgrade.img that isn't affected by the 15-minute timeout bug - Final TC1 has been built with systemd 216-8, which removes that timeout. It'd be great if folks could test fedup from 19 and 20 to 21, with --instrepo pointing to the 21 Final TC1 tree: fedup --network 21 --product (product) --instrepo https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/21_TC1/Server/x86_64/os or: fedup --network 21 --product (product) --instrepo https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/21_TC1/Server/i386/os or: fedup --network 21 --product (product) --instrepo https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/21_TC1/Server/armhfp/os ideally, run the test with fedup 0.9.0-1 and a package set that will take more than 15 minutes to update, so we can confirm the systemd fix works even without the fedup workaround. I've run a couple of tests here that looked good, but it'd be good to have more confirmation. If folks can report back to this thread with results that'd be great. We intend to have mirrormanager point fedup at the 21 Final TC1 tree as the upgrade.img source if this testing goes well. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Shouldn't this work?
I just tried the f21 beta workstation live iso, and the poor old nouveau driver apparently can't run this card: 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation GM107 [GeForce GTX 750 Ti] (rev a2) I thought I read that support for Maxwell (I think its maxwell :-) was in the latest nouveau and mesa. Is the latest not in f21? Is it a bug that it doesn't work? (I just get a black screen on my UHD monitor with display port cable). -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Shouldn't this work?
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 14:02 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote: I just tried the f21 beta workstation live iso, and the poor old nouveau driver apparently can't run this card: 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation GM107 [GeForce GTX 750 Ti] (rev a2) I thought I read that support for Maxwell (I think its maxwell :-) was in the latest nouveau and mesa. Is the latest not in f21? Is it a bug that it doesn't work? (I just get a black screen on my UHD monitor with display port cable). mesa isn't going to affect basic console output. The key thing there is mostly the code that's in the kernel, certainly not mesa and probably not the DDX. F21 has kernel 3.17. You could try a Rawhide nightly live (yes, these are being built still, you can find 'em in Koji) and see if it works there, as that has kernel 3.18. Or just file a bug upstream with the usual information, if you can manage to get the logs out 'flying blind' (or by enabling ssh or something). -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: One more testing request: F21 fedup using Final TC1 tree
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 11:02 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: Hi, folks! Thanks again for all the Beta validation and fedup testing lately. There's one more set of testing we could really use results for quickly. The Final TC1 compose has been done so early partly with the goal of providing a fedup upgrade.img that isn't affected by the 15-minute timeout bug - Final TC1 has been built with systemd 216-8, which removes that timeout. It'd be great if folks could test fedup from 19 and 20 to 21, with --instrepo pointing to the 21 Final TC1 tree: fedup --network 21 --product (product) --instrepo https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/21_TC1/Server/x86_64/os or: fedup --network 21 --product (product) --instrepo https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/21_TC1/Server/i386/os or: fedup --network 21 --product (product) --instrepo https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/21_TC1/Server/armhfp/os ideally, run the test with fedup 0.9.0-1 and a package set that will take more than 15 minutes to update, so we can confirm the systemd fix works even without the fedup workaround. I've run a couple of tests here that looked good, but it'd be good to have more confirmation. If folks can report back to this thread with results that'd be great. We intend to have mirrormanager point fedup at the 21 Final TC1 tree as the upgrade.img source if this testing goes well. Note - if this complains about something not being signed, try adding --nogpgcheck . The TC1 upgrade stuff may not be signed yet. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
2014-10-27 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting - Minutes
== #fedora-meeting: Fedora QA meeting == Meeting started by adamw at 15:01:10 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-10-27/fedora-qa.2014-10-27-15.01.log.html . Meeting summary --- * Roll call (adamw, 15:01:17) * Fedora 21 Beta status (adamw, 15:06:48) * thanks to all for Beta testing work last week (adamw, 15:07:45) * we'll do blocker review following this meeting (adamw, 15:12:01) * Open floor (adamw, 15:26:36) * LINK: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/list/QA/?subject=Test+Day (kparal, 15:31:50) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Roshi/TCMSWants (roshi, 15:35:52) * roshi has put up https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Roshi/TCMSWants as a place to collect thoughts on what we really want in a test (case) management system, please add your notes there! (adamw, 15:39:44) Meeting ended at 16:10:33 UTC. Action Items Action Items, by person --- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --- * adamw (64) * roshi (41) * kparal (9) * pwhalen (5) * zodbot (5) * satellit (3) * satellit_e (3) * brunowolff (2) * jreznik_pp (2) * lnovich2 (1) * pschindl (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
2014-11-03 @ 16:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting - Minutes
== #fedora-meeting: Fedora QA meeting == Meeting started by adamw at 16:02:11 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-11-03/fedora-qa.2014-11-03-16.02.log.html . Meeting summary --- * Roll call (adamw, 16:02:19) * Fedora 21 Beta: remaining work (adamw, 16:08:20) * major upgrade issue needs mitigating / resolving somehow for beta: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1159292 (adamw, 16:10:24) * AGREED: QA recommends that we at a minimum ensure fedup for 19 and 20 is updated to work around this issue today (and will provide karma to ensure that's possible). We also endorse the proposal to delete the Beta upgrade.img and provide an alternative in a special location if releng considers it viable and not too much work. (adamw, 16:45:22) * Common Bugs needs updating - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F21_bugs , http://bit.ly/fedora-commonbugs-proposed is the list of bugs that need to be added to the page (plus some old stale ones) (adamw, 16:50:34) * Fedora 21 Final schedule (adamw, 16:53:40) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/21/Schedule (jreznik, 16:55:27) * it was discussed at Go/No-Go whether any or all of a) TC1 compose date, b) Final freeze date, c) the actual scheduled Final release date could be moved up from the current schedule - see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/21/Schedule (adamw, 16:56:13) * AGREED: QA in principle supports moving any or all of Final TC1, Final freeze and Final release date a week earlier on the schedule to provide more time for blocker identification and fixing and less likelihood of a post-Christmas slip (adamw, 17:10:14) * Open floor (adamw, 17:16:37) Meeting ended at 17:20:13 UTC. Action Items Action Items, by person --- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --- * adamw (142) * sgallagh (61) * nirik (37) * kparal (24) * jreznik (20) * roshi (16) * danofsatx (14) * wwoods (6) * mattdm (6) * zodbot (5) * masta (3) * pwhalen (1) * satellit (1) * pingou (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Resume still broken on Thinkpad X1 Carbon
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 10:48:00 -0800 Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Check the modules loaded in working and non-working cases? Should have mentioned...I did that. About the only promising sounding discrepancy was ec_sys, but loading it didn't change anything. Of course, I loaded it after boot; guess I should retry with ec_sys loaded from the outset. Thanks, jon -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Note on 'systemd-216-9'
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 21:13 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 08:30:32AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: An update has been submitted for systemd today: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kmod-18-4.fc21,systemd-216-9.fc21 with a fairly short description. I wanted to flag up that, in fact, systemd-216-9 is a major change from systemd-216-8 and is not really systemd 216 at all. Hi Adam, this annoucement misrepresents the situation quite a bit. Since you are speaking from your position as QA chief I don't hold that position, and there isn't such a position. , your word carries a lot of weight. We *were* in contact on IRC yesterday, I'm in #fedora-devel semi-permanently, and it should not be a problem to show it to me before you sent it out, since you are talking about updates I made. If you disagreed with what I have to say and *then* sent the mail, that would be fine, but not like this, out of the blue. Sorry for not running it by you first, but I'm just trying to stay on top of a whole bunch of stuff for F21 right now. I wasn't *complaining* about anything. I just wanted to make sure people didn't rubber-stamp 216-9 on the impression that it contained a single bugfix vs -8 or something. Anyway, returning to the matter at hand, systemd-216-9 is fairly close to systemd-216-8, has patches over it to fix *known bugs*, the ones listed in the update, a few listed on the freedesktop systemd bug tracker, and a few small ones I found while testing the update. The delta is not as small as I would like, but fits imho in the rules. I didn't say otherwise, but I wouldn't characterize the diff posted earlier as 'fairly close', it really isn't. Anything past a dozen LOC is not 'fairly close', IMHO. If systemd upstream was doing point releases, this would certainly qualify as one. Well, I didn't want to bring it up, but that would rather clarify things, wouldn't it? Right now we have a sort of messy situation where what the Fedora package is is basically 'whatever's on the systemd-stable 216 branch upstream', and what that is is 'whatever you find most convenient right at present' - like the Fedora package, up until a couple of days ago that branch was a few hundred commits added to the 216 tarball, whereas now it's been completely changed to be 217 minus a few reversions. This I guess makes sense to you as you have this kind of mental vision of what you want '216 stable' to be, so it makes sense to at some point say 'oh hey, my mental 216 stable is just 217 minus X, Y and Z, so let's make the branch be that' but it's rather difficult for anyone else to follow, there isn't much continuity. Things like point releases and changelogs and consistent maintenance procedures and more differentiation between upstream and downstream changes would make the picture clearer. While I was researching the mail I kind of pieced together all this history from the package changelog, the package SCM commit log, the upstream SCM log, and the Bodhi update comments, but you *do* have to go through all of that to actually figure out what the hell's going on, because it's all just '216-x', there's no 216 point releases, no release documentation, not a lot to differentiate package changes and upstream changes. Actually it was 216-2 which contained the biggest change. I built it on Oct 7, before the alpha freeze. It was called 216 because 217 wasn't tagged yet, and I didn't want F21 to miss the bugfixes and features which have accumulated in the upstream git. So 216-2 has most of the post-216 commits, and 216-9 is fairly close to that. Again, well, I posted the diff, and I disagree that it's 'fairly close'. 216-2 was certainly hugely different to 216-1, but 216-1 never went to updates-testing, so it doesn't really signify. systemd-216-8 (and 216-1 through 216-5) and earlier) was more or less identical to upstream systemd-stable 216: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd-stable/log/?h=v216-stable . systemd 216-9 is not built from 216 at all, it is in fact systemd-217 with some particular changes (presumably intended to be the most disruptive ones) reverted. When I dropped build-related files and directories and documentation from the trees, did a context-free recursive diff, and filtered out the metadata from the diff, it still worked out at 7,000 lines worth of additions and removals between the underlying code of 'systemd-216-8' and 'systemd-216-9'. This is a lot of change to land between Beta and Final. Like I said on IRC yesterday, a large part of this is code which is not compiled for Fedora, or unsupported [*], or tests. Testers, please take care to test the update thoroughly, despite the small bump and small description it is a major change to the package. That I can agree with. I'd much prefer a concrete list of things to test in this update though, which would be *useful* and lead to a better release. Right now
21014-11-05 @ 1600 UTC ** F21 Blocker Review
# F21 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2014-11-05 # Time: 16:00 UTC (12:00 EDT, 09:00 PDT) # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net The first TC of Final is upon us! Along with that, we've changed up the release schedule a bit so we need to get to finding and knocking out these blocker bugs for Final. Currently we have 15 proposed blockers and 3 proposed FEs to get through. If you want to take a look at the accepted blockers, the full list can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/21/final/buglist We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate the Final Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F21 can be found on the wiki [0]. For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting See you Wednesday! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Note on 'systemd-216-9'
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 21:37 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 12:27:58PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: Testers, please take care to test the update thoroughly, despite the small bump and small description it is a major change to the package. That I can agree with. I'd much prefer a concrete list of things to test in this update though, which would be *useful* and lead to a better release. Right now you suggest that anything might be broken. Well, I just said it's a big change and the update description doesn't accurately encapsulate it. I would of course be very happy with a concrete list of things to test in the update. The update description would be a good place for it. Well, then ping me on IRC to update the description (or even mail it to test@ or whatever) and with luck 30 minutes later we would have a much better picture than by looking at a squashed diff. Well, that's more or less what my initial mail was meant to be. I didn't post the diff initially, only in response to a follow-up mail asking what the difference between the builds was. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Note on 'systemd-216-9'
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 22:41 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 12:49:27PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 21:37 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 12:27:58PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: Testers, please take care to test the update thoroughly, despite the small bump and small description it is a major change to the package. That I can agree with. I'd much prefer a concrete list of things to test in this update though, which would be *useful* and lead to a better release. Right now you suggest that anything might be broken. Well, I just said it's a big change and the update description doesn't accurately encapsulate it. I would of course be very happy with a concrete list of things to test in the update. The update description would be a good place for it. Well, then ping me on IRC to update the description (or even mail it to test@ or whatever) and with luck 30 minutes later we would have a much better picture than by looking at a squashed diff. Well, that's more or less what my initial mail was meant to be. I didn't post the diff initially, only in response to a follow-up mail asking what the difference between the builds was. The first mail I saw was this: I wanted to flag up that, in fact, systemd-216-9 is a major change from systemd-216-8 and is not really systemd 216 at all. ... worked out at 7,000 lines worth of additions and removals between the underlying code of 'systemd-216-8' and 'systemd-216-9'. Oh, sorry. I thought I'd cut that bit before sending the mail. It went through a few revisions. Sorry :/ I was context-switching between a few different things. I wrote the mail a few different ways and to a few different recipients but in the end I only wanted to send out a more or less factual 'hey, heads up this update needs full testing' mail. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Fwd: F21 nm-openvpn and md5
Hi, With F21 on, openssl has been patched to disallow verification of certificates that are signed with MD5 algorithm. Until I get our sysadmins generate new keys I should use the workaround described as: a temporary measure the OPENSSL_ENABLE_MD5_VERIFY environment variable can be set to allow verification of certificates signed with MD5 algorithm. On my pre-F21 (test)machine I use gnome with Networkmanager(-openvpn). How can I add the above environment variable for Networkmanager? Zoltan -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] 2014-11-05 @ 1600 UTC ** F21 Blocker Review
# F21 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2014-11-05 # Time: 16:00 UTC (11:00 EST, 08:00 PST) # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net The first TC of Final is upon us! Along with that, we've changed up the release schedule a bit so we need to get to finding and knocking out these blocker bugs for Final. Currently we have 15 proposed blockers and 3 proposed FEs to get through. If you want to take a look at the accepted blockers, the full list can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/21/final/buglist We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate the Final Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F21 can be found on the wiki [0]. For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting See you Wednesday! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F21 TC-3 installation issue [resolved, sort of--or maybe NOT]
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:04:24AM -0500, Fred Smith wrote: On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 03:20:21PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 15:29 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: I installed TC-3 in a VirtualBox VM (latest vbox release, 64-bit) t'other day. Mostly it went quite well with one really oddball exception. I don't know if it's a general problem (haven't seen other mentions of it) or not, but it's weird enough I thought to mention it here. When creating a user in Anaconda, I entered the password twice, as prompted, and it said they didn't match. so I did it again. and again. and again. It insisted they didn't match. tried the same thing for the root password and got the same result. So, I entered a one-character password, in both fields, and it did not say they didn't match. so I tried two chars. ok so far. by working my way up to the full password, one char at a time in both fields, it allowed me to get the whole thing in successfully. This worked for both my username and for root. Never seen any such thing before! If anyone wants me to, I can go try more installs and see if I can reproduce. If I CAN, what sorts of extra info would be helpful when i report it? Adam, et al: I did two more fresh installs last night to see if I could reproduce this, and was unable to. So, I have no idea if I was doing something wrong in the first instance, or what. So I guess it counts as resolved, for some values therof. Well, I downloaded the actual beta and I can re-create it, it's a matter of how one types things in, apparently, on the user creation screen. I've exercised this four or five times this evening, and it seems to always work as described below: When the user creation screen first appears, if I type my name in quickly, it appears as derF Smith, then when I go on to enter a password, it repeatedly fails. Makes me wonder if whatever caused the reverse-ordering of the letters in my first name may not also be messing with what I type into the password fields. OTOH, if I wait a few seconds after the user creation appears, and type the first name slowly, all is well: the name is not reversed, and the password is accepted without complaint. weird, eh? Fred snip -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. --- Romans 5:8 (niv) -- -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F21 TC-3 installation issue [resolved, sort of--or maybe NOT]
On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 21:14 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:04:24AM -0500, Fred Smith wrote: On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 03:20:21PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 15:29 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: I installed TC-3 in a VirtualBox VM (latest vbox release, 64-bit) t'other day. Mostly it went quite well with one really oddball exception. I don't know if it's a general problem (haven't seen other mentions of it) or not, but it's weird enough I thought to mention it here. When creating a user in Anaconda, I entered the password twice, as prompted, and it said they didn't match. so I did it again. and again. and again. It insisted they didn't match. tried the same thing for the root password and got the same result. So, I entered a one-character password, in both fields, and it did not say they didn't match. so I tried two chars. ok so far. by working my way up to the full password, one char at a time in both fields, it allowed me to get the whole thing in successfully. This worked for both my username and for root. Never seen any such thing before! If anyone wants me to, I can go try more installs and see if I can reproduce. If I CAN, what sorts of extra info would be helpful when i report it? Adam, et al: I did two more fresh installs last night to see if I could reproduce this, and was unable to. So, I have no idea if I was doing something wrong in the first instance, or what. So I guess it counts as resolved, for some values therof. Well, I downloaded the actual beta and I can re-create it, it's a matter of how one types things in, apparently, on the user creation screen. I've exercised this four or five times this evening, and it seems to always work as described below: When the user creation screen first appears, if I type my name in quickly, it appears as derF Smith, then when I go on to enter a password, it repeatedly fails. Makes me wonder if whatever caused the reverse-ordering of the letters in my first name may not also be messing with what I type into the password fields. OTOH, if I wait a few seconds after the user creation appears, and type the first name slowly, all is well: the name is not reversed, and the password is accepted without complaint. weird, eh? Yeah, it is a bit (and would explain why I don't see it with my palindromic password...) Which image were you using again? If you can, can you test with virt-manager and see if it reproduces there? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Security Lab - Dependencies
Using the latest, and greatest, Beta. In doing a KDE install from the net-install I added Security Lab as one of the Software Selections. It fails with dependencies problems. Known issue? -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F21 TC-3 installation issue [resolved, sort of--or maybe NOT]
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 06:44:23PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 21:14 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:04:24AM -0500, Fred Smith wrote: On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 03:20:21PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 15:29 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: I installed TC-3 in a VirtualBox VM (latest vbox release, 64-bit) t'other day. Mostly it went quite well with one really oddball exception. I don't know if it's a general problem (haven't seen other mentions of it) or not, but it's weird enough I thought to mention it here. When creating a user in Anaconda, I entered the password twice, as prompted, and it said they didn't match. so I did it again. and again. and again. It insisted they didn't match. tried the same thing for the root password and got the same result. So, I entered a one-character password, in both fields, and it did not say they didn't match. so I tried two chars. ok so far. by working my way up to the full password, one char at a time in both fields, it allowed me to get the whole thing in successfully. This worked for both my username and for root. Never seen any such thing before! If anyone wants me to, I can go try more installs and see if I can reproduce. If I CAN, what sorts of extra info would be helpful when i report it? Adam, et al: I did two more fresh installs last night to see if I could reproduce this, and was unable to. So, I have no idea if I was doing something wrong in the first instance, or what. So I guess it counts as resolved, for some values therof. Well, I downloaded the actual beta and I can re-create it, it's a matter of how one types things in, apparently, on the user creation screen. I've exercised this four or five times this evening, and it seems to always work as described below: When the user creation screen first appears, if I type my name in quickly, it appears as derF Smith, then when I go on to enter a password, it repeatedly fails. Makes me wonder if whatever caused the reverse-ordering of the letters in my first name may not also be messing with what I type into the password fields. OTOH, if I wait a few seconds after the user creation appears, and type the first name slowly, all is well: the name is not reversed, and the password is accepted without complaint. weird, eh? Yeah, it is a bit (and would explain why I don't see it with my palindromic password...) Which image were you using again? If you can, can you test with today's tests are using: Fedora-Live-Workstation-x86_64-21_Beta-4.iso virt-manager and see if it reproduces there? I don't have it working on this system, and I'd rather not futz with my main desktop machine to get it working. sorry. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Hebrews 4:12 (niv) -- -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F21 TC-3 installation issue [resolved, sort of--or maybe NOT]
On 11/05/14 10:44, Adam Williamson wrote: On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 21:14 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:04:24AM -0500, Fred Smith wrote: On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 03:20:21PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 15:29 -0500, Fred Smith wrote: I installed TC-3 in a VirtualBox VM (latest vbox release, 64-bit) t'other day. Mostly it went quite well with one really oddball exception. I don't know if it's a general problem (haven't seen other mentions of it) or not, but it's weird enough I thought to mention it here. When creating a user in Anaconda, I entered the password twice, as prompted, and it said they didn't match. so I did it again. and again. and again. It insisted they didn't match. tried the same thing for the root password and got the same result. So, I entered a one-character password, in both fields, and it did not say they didn't match. so I tried two chars. ok so far. by working my way up to the full password, one char at a time in both fields, it allowed me to get the whole thing in successfully. This worked for both my username and for root. Never seen any such thing before! If anyone wants me to, I can go try more installs and see if I can reproduce. If I CAN, what sorts of extra info would be helpful when i report it? Adam, et al: I did two more fresh installs last night to see if I could reproduce this, and was unable to. So, I have no idea if I was doing something wrong in the first instance, or what. So I guess it counts as resolved, for some values therof. Well, I downloaded the actual beta and I can re-create it, it's a matter of how one types things in, apparently, on the user creation screen. I've exercised this four or five times this evening, and it seems to always work as described below: When the user creation screen first appears, if I type my name in quickly, it appears as derF Smith, then when I go on to enter a password, it repeatedly fails. Makes me wonder if whatever caused the reverse-ordering of the letters in my first name may not also be messing with what I type into the password fields. OTOH, if I wait a few seconds after the user creation appears, and type the first name slowly, all is well: the name is not reversed, and the password is accepted without complaint. weird, eh? Yeah, it is a bit (and would explain why I don't see it with my palindromic password...) Which image were you using again? If you can, can you test with virt-manager and see if it reproduces there? FWIW, I do most of my testing in VirtualBox VM's using the VBox distribution directly from Oracle. My host system is F20. I've never encountered problems such as this one. I've had some minor issues when some VM configuration settings didn't sit well with Fedora/Linux guests. -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Fedora 19 updates-testing report
The following Fedora 19 Security updates need testing: Age URL 375 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19963/openstack-glance-2013.1.4-1.fc19 187 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-5896/nrpe-2.15-2.fc19 138 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-7496/readline-6.2-8.fc19 81 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-9427/pipelight-0.2.7.3-3.fc19 56 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-10366/icecream-1.0.1-8.20140822git.fc19 55 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-10640/libreoffice-4.1.6.2-8.fc19 39 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-11544/drupal6-6.33-1.fc19 32 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-12057/krb5-1.11.3-29.fc19 25 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-12407/sddm-0.9.0-2.20141007git6a28c29b.fc19 18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-12994/firefox-33.0-1.fc19 18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13047/libxml2-2.9.1-2.fc19 18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13018/deluge-1.3.10-1.fc19 13 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13451/webkitgtk3-2.0.4-4.fc19 9 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13551/wpa_supplicant-2.0-12.fc19 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14066/php-sabredav-Sabre_VObject-2.1.4-1.fc19,php-sabredav-Sabre_HTTP-1.7.11-1.fc19,php-sabredav-Sabre_CalDAV-1.7.9-1.fc19,php-sabredav-Sabre_DAVACL-1.7.9-1.fc19,php-sabredav-Sabre_CardDAV-1.7.9-2.fc19,php-sabredav-Sabre_DAV-1.7.13-1.fc19,owncloud-5.0.17-2.fc19 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14068/kernel-3.14.23-100.fc19 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14059/mokutil-0.2.0-1.fc19,shim-signed-0.8-2 3 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14043/php-ZendFramework2-2.2.8-2.fc19 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14266/python-2.7.5-15.fc19 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14237/claws-mail-plugins-3.11.1-1.fc19,claws-mail-3.11.1-2.fc19,libetpan-1.6-1.fc19 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14257/python3-3.3.2-10.fc19 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14233/aircrack-ng-1.2-0.3.rc1.fc19 The following Fedora 19 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved: Age URL 323 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-22326/fedora-bookmarks-15-5.fc19 249 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-3245/testdisk-6.14-2.fc19.1,ntfs-3g-2014.2.15-1.fc19 13 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13451/webkitgtk3-2.0.4-4.fc19 13 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13434/curl-7.29.0-24.fc19 9 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13549/xulrunner-33.0-2.fc19 9 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13551/wpa_supplicant-2.0-12.fc19 6 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13880/device-mapper-persistent-data-0.4.1-1.fc19 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14068/kernel-3.14.23-100.fc19 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14047/qtwebkit-2.3.4-1.fc19 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14266/python-2.7.5-15.fc19 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora 19 updates-testing R-3.1.2-1.fc19 aircrack-ng-1.2-0.3.rc1.fc19 bashmount-3.2.0-2.fc19 bindfs-1.12.6-1.fc19 claws-mail-3.11.1-2.fc19 claws-mail-plugins-3.11.1-1.fc19 dar-2.4.15-2.fc19 gnuplot-py-1.8-18.fc19 groonga-4.0.7-1.fc19 libetpan-1.6-1.fc19 libkscreen-1.0.5-2.fc19 mediawiki-1.23.6-1.fc19 python-2.7.5-15.fc19 python3-3.3.2-10.fc19 rkward-0.6.1-10.fc19 rpy-2.3.10-3.fc19 sonic-visualiser-2.4.1-1.fc19 the_silver_searcher-0.26.0-1.fc19 wine-1.7.30-1.fc19 youtube-dl-2014.11.02.1-1.fc19 Details about builds: R-3.1.2-1.fc19 (FEDORA-2014-14246) A language for data analysis and graphics Update Information: Update to R 3.1.2 Change /usr/lib[64]/R/etc/Makeconf from %config(noreplace) to %config to force it to be updated when upgrading. Without this change, the TCL_LIBS variable can be set incorrectly. The old Makeconf file will be preserved as Makeconf.rpmold ChangeLog: * Fri Oct 31 2014 Tom Callaway s...@fedoraproject.org - 3.1.2-1 - update to 3.1.2 * Wed Oct 29 2014 Tom Callaway s...@fedoraproject.org - 3.1.1-8 - rebuild for new tcl/tk - mark Makeconf as config (not config(noreplace) so that we get proper updated tcl/tk libs) References: [ 1 ] Bug #1158425 - package
Fedora 20 updates-testing report
The following Fedora 20 Security updates need testing: Age URL 187 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-5897/nrpe-2.15-2.fc20 81 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-9474/pipelight-0.2.7.3-3.fc20 56 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-10451/geary-0.6.3-1.fc20 56 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-10468/icecream-1.0.1-8.20140822git.fc20 40 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-11430/ca-certificates-2014.2.1-1.1.fc20 33 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-11969/krb5-1.11.5-16.fc20 23 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-12699/facter-1.7.6-1.fc20 18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-12991/deluge-1.3.10-1.fc20 7 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13777/Pound-2.6-8.fc20 6 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13879/xml-security-1.5.7-1.fc20 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14033/qemu-1.6.2-10.fc20 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14058/mokutil-0.2.0-1.fc20,shim-signed-0.8-3 4 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14069/pidgin-2.10.10-1.fc20 3 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14113/tnftp-20141031-1.fc20 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14234/claws-mail-plugins-3.11.1-1.fc20,claws-mail-3.11.1-2.fc20,libetpan-1.6-1.fc20 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14227/python-2.7.5-15.fc20 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14245/python3-3.3.2-18.fc20 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14247/aircrack-ng-1.2-0.3.rc1.fc20 The following Fedora 20 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved: Age URL 13 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13448/libsoup-2.44.2-2.fc20 9 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13575/xulrunner-33.0-2.fc20 7 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13756/sddm-0.10.0-2.fc20 6 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13875/python-nss-0.16.0-0.fc20 6 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13873/device-mapper-persistent-data-0.4.1-1.fc20 6 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-13775/ibus-1.5.9-4.fc20 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14228/selinux-policy-3.12.1-193.fc20 0 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-14227/python-2.7.5-15.fc20 The following builds have been pushed to Fedora 20 updates-testing R-3.1.2-1.fc20 aircrack-ng-1.2-0.3.rc1.fc20 bashmount-3.2.0-2.fc20 bindfs-1.12.6-1.fc20 claws-mail-3.11.1-2.fc20 claws-mail-plugins-3.11.1-1.fc20 dar-2.4.15-2.fc20 ettercap-0.8.1-1.fc20 getdns-0.1.5-1.fc20 gnuplot-py-1.8-18.fc20 google-noto-fonts-20141001-2.fc20 groonga-4.0.7-1.fc20 libetpan-1.6-1.fc20 libkscreen-1.0.5-2.fc20 mediawiki-1.23.6-1.fc20 opensips-1.10.3-1.fc20 perl-DateTime-TimeZone-1.76-1.fc20 perl-Return-MultiLevel-0.04-1.fc20 python-2.7.5-15.fc20 python3-3.3.2-18.fc20 rkward-0.6.1-10.fc20 rpy-2.3.10-3.fc20 selinux-policy-3.12.1-193.fc20 sonic-visualiser-2.4.1-1.fc20 sudo-1.8.11p2-1.fc20 the_silver_searcher-0.26.0-1.fc20 userspace-rcu-0.8.5-1.fc20 wine-1.7.30-1.fc20 youtube-dl-2014.11.02.1-1.fc20 Details about builds: R-3.1.2-1.fc20 (FEDORA-2014-14261) A language for data analysis and graphics Update Information: Update to R 3.1.2 Change /usr/lib[64]/R/etc/Makeconf from %config(noreplace) to %config to force it to be updated when upgrading. Without this change, the TCL_LIBS variable can be set incorrectly. The old Makeconf file will be preserved as Makeconf.rpmold ChangeLog: * Fri Oct 31 2014 Tom Callaway s...@fedoraproject.org - 3.1.2-1 - update to 3.1.2 * Wed Oct 29 2014 Tom Callaway s...@fedoraproject.org - 3.1.1-8 - rebuild for new tcl/tk - mark Makeconf as config (not config(noreplace) so that we get proper updated tcl/tk libs) References: [ 1 ] Bug #1158425 - package install fails with infinite loop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1158425 aircrack-ng-1.2-0.3.rc1.fc20 (FEDORA-2014-14247) 802.11 (wireless) sniffer and WEP/WPA-PSK key cracker Update Information: Security fix for CVE-2014-8321, CVE-2014-8322, CVE-2014-8323, CVE-2014-8324
Re: Adding GNOME ....
On 10/26/14 11:06, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 10:51 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/26/14 10:48, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 10:44 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/26/14 10:40, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 10:20 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: After doing a KDE install from the Fedora-Server-netinst-x86_64-21_Beta ISO I wanted to add GNOME to the mix. In the past, even on B-TC4 I believe, I simply did yum groupinstall GNOME Desktop. However, now that choice no longer exists when doing yum grouplist. Try 'yum install @^gnome-desktop-environment'. [root@localhost ~]# yum install @^gnome-desktop-environment Loaded plugins: langpacks Group gnome-desktop-environment does not exist. Error: Nothing to do huh, i see it in comps. maybe someone removed it since my last checkout? Will you follow up or does a bugzilla of some sort need to be created? It's not necessarily a bug. It wants more looking into, but I'm not gonna do it tonight. Still can't find a way to install the GNOME desktop after doing a KDE install. Using the latest, and greatest, Beta just released. This could be very annoying to some people. :-) -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Adding GNOME ....
On Wednesday, November 05, 2014 01:35:24 PM Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/26/14 11:06, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 10:51 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/26/14 10:48, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 10:44 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/26/14 10:40, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 10:20 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: After doing a KDE install from the Fedora-Server-netinst-x86_64-21_Beta ISO I wanted to add GNOME to the mix. In the past, even on B-TC4 I believe, I simply did yum groupinstall GNOME Desktop. However, now that choice no longer exists when doing yum grouplist. Try 'yum install @^gnome-desktop-environment'. [root@localhost ~]# yum install @^gnome-desktop- environment Loaded plugins: langpacks Group gnome-desktop-environment does not exist. Error: Nothing to do huh, i see it in comps. maybe someone removed it since my last checkout? Will you follow up or does a bugzilla of some sort need to be created? It's not necessarily a bug. It wants more looking into, but I'm not gonna do it tonight. Still can't find a way to install the GNOME desktop after doing a KDE install. Using the latest, and greatest, Beta just released. This could be very annoying to some people. :-) Hi there, how about: dnf group install 'GNOME Desktop Environment' This works here. Andrei Amuraritei -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fwd: F21 nm-openvpn and md5
On 04.11.2014 22:57, Zoltan Kota wrote: Hi, With F21 on, openssl has been patched to disallow verification of certificates that are signed with MD5 algorithm. Until I get our sysadmins generate new keys I should use the workaround described as: a temporary measure the OPENSSL_ENABLE_MD5_VERIFY environment variable can be set to allow verification of certificates signed with MD5 algorithm. On my pre-F21 (test)machine I use gnome with Networkmanager(-openvpn). How can I add the above environment variable for Networkmanager? [openssl] disable verification of certificate, CRL, and OCSP signatures using MD5 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/scm-commits/Week-of-Mon-2013/1144043.html Chapter 28. Networking https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/7.0_Release_Notes/Known-Issues-Networking.html openssl component, BZ#1062656 It is not possible to connect to any Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA) Enterprise Access Point (AP) that requires MD5-signed certificates. To work around this problem, copy the wpa_supplicant.service file from the /usr/lib/systemd/system/ directory to the /etc/systemd/system/ directory and add the following line to the Service section of the file: Environment=OPENSSL_ENABLE_MD5_VERIFY Then run the systemctl daemon-reload command as root to reload the service file. Important Note that MD5 certificates are highly insecure and Red Hat does not recommend using them. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Adding GNOME ....
On 11/05/14 14:09, Andrei Amuraritei wrote: how about: dnf group install 'GNOME Desktop Environment' This works here. [root@localhost ~]# dnf group install 'GNOME Desktop Environment' Error: No relevant match for the specified 'GNOME Desktop Environment'. [root@localhost ~]# cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) [root@localhost ~]# uname -r 3.17.2-300.fc21.x86_64 -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 21 Final Test Compose 1 (TC1) Available Now!
As per the Fedora 21 schedule [1], Fedora 21 Final Test Compose 1 (TC1) is now available for testing. Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6031 . Please see the following pages for download links (including delta ISOs) and testing instructions. Normally dl.fedoraproject.org should provide the fastest download, but download-ib01.fedoraproject.org is available as a mirror (with an approximately 1 hour lag) in case of trouble. To use it, just replace dl with download-ib01 in the download URL. Installation: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test Base: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test Workstation and Desktop: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Server_Test Cloud: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Cloud_Test Summary: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Summary Ideally, all Alpha, Beta, and Final priority test cases for each of these test pages [2] should pass in order to meet the Final Release Criteria [3]. Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [4], or on the test list [5]. Create Fedora 21 Final test compose (TC) and release candidate (RC) https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6031 Current Blocker and Freeze Exception bugs: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current [1] http://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-21/f-21-quality-tasks.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Final_Release_Criteria [4] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa [5] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ test-announce mailing list test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce
[Test-Announce] 2014-11-05 @ 1600 UTC ** F21 Blocker Review
# F21 Blocker Review meeting # Date: 2014-11-05 # Time: 16:00 UTC (11:00 EST, 08:00 PST) # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net The first TC of Final is upon us! Along with that, we've changed up the release schedule a bit so we need to get to finding and knocking out these blocker bugs for Final. Currently we have 15 proposed blockers and 3 proposed FEs to get through. If you want to take a look at the accepted blockers, the full list can be found here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/21/final/buglist We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate the Final Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F21 can be found on the wiki [0]. For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting See you Wednesday! [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria -- // Mike -- Fedora QA freenode: roshi http://roshi.fedorapeople.org ___ test-announce mailing list test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce
