Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bug Review Meeting 2010-08-06 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST/9 AM PST)
On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 20:35 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: Meeting at our regular time and location! When: 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST/9 AM PST) Where: irc.freenode.net #fedora-bugzappers Please join us. Here are the bugs we'll look at and discuss: 621102 :: NEW :: udev :: Harald Hoyer :: The installer doesn't use packages repository in DVD as default :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621102 621200 :: ASSIGNED :: systemd :: Lennart Poettering :: [abrt] systemd-units-5-2.fc15: selabel_lookup_common: Process /bin/systemctl was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV) :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621200 Greetings, Early testing of RC#1 has added several issues to the list for review, including the following: 621775 :: NEW :: anaconda :: anaconda-maint-l...@redhat.com :: kernel panic- not syncing: VFS : unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(9,2) :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621775 621102 :: NEW :: udev :: har...@redhat.com :: The installer doesn't use packages repository in DVD as default :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621102 620211 :: NEW :: python-psyco :: kon...@tylerc.org :: python-psyco needs porting to python 2.7 in F14 and devel :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=620211 I'm not able to join the blocker review meeting today. I've walked through the list of bugs and updated states to match the test status and bodhi status. It seems bugs are not being moved to ON_QA when a bodhi update is available (even though the bug# is listed in the bodhi update). Thanks, James 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
Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bug Review Meeting 2010-08-06 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST/9 AM PST)
On 08/06/2010 10:16 AM, James Laska wrote: 620211 :: NEW :: python-psyco :: kon...@tylerc.org :: python-psyco needs porting to python 2.7 in F14 and devel :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=620211 Does anything actually depend on this? ~spot -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bug Review Meeting 2010-08-06 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST/9 AM PST)
On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 10:57 -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: On 08/06/2010 10:16 AM, James Laska wrote: 620211 :: NEW :: python-psyco :: kon...@tylerc.org :: python-psyco needs porting to python 2.7 in F14 and devel :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=620211 Does anything actually depend on this? It's part of the Alpha release criteria [1] that no deps or conflicts are present on physical media (DVD/CD). This seems to have slipped through through first scrubbing of the list yesterday. No file conflicts or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (CD/DVD) install If nothing pulls this into an install transaction on DVD/CD, and it isn't listed in comps.xml, should it be removed from the media? Also, the package is only included in the i386 DVD, not the x86_64 DVD ... not sure why. Thanks, James [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_14_Alpha_Release_Criteria 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
Re: Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bug Review Meeting 2010-08-06 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST/9 AM PST)
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 11:13:00 -0400 James Laska jla...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 10:57 -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: On 08/06/2010 10:16 AM, James Laska wrote: 620211 :: NEW :: python-psyco :: kon...@tylerc.org :: python-psyco needs porting to python 2.7 in F14 and devel :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=620211 Does anything actually depend on this? It's part of the Alpha release criteria [1] that no deps or conflicts are present on physical media (DVD/CD). This seems to have slipped through through first scrubbing of the list yesterday. No file conflicts or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (CD/DVD) install If nothing pulls this into an install transaction on DVD/CD, and it isn't listed in comps.xml, should it be removed from the media? Also, the package is only included in the i386 DVD, not the x86_64 DVD ... not sure why. It's 32bit only. :) The package uses asm that is not available for x86_64. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Fedora 14 Alpha Blocker Bug Review Meeting 2010-08-06 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST/9 AM PST)
Meeting at our regular time and location! When: 16:00 UTC (12 PM EST/9 AM PST) Where: irc.freenode.net #fedora-bugzappers Please join us. Here are the bugs we'll look at and discuss: 621102 :: NEW :: udev :: Harald Hoyer :: The installer doesn't use packages repository in DVD as default :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621102 621200 :: ASSIGNED :: systemd :: Lennart Poettering :: [abrt] systemd-units-5-2.fc15: selabel_lookup_common: Process /bin/systemctl was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV) :: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621200 -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
