Fedora 25 Alpha 1.2 compose check report
Missing expected images: Cloud_base raw-xz i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 10/88 (x86_64), 4/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm) ID: 29979 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29979 ID: 29989 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29989 ID: 29990 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29990 ID: 29992 Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29992 ID: 29993 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29993 ID: 29994 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29994 ID: 3 Test: i386 KDE-live-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/3 ID: 30001 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30001 ID: 30017 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30017 ID: 30043 Test: x86_64 universal install_iscsi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30043 ID: 30049 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_partial@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30049 ID: 30063 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30063 ID: 30064 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30064 ID: 30075 Test: i386 universal upgrade_2_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30075 ID: 30076 Test: i386 universal install_package_set_kde URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/30076 Passed openQA tests: 73/88 (x86_64), 13/17 (i386) Skipped openQA tests: 6 of 107 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/fedora-qa.git/tree/check-compose -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2016-08-25 16:00 UTC)
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2016-08-25 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net. Local time information (via. rktime): 2016-08-25 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT 2016-08-25 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT 2016-08-25 16:00 Thu UTC <- 2016-08-25 17:00 Thu Europe/London BST 2016-08-25 18:00 Thu Europe/Paris CEST 2016-08-25 18:00 Thu Europe/Berlin CEST 2016-08-25 21:30 Thu Asia/Calcutta IST --new day-- 2016-08-26 00:00 Fri Asia/Singapore SGT 2016-08-26 00:00 Fri Asia/Hong_Kong HKT 2016-08-26 01:00 Fri Asia/Tokyo JST 2016-08-26 02:00 Fri Australia/BrisbaneAEST Links to all tickets below can be found at: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/13 = Followups = #topic #558 Application/Library distinction and package splitting .fpc 558 https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/558 #topic #610 Packaging guidelines: Check upstream tarball signatures .fpc 610 https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/610 #topic #645 Clarify policy on obsoleting non-directly-replaced packages .fpc 645 https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/645 = New business = #topic #635 FC Automatic Provides for Python RPM Packages .fpc 635 https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/635 = Open Floor = For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The report of the agenda items can be found at: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/13 If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fpc, e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Test-Announce] Fedora 25 Candidate Alpha-1.2 Available Now!
According to the schedule [1], Fedora 25 Candidate Alpha-1.2 is now available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation testing! For more information on release validation testing, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan Test coverage information for the current release can be seen at: https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/25 You can see all results, find testing instructions and image download locations, and enter results on the Summary page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Alpha_1.2_Summary The individual test result pages are: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Alpha_1.2_Installation https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Alpha_1.2_Base https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Alpha_1.2_Server https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Alpha_1.2_Cloud https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Alpha_1.2_Desktop https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_25_Alpha_1.2_Security_Lab All Alpha priority test cases for each of these test pages [2] must pass in order to meet the Alpha Release Criteria [3]. Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [4], or on the test list [5]. Current Blocker and Freeze Exception bugs: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current [1] http://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-25/f-25-quality-tasks.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Release_validation_test_plan [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_25_Alpha_Release_Criteria [4] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa [5] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/t...@lists.fedoraproject.org/ ___ test-announce mailing list test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
F25 Alpha status: new compose coming soon
Hi folks! Just wanted to keep everyone informed. We had a bit of a panic drill with the Alpha today; it turns out the Cloud images are completely broken, and in fact have been for months, only apparently no-one bothers to look at the output of our shiny automated test systems (autocloud has been reporting this all along, but apparently no-one's been doing anything about it). We've worked around the multiple issues and there is now a new compose running, which will be Alpha-1.2 (some of the image names will be a bit messed up though). The changes should really only affect the Cloud images, so most Alpha-1.1 testing should remain valid. But once Alpha- 1.2 lands, we should switch over to testing that, and make sure the cloud images actually work. It should arrive in ~5-6 hours. Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1369794 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1369934 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:53:52 -0700 "Gerald B. Cox" wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > That said, that doesn't get it working on f25 either. > > > > I suspect there's some update thats gone stable in f24 and is in > > rawhide, but isn't stable yet in f25 due to the alpha freeze causing > > the failure. Perhaps something in the kf5 stack? > > > > I don't even see any appdata file in the source, so it must be > > generating it somewhere in one of the other kde packages... > > > > Thanks Kevin... yes, your suspensions are correct. Rex Dieter replied: > > "The appdata files only get generated/installed when built against > kf5-5.25.0, which is currently still in -testing for f23/f24/f25 > (waiting for f25 alpha freeze to lift) > > -- Rex" Cool. ;) > It built correctly on F24/F26 so I just need to back out the extra > buildrequires I added > to try to fix... they weren't needed. > > Regarding lookaside, can that only be removed via a ticket, or is that > something we can do? I already removed it, but you will need to fix your sources file... kevin pgpQatCKhM86b.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > That said, that doesn't get it working on f25 either. > > I suspect there's some update thats gone stable in f24 and is in > rawhide, but isn't stable yet in f25 due to the alpha freeze causing > the failure. Perhaps something in the kf5 stack? > > I don't even see any appdata file in the source, so it must be > generating it somewhere in one of the other kde packages... > Thanks Kevin... yes, your suspensions are correct. Rex Dieter replied: "The appdata files only get generated/installed when built against kf5-5.25.0, which is currently still in -testing for f23/f24/f25 (waiting for f25 alpha freeze to lift) -- Rex" It built correctly on F24/F26 so I just need to back out the extra buildrequires I added to try to fix... they weren't needed. Regarding lookaside, can that only be removed via a ticket, or is that something we can do? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Please bump bz#1017603 to F24
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:40 PM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 22:06:15 + > Christopher wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:26 AM Mikolaj Izdebski > > wrote: > > > > > On 08/19/2016 09:51 PM, Christopher wrote: > > > > Interesting... it still won't give me the drop-down box to be > > > > able to change it. > > > > It's weird, because I can change > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308662 > > > > I had assumed it was because of the lack of admin on the older > > > > branch, > > > but > > > > if all packagers should be able to do this, then I'm not sure why > > > > it doesn't work for me. Another one I can't bump is > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289919 but I'm not a > > > > maintainer or reporter on that one, so I expected that. > > > > > > > > Is the rule perhaps something like "assignee OR reporter"? > > > > > > AFAIK, any member of "fedorabugs" FAS group (including you) should > > > be able to edit any Fedora bug (unless it's a private bug). > > > > > > Maybe it's a web browser glitch? You can try command-line interface. > > > > > > > > Nope. Not just a UI glitch. Command-line doesn't work either: > > > > $ bugzilla --ensure-logged-in modify --version=25 1308662 # works > > $ bugzilla --ensure-logged-in modify --version=25 1017603 # fails > > > > Server error: > 24 to 25, but only the assignee or reporter of the bug, or a user > > with the required permissions may change that field.'> > > There was something odd with your bugzilla account, it wasn't in the > correct groups and I am not sure why. > > However, I added them to your account, so it should work now. Can you > try again and confirm it's working? > Works perfectly now. I didn't expect it to be one of those "just me" problems. I just assumed that's how it was supposed to work. Thanks for following up and fixing. :) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Please bump bz#1017603 to F24
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 22:06:15 + Christopher wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:26 AM Mikolaj Izdebski > wrote: > > > On 08/19/2016 09:51 PM, Christopher wrote: > > > Interesting... it still won't give me the drop-down box to be > > > able to change it. > > > It's weird, because I can change > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308662 > > > I had assumed it was because of the lack of admin on the older > > > branch, > > but > > > if all packagers should be able to do this, then I'm not sure why > > > it doesn't work for me. Another one I can't bump is > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289919 but I'm not a > > > maintainer or reporter on that one, so I expected that. > > > > > > Is the rule perhaps something like "assignee OR reporter"? > > > > AFAIK, any member of "fedorabugs" FAS group (including you) should > > be able to edit any Fedora bug (unless it's a private bug). > > > > Maybe it's a web browser glitch? You can try command-line interface. > > > > > Nope. Not just a UI glitch. Command-line doesn't work either: > > $ bugzilla --ensure-logged-in modify --version=25 1308662 # works > $ bugzilla --ensure-logged-in modify --version=25 1017603 # fails > > Server error: 24 to 25, but only the assignee or reporter of the bug, or a user > with the required permissions may change that field.'> There was something odd with your bugzilla account, it wasn't in the correct groups and I am not sure why. However, I added them to your account, so it should work now. Can you try again and confirm it's working? kevin pgpnfr_mTxONF.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora Rawhide-20160824.n.0 compose check report
On Wed, 2016-08-24 at 20:42 +, Fedora compose checker wrote: > Missing expected images: > > Cloud_base raw-xz i386 > Atomic raw-xz x86_64 > > Failed openQA tests: 60/89 (x86_64), 17/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm) I'm still working on the Rawhide needle re-takes - an annoying bug in the openQA needle editor is making it slower than it should be, and I keep getting whacked in the head by Alpha emergencies. But there is in fact a new bug in Rawhide today, which openQA staging - where I've fixed some of the needles - caught: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1369979 the new shadow-utils build that showed up today breaks user account creation. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:34:43 -0700 "Gerald B. Cox" wrote: > Ok, worse case I can just skip F25 for this package. The sources file is messed up. It has the spec listed... (which you requested be removed from lookaside). You should do: fedpkg new-sources plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7.tar.gz git rm -f plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7.tar.gz fedpkg commit fedpkg push That said, that doesn't get it working on f25 either. I suspect there's some update thats gone stable in f24 and is in rawhide, but isn't stable yet in f25 due to the alpha freeze causing the failure. Perhaps something in the kf5 stack? I don't even see any appdata file in the source, so it must be generating it somewhere in one of the other kde packages... kevin pgpPaMsdbMbnK.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Please bump bz#1017603 to F24
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:26 AM Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > On 08/19/2016 09:51 PM, Christopher wrote: > > Interesting... it still won't give me the drop-down box to be able to > > change it. > > It's weird, because I can change > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308662 > > I had assumed it was because of the lack of admin on the older branch, > but > > if all packagers should be able to do this, then I'm not sure why it > > doesn't work for me. Another one I can't bump is > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289919 but I'm not a > > maintainer or reporter on that one, so I expected that. > > > > Is the rule perhaps something like "assignee OR reporter"? > > AFAIK, any member of "fedorabugs" FAS group (including you) should be > able to edit any Fedora bug (unless it's a private bug). > > Maybe it's a web browser glitch? You can try command-line interface. > > Nope. Not just a UI glitch. Command-line doesn't work either: $ bugzilla --ensure-logged-in modify --version=25 1308662 # works $ bugzilla --ensure-logged-in modify --version=25 1017603 # fails Server error: -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: review swaps
Already resolved the problem… Was an over-strict requirement for rubygem-listen >= 3.0 < 3.1 in rubygem-jekyll-watch to compat for Ruby-MRI 1.9.3… Am 24.08.2016 um 19:03 schrieb Vít Ondruch: Dne 23.8.2016 v 20:11 Björn Esser napsal(a): Thanks you very much for the reviews! ^^ We need a compat-pkg for rubygem-listen, I'm afraid… :( Why? Vít Am 23.08.2016 um 19:45 schrieb gil: hi damm i dont know what happen! $ fedora-review -b 1368851 --plugins Ruby -m fedora-rawhide-i386 -L /home/gil/deps INFO: Processing bugzilla bug: 1368851 INFO: Getting .spec and .srpm Urls from : 1368851 INFO: --> SRPM url: https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/jekyll/rubygem-jekyll-3.2.1-0.1.fc26.src.rpm INFO: --> Spec url: https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/jekyll/rubygem-jekyll.spec INFO: Using review directory: /home/gil/1368851-rubygem-jekyll INFO: Downloading .spec and .srpm files INFO: Downloading (Source0): https://rubygems.org/downloads/jekyll-3.2.1.gem INFO: Running checks and generating report INFO: Install command returned error code 30 ERROR: 'While building: INFO: mock.py version 1.2.20 starting (python version = 3.5.1)...\nStart: init plugins\nINFO: selinux enabled\nFinish: init plugins\nStart: run\nStart: chroot init\nINFO: calling preinit hooks\nINFO: enabled root cache\nINFO: enabled dnf cache\nStart: cleaning dnf metadata\nFinish: cleaning dnf metadata\nMock Version: 1.2.20\nINFO: Mock Version: 1.2.20\nFinish: chroot init\nINFO: installing package(s): /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-doc-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-doc-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-doc-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-doc-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-doc-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-doc-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-doc-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm\nERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.\n # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/root/ --releasever 26 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-doc-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-doc-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-doc-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-doc-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-doc-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-doc-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-doc-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts\n' (logs in /home/gil/.cache/fedora-review.log) i cleanup the chache an the result is the same ... maybe tomorrow, if you do not hurry, i end review regards .g Il 23/08/2016 17:20, Björn Esser ha scritto: A'ighty! Took them… =) Am 23.08.2016 um 16:37 schrieb gil: Il 23/08/2016 16:14, Björn Esser ha scritto: Hello folks, I have some rubygem-packages open for review [1] for a proposed change in Fedora 25 [2] and looking for someone to swap reviews with. Cheers Björn (besser82) hi take: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368844 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368846 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368847 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368848 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368849 can review these for me? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1364535 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366835 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366837 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366838 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367518 thanks in advance regards .g [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=1368851&hide_resolved=1 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Besser82/Changes/Jekyll -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.or
Re: F24 virt-manager fails to start any VM, SELinux policy denies access
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > So even after 'dnf clean all' the -13 version that should fix this > problem is not listed as an update in either updates or > updates-testing. Is that expected? It hasn't been that long since the update left the pending state, so I'm guessing it's just a matter of mirrors catching up. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24 virt-manager fails to start any VM, SELinux policy denies access
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Alexander Ploumistos > wrote: >> It's already been dealt with, see RHBZ #1368745. > > Thanks. Kinda surprising -12 made it to stable... So even after 'dnf clean all' the -13 version that should fix this problem is not listed as an update in either updates or updates-testing. Is that expected? -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24 virt-manager fails to start any VM, SELinux policy denies access
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > It's already been dealt with, see RHBZ #1368745. Thanks. Kinda surprising -12 made it to stable... -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24 virt-manager fails to start any VM, SELinux policy denies access
It's already been dealt with, see RHBZ #1368745. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
F24 virt-manager fails to start any VM, SELinux policy denies access
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1369954 I'm not sure what's caused this, I'm still trying to track it down. But enforcing=0 does work around it. It might be a recent selinux-policy of systemd update that's broken it. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Jens Lody wrote: > If you look at the build.log you can see, that for whatever reason the > appdata.cml-file does not get installed on F25, so it can not be found > by appstream-util . > > Jens > Yes, I saw that... but I if you look at the rawhide and F24 build, it is installed fine. It also installed fine on copr. It's a bit bizarre if you ask me. If it is working on the release before and the release after F25 - seems to me that points to some peculiarly with F25. I checked some other builds that used appdata, and they included gettext... so I included that, plus I found a post that suggested dconf-devel and dconf-editor so I included those also... and still same result. I'm stumped. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
Am Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:23:27 -0700 schrieb "Gerald B. Cox" : > Here is what the log shows for F25: > > > + appstream-util validate-relax --nonet > /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml > /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml: > /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml > could not be read: Failed to open file > '/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml': > No such file or directory > error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.xPZ0QS (%check) > Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.xPZ0QS (%check) > > > Here is what the log shows for F24: > > + appstream-util validate-relax --nonet > /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc24.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml > /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc24.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml: > GLib-GIO-Message: Using the 'memory' GSettings backend. Your settings > will not be saved or shared with other applications. > OK > + exit 0 > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > > > I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on > > F26 (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 > > > > Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would > > this fail only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 > > > > > > If you look at the build.log you can see, that for whatever reason the appdata.cml-file does not get installed on F25, so it can not be found by appstream-util . Jens pgpn0fuoeOsAE.pgp Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora 25-20160824.n.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Cloud_base raw-xz i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 10/89 (x86_64), 3/17 (i386) ID: 29875 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29875 ID: 29876 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29876 ID: 29878 Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29878 ID: 29879 Test: x86_64 Atomic-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29879 ID: 29880 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29880 ID: 29881 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29881 ID: 29887 Test: i386 KDE-live-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29887 ID: 29904 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29904 ID: 29930 Test: x86_64 universal install_iscsi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29930 ID: 29947 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29947 ID: 29950 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29950 ID: 29951 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_kde_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29951 ID: 29962 Test: i386 universal upgrade_2_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29962 Passed openQA tests: 74/89 (x86_64), 14/17 (i386), 2/2 (arm) Skipped openQA tests: 5 of 108 -- Mail generated by check-compose: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/fedora-qa.git/tree/check-compose -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Rawhide-20160824.n.0 compose check report
Missing expected images: Cloud_base raw-xz i386 Atomic raw-xz x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 60/89 (x86_64), 17/17 (i386), 1/2 (arm) ID: 29757 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29757 ID: 29758 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29758 ID: 29759 Test: i386 Everything-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29759 ID: 29760 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29760 ID: 29761 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29761 ID: 29767 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29767 ID: 29768 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29768 ID: 29769 Test: i386 Workstation-live-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29769 ID: 29770 Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29770 ID: 29771 Test: x86_64 Atomic-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29771 ID: 29772 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29772 ID: 29773 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29773 ID: 29779 Test: i386 KDE-live-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29779 ID: 29780 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29780 ID: 29782 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29782 ID: 29783 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29783 ID: 29784 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29784 ID: 29785 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29785 ID: 29790 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfs_variation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29790 ID: 29791 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfs_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29791 ID: 29799 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_updates_nfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29799 ID: 29800 Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29800 ID: 29801 Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29801 ID: 29803 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_variation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29803 ID: 29804 Test: x86_64 universal install_repository_http_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29804 ID: 29805 Test: x86_64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29805 ID: 29806 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29806 ID: 29807 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_pata@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29807 ID: 29808 Test: x86_64 universal install_kickstart_user_creation URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29808 ID: 29809 Test: x86_64 universal install_scsi_updates_img URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29809 ID: 29810 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29810 ID: 29811 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29811 ID: 29812 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_encrypted URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29812 ID: 29813 Test: x86_64 universal install_simple_free_space URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29813 ID: 29814 Test: x86_64 universal install_multi_empty URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29814 ID: 29815 Test: x86_64 universal install_software_raid URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29815 ID: 29816 Test: x86_64 universal install_delete_partial URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29816 ID: 29817 Test: x86_64 universal install_btrfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29817 ID: 29818 Test: x86_64 universal install_ext3 URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29818 ID: 29819 Test: x86_64 universal install_xfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29819 ID: 29820 Test: x86_64 universal install_lvmthin URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29820 ID: 29821 Test: x86_64 universal install_no_swap URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/29821 ID: 29822 Test: x86_64 universal install_iscsi URL: https://openqa.fe
Re: Koji issues with F25?
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:05:33 -0700 "Gerald B. Cox" wrote: > I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on F26 > (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 > > Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would this > fail only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 if the missing file is being generated during the build, then it could be a parallel make issue Dan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
Ok, worse case I can just skip F25 for this package. On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > > Thanks Peter... I posted the results from both F25 and F24... does that > > offer a clue? > > Nope, but I don't have time to really investigate but it's not a koji > issue. You might want to check the root.log file and compare the > package list so see if there's differences. > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Peter Robinson > > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > >> > I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on F26 > >> > (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 > >> > >> I've done quite a few builds of late and had no issues at all. > >> > >> > Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would this > >> > fail > >> > only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. > >> > >> Could be missing deps other other issues on the branch. > >> > >> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 > >> > >> I don't see the file org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml being installed > >> or referenced any where other than on the line it references. Maybe > >> your missing an explicit dependency that's not listed in the BuildReq > >> that happens to land there some other reason on other branches. > >> -- > >> devel mailing list > >> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists. > fedoraproject.org > > > > > > > > -- > > devel mailing list > > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists. > fedoraproject.org > > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > Thanks Peter... I posted the results from both F25 and F24... does that > offer a clue? Nope, but I don't have time to really investigate but it's not a koji issue. You might want to check the root.log file and compare the package list so see if there's differences. > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Peter Robinson > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: >> > I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on F26 >> > (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 >> >> I've done quite a few builds of late and had no issues at all. >> >> > Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would this >> > fail >> > only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. >> >> Could be missing deps other other issues on the branch. >> >> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 >> >> I don't see the file org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml being installed >> or referenced any where other than on the line it references. Maybe >> your missing an explicit dependency that's not listed in the BuildReq >> that happens to land there some other reason on other branches. >> -- >> devel mailing list >> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
Thanks Peter... I posted the results from both F25 and F24... does that offer a clue? On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > > I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on F26 > > (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 > > I've done quite a few builds of late and had no issues at all. > > > Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would this fail > > only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. > > Could be missing deps other other issues on the branch. > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 > > I don't see the file org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml being installed > or referenced any where other than on the line it references. Maybe > your missing an explicit dependency that's not listed in the BuildReq > that happens to land there some other reason on other branches. > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on F26 > (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 I've done quite a few builds of late and had no issues at all. > Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would this fail > only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. Could be missing deps other other issues on the branch. > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 I don't see the file org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml being installed or referenced any where other than on the line it references. Maybe your missing an explicit dependency that's not listed in the BuildReq that happens to land there some other reason on other branches. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Koji issues with F25?
Here is what the log shows for F25: + appstream-util validate-relax --nonet /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml could not be read: Failed to open file '/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc25.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml': No such file or directory error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.xPZ0QS (%check) Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.xPZ0QS (%check) Here is what the log shows for F24: + appstream-util validate-relax --nonet /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc24.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/plasma-applet-weather-widget-1.6.7-2.fc24.x86_64/usr/share/appdata/org.kde.weatherWidget.appdata.xml: GLib-GIO-Message: Using the 'memory' GSettings backend. Your settings will not be saved or shared with other applications. OK + exit 0 On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on F26 > (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 > > Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would this fail > only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 > > > -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Koji issues with F25?
I'm trying to build a new package. It completed with no issues on F26 (rawhide) and F24. However, the build keeps failing on F25 Here is the build link which is reporting the error? Why would this fail only on F25? Doesn't make much sense. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15365643 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: review swaps
Dne 23.8.2016 v 20:11 Björn Esser napsal(a): > Thanks you very much for the reviews! ^^ > > We need a compat-pkg for rubygem-listen, I'm afraid… :( Why? Vít > > > Am 23.08.2016 um 19:45 schrieb gil: >> hi >> >> damm i dont know what happen! >> >> $ fedora-review -b 1368851 --plugins Ruby -m fedora-rawhide-i386 -L >> /home/gil/deps >> INFO: Processing bugzilla bug: 1368851 >> INFO: Getting .spec and .srpm Urls from : 1368851 >> INFO: --> SRPM url: >> https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/jekyll/rubygem-jekyll-3.2.1-0.1.fc26.src.rpm >> INFO: --> Spec url: >> https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/jekyll/rubygem-jekyll.spec >> INFO: Using review directory: /home/gil/1368851-rubygem-jekyll >> INFO: Downloading .spec and .srpm files >> INFO: Downloading (Source0): >> https://rubygems.org/downloads/jekyll-3.2.1.gem >> INFO: Running checks and generating report >> INFO: Install command returned error code 30 >> ERROR: 'While building: INFO: mock.py version 1.2.20 starting (python >> version = 3.5.1)...\nStart: init plugins\nINFO: selinux >> enabled\nFinish: init plugins\nStart: run\nStart: chroot init\nINFO: >> calling preinit hooks\nINFO: enabled root cache\nINFO: enabled dnf >> cache\nStart: cleaning dnf metadata\nFinish: cleaning dnf >> metadata\nMock Version: 1.2.20\nINFO: Mock Version: 1.2.20\nFinish: >> chroot init\nINFO: installing package(s): >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-doc-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-doc-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-doc-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-doc-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-doc-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-doc-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-doc-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm\nERROR: >> Command failed. See logs for output.\n # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot >> /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/root/ --releasever 26 >> --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-doc-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-doc-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-doc-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-doc-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-colorator-doc-1.1.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-watch-1.5.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-forwardable-extended-doc-2.6.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-mercenary-doc-0.3.6-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-jekyll-sass-converter-1.4.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-rouge-1.11.1-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> /home/gil/deps/rubygem-pathutil-0.14.0-0.1.fc26.noarch.rpm >> --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts\n' (logs in >> /home/gil/.cache/fedora-review.log) >> >> i cleanup the chache an the result is the same ... >> >> maybe tomorrow, if you do not hurry, i end review >> regards >> .g >> Il 23/08/2016 17:20, Björn Esser ha scritto: >>> A'ighty! Took them… =) >>> >>> >>> Am 23.08.2016 um 16:37 schrieb gil: Il 23/08/2016 16:14, Björn Esser ha scritto: > Hello folks, > > I have some rubygem-packages open for review [1] for a proposed > change in Fedora 25 [2] and looking for someone to swap reviews with. > > Cheers > > Björn (besser82) > hi take: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368844 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368846 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368847 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368848 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368849 can review these for me? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1364535 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366835 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366837 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366838 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367518 thanks in advance regards .g > > [1] > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=1368851&hide_resolved=1 > > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Besser82/Changes/Jekyll > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedorapro
[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora 25 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting - 2nd round
Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Fedora 25 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting - 2nd round on 2016-08-25 from 17:00:00 to 19:00:00 UTC At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: This is the second round of Fedora 25 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting. Release Candidate (RC) availability and good QA coverage are prerequisites for the Go/No-Go meeting. If you have any bug on the list, please help us with Alpha release. If we won't be ready by Thursday, we will use this meeting to review blockers and decide what to do. [Go/No-Go Meeting] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Go_No_Go_Meeting [AlphaBlockers] http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/25/alpha/buglist Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/4642/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken: Firefox 48 + Private Tab + Kerberos SSO
On 08/24/2016 10:43 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Robert Marcano wrote: ... I wonder if the default setting for network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris=https:// is or isn't a leak. No, it is not, at least not to the remote server you are trying to visit. Kerberos flow is always a such that you never send authentication request to the remote server if you cannot obtain a service ticket to HTTP/@YOUR.REALM from your realm's KDC. If your realm's KDC doesn't know about (doesn't have Kerberos principal HTTP/@YOUR.REALM or doesn't have Kerberos trust to the realm of ), no service ticket would be issued to you and you wouldn't be able to negotiate with remote server. As result, Firefox wouldn't even try to send a request to the remote server. Your KDC will get a request to issue service ticket so technically it will be able to see host name of the remote server associated with your principal. This is a problem for private browsing mode and we proposed Firefox team to fix this information leak. Thanks for the clarification, the leak in private mode was to the internal KDC not the internet. Use of https:// in network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris in Fedora allows us to have zero configuration setup for Fedora desktop. As soon as your desktop is enrolled into an environment that supports Kerberos, Firefox will be able to negotiate GSSAPI with your corporate servers without any additional configuration changes. The same happens with GNOME Epiphany browser, KDE Konqueror browser, and, I believe, with Safari on Mac OS X. We also wanted to improve UX of Firefox in this area by proposing a flow similar to acceptance of geotagging requests, where Firefox would ask you to add a server or domain to the list of trusted-uris first time we encounter GSSAPI negotiation. This is still open; Firefox UX changes require more involvement and discussions to go on. Use of https:// is a good compromise for default configuration, though. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken: Firefox 48 + Private Tab + Kerberos SSO
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Robert Marcano wrote: On 08/24/2016 12:29 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2016, Dusty Mabe wrote: I can't seem to get firefox-48.0-5.fc24.x86_64 to work with kerberos single sign on in a private window. It works fine when using a non-private window. Any ideas on why this would have broken? Anyone else seeing this? We fixed an information leak that was happening in private browsing. However, the same (almost the same) mode switch was used in Firefox to implement 'Never Remember History' mode which is almost private in the sense that browsing history is not remembered. With the fix for https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1291700, 'Never Remember History' mode is now allowing GSSAPI to work. Private browse mode will not allow GSSAPI credentials to work, though, as this is an information leak. I wonder if the default setting for network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris=https:// is or isn't a leak. No, it is not, at least not to the remote server you are trying to visit. Kerberos flow is always a such that you never send authentication request to the remote server if you cannot obtain a service ticket to HTTP/@YOUR.REALM from your realm's KDC. If your realm's KDC doesn't know about (doesn't have Kerberos principal HTTP/@YOUR.REALM or doesn't have Kerberos trust to the realm of ), no service ticket would be issued to you and you wouldn't be able to negotiate with remote server. As result, Firefox wouldn't even try to send a request to the remote server. Your KDC will get a request to issue service ticket so technically it will be able to see host name of the remote server associated with your principal. This is a problem for private browsing mode and we proposed Firefox team to fix this information leak. Use of https:// in network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris in Fedora allows us to have zero configuration setup for Fedora desktop. As soon as your desktop is enrolled into an environment that supports Kerberos, Firefox will be able to negotiate GSSAPI with your corporate servers without any additional configuration changes. The same happens with GNOME Epiphany browser, KDE Konqueror browser, and, I believe, with Safari on Mac OS X. We also wanted to improve UX of Firefox in this area by proposing a flow similar to acceptance of geotagging requests, where Firefox would ask you to add a server or domain to the list of trusted-uris first time we encounter GSSAPI negotiation. This is still open; Firefox UX changes require more involvement and discussions to go on. Use of https:// is a good compromise for default configuration, though. -- / Alexander Bokovoy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Naming a sphinx-doc theme: python-sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme or python-sphinx-theme-py3doc-enhanced
Frankly I think upstream should have called it py3doc_enhanced and left out sphinx and theme, but that's beside the point. Based on the package naming conventions [1], you name is mainly correct (more on this later). In the Python modules section [2], it says: The package name should reflect the upstream name of the Python module, and should generally take into account the name of the module used when importing it in Python scripts. This name will be prefixed depending on the type of the package. Based on that, the name should really be python-sphinx-theme-sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme, but that is overly confusing. I think there are two legitimate names: python-sphinx-theme-py3doc_enhanced python-sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme Some might argue you could replace the underscore in the first one with a dash, and I wouldn't see a huge problem with that, but I think it's not necessary. It is justified though because the name is already changed from the import name and the tarball for the package uses dashes instead of underscores. As far those underscores, that's covered in the separator section [3]: There are a few exceptions to the no underscore '_' rule. ... - packages where the upstream name naturally contains an underscore are excluded from this. Based on this rule and the Python module rule, I would say python- sphinx-py3doc-enhanced-theme would not be an appropriate name. So go with one of these: python-sphinx-theme-py3doc_enhanced python-sphinx-theme-py3doc-enhanced python-sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd= Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Python_modules [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd= Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Separators On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:16 AM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote: > On 2016-08-23 10:19, Julien Enselme wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Recently I opened a review [1] for a new sphinx theme: >> py3doc_enhanced_theme [2] >> >> The upstream name is sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme, so in my opinion, >> the the package should be named python-sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme. >> Furthermore, there's another sphinx theme with underscores in its >> name: python3-sphinx_rtd_theme. So I find it logical that the package >> is named this way. >> >> However, the reviewer (Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek) pointed out that: >> >> - Dashes are preferred (See the guidelines [3]) >> - Most themes are named with this pattern: python-sphinx-theme- >> Therefore, it would be consistent to name the package: python-sphinx- >> theme-py3doc-enhanced and I think that's a good point. >> >> A middle ground would be to use provides so the package can be >> installed with both names, but that leaves the question about the >> "main" name unresolved. >> >> Any thoughts? >> > > Using hyphens in the package name keeps the package collection more > consistent, and adding a Provides entry that uses underscores will more or > less seamlessly take care of the case where people installing it assume it > uses those instead. It's a win-win to do it that way, IMO. > > -- > Garrett Holmstrom > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken: Firefox 48 + Private Tab + Kerberos SSO
> "RM" == Robert Marcano writes: RM> I wonder if the default setting for RM> network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris=https:// is or isn't a leak. My understanding (from talking to npmccallum and ab/abbra at flock) is that the security and disclosure issues with that have been fixed to the satisfaction of the people who understand such things, and hence it was finally enabled by default in Firefox 48. - J< -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken: Firefox 48 + Private Tab + Kerberos SSO
On 08/24/2016 08:41 AM, Robert Marcano wrote: On 08/24/2016 12:29 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2016, Dusty Mabe wrote: I can't seem to get firefox-48.0-5.fc24.x86_64 to work with kerberos single sign on in a private window. It works fine when using a non-private window. Any ideas on why this would have broken? Anyone else seeing this? We fixed an information leak that was happening in private browsing. However, the same (almost the same) mode switch was used in Firefox to implement 'Never Remember History' mode which is almost private in the sense that browsing history is not remembered. With the fix for https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1291700, 'Never Remember History' mode is now allowing GSSAPI to work. Private browse mode will not allow GSSAPI credentials to work, though, as this is an information leak. I wonder if the default setting for network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris=https:// is or isn't a leak. By the way, this is a Fedora default customization, Upstream binaries don't do that http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/firefox.git/tree/firefox-redhat-default-prefs.js?h=f24#n31 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken: Firefox 48 + Private Tab + Kerberos SSO
On 08/24/2016 12:29 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2016, Dusty Mabe wrote: I can't seem to get firefox-48.0-5.fc24.x86_64 to work with kerberos single sign on in a private window. It works fine when using a non-private window. Any ideas on why this would have broken? Anyone else seeing this? We fixed an information leak that was happening in private browsing. However, the same (almost the same) mode switch was used in Firefox to implement 'Never Remember History' mode which is almost private in the sense that browsing history is not remembered. With the fix for https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1291700, 'Never Remember History' mode is now allowing GSSAPI to work. Private browse mode will not allow GSSAPI credentials to work, though, as this is an information leak. I wonder if the default setting for network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris=https:// is or isn't a leak. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken: Firefox 48 + Private Tab + Kerberos SSO
On 08/23/2016 05:06 PM, Robert Marcano wrote: On 08/23/2016 04:44 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote: I can't seem to get firefox-48.0-5.fc24.x86_64 to work with kerberos single sign on in a private window. It works fine when using a non-private window. Any ideas on why this would have broken? Anyone else seeing this? I just noticed it after reading you email. I noticed too that network.negotiate-auth.trusted-uris default is now "https://";. It was empty previously. Maybe now that it is enabled for all https sites by default, upstream changed the behavior for private sessions. I hope it doesn't break Negotiate on proxies with private sessions. Will test later when I am on a network with a kerberized Squid. Tested. It doesn't break Kerberos authentication against a proxy server on private mode Dusty -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Naming a sphinx-doc theme: python-sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme or python-sphinx-theme-py3doc-enhanced
On 2016-08-23 10:19, Julien Enselme wrote: Hi, Recently I opened a review [1] for a new sphinx theme: py3doc_enhanced_theme [2] The upstream name is sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme, so in my opinion, the the package should be named python-sphinx_py3doc_enhanced_theme. Furthermore, there's another sphinx theme with underscores in its name: python3-sphinx_rtd_theme. So I find it logical that the package is named this way. However, the reviewer (Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek) pointed out that: - Dashes are preferred (See the guidelines [3]) - Most themes are named with this pattern: python-sphinx-theme- Therefore, it would be consistent to name the package: python-sphinx- theme-py3doc-enhanced and I think that's a good point. A middle ground would be to use provides so the package can be installed with both names, but that leaves the question about the "main" name unresolved. Any thoughts? Using hyphens in the package name keeps the package collection more consistent, and adding a Provides entry that uses underscores will more or less seamlessly take care of the case where people installing it assume it uses those instead. It's a win-win to do it that way, IMO. -- Garrett Holmstrom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
