Re: [Fedora QA] #102: ProvenTester Mentor Request: cyberpear
#102: ProvenTester Mentor Request: cyberpear --+- Reporter: cyberpear| Owner: rhe Type: proventester request | Status: assigned Priority: trivial | Milestone: Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version: Resolution: |Keywords: --+- Changes (by rhe): * owner: = rhe * status: new = assigned Comment: Replying to [ticket:102 cyberpear]: I'd like to become a proventester. I've read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/JoinProvenTesters and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Critical_Path_Packages Hi cyberpear, Glad to see you as a proven testers candidate. Since you've read the proven tester instructions, can you please confirm that you ... * 1. have read and understand the instructions, and intend to follow the instructions when testing Fedora critical path updates * 2. understand how to enable the update-testing repository * 3. are familiar with providing test feedback using either the Bodhi web interface, or the fedora-easy-karma utility Feel free to discuss with me if you have any questions or concerns. Once you're clear on the process, please reply to this ticket, I'll then sponsor you into the proventesters group. Thanks a lot for volunteering. Have a nice day! (￣︶￣)y -- Ticket URL: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/102#comment:1 Fedora QA http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa Fedora Quality Assurance -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[urgent] libsndfile security update needs 2 proventesters
Hi folks, libsndfile for EL-5 has had a security vulnerability for many months, and now that it is actively maintained again, unfortunately hit the Bodhi proventester bottleneck (see forwarded announcement below) -- Forwarded message -- From: Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com Subject: Bodhi 0.7.5 release [...] Critical path package[0] updates now require positive karma from two proventesters[1], and a single +1 from one other community member. [...] We need two proventesters to approve this update: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libsndfile-1.0.17-3.el5 The patch applied is trivial (see the first linked bug report in the update request, and feel free to check out the libsndfile package and verify that the patch is applied to the EL-5 branch). Thanks, -- Michel Alexandre Salim Fedora Project Contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/ Email: sali...@fedoraproject.org | GPG key ID: 78884778 Jabber: hir...@jabber.ccc.de | IRC: hir...@irc.freenode.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Mock for more than one config\arch?
I'm doing something wrong but what is the correct sequence to build for more that one arch, mock --help\man not throwing much light for me. mock -r fedora12.i386 fedora12.x86_64 fedora 13.xx fedoraDevel.xx --rebuild --resultdir=/some/local/path somesrc.rpm -- Regards, Frank Murphy UTF_8 Encoded Friend of Fedora -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Mock for more than one config\arch?
On 07/12/2010 11:39 AM, Frank Murphy wrote: I'm doing something wrong but what is the correct sequence to build for more that one arch, mock --help\man not throwing much light for me. mock -r fedora12.i386 fedora12.x86_64 fedora 13.xx fedoraDevel.xx --rebuild --resultdir=/some/local/path somesrc.rpm for ARCH in fedora-12-i386 fedora-12-x86_64 fedora-rawhide-i386 ; do mock -r $ARCH mypackage.src.rpm done -- Kalev -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
SOLVED Re: Mock for more than one config\arch?
On 12/07/10 10:01, Kalev Lember wrote: On 07/12/2010 11:39 AM, Frank Murphy wrote: I'm doing something wrong but what is the correct sequence to build for more that one arch, mock --help\man not throwing much light for me. mock -r fedora12.i386 fedora12.x86_64 fedora 13.xx fedoraDevel.xx --rebuild --resultdir=/some/local/path somesrc.rpm for ARCH in fedora-12-i386 fedora-12-x86_64 fedora-rawhide-i386 ; do mock -r $ARCH mypackage.src.rpm done Is it basically bash script? I'm not excellent currently with a cli. -- Regards, Frank Murphy UTF_8 Encoded Friend of Fedora -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
2010-07-12 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting agenda
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2010-07-12 # Time: 15:00 UTC (11:00 EDT, 17:00 CEST) [1] # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings gang, If you haven't noticed, things are really heating up in preparation for the upcoming release. I'd like to review a few upcoming activities, as well as check-in on proventesters. Wwoods also asked to discuss a team sprint around the updated AutoQA depcheck milestone. As always, corrections+suggestions to the agenda are welcome. = Proposed Agenda = 1. Previous meeting follow-up 2. Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan #1 3. Fedora 14 Install Matrix Review 4. Proventester update 5. AutoQA PUATP (package update acceptance test plan) 6. Open discussion your topic here 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: 2010-07-12 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting agenda
On 07/12/2010 01:00 PM, James Laska wrote: 6. Open discussionyour topic here There's one issue that needs to be discussed and resolved and that's maintainers ignoring their packaging responsibility by not being the bridge between upstream and bugzilla refusing to resolve outstanding bugs and forcing reporters to file bugs against upstream bugzilla(s) trac system and what not. This behaviour causes serious confusion and rift in the community and disrupts the QA workflow. JBG -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: 2010-07-12 @ ** 15:00 UTC ** - Fedora QA meeting agenda
On 07/12/2010 01:19 PM, Frank Murphy wrote: Thers an ongoing thread on devel list. There have been many threads on the development list through out several release cycles about this issue. All those thread led nowhere and all those thread had all little to no input from the QA community and reporters/triagers in general. ( FYI. Not all reporters are subscribed to the development list as are not all developers/maintainers subscribed to the test list. ) Why should this be any different now? This issue needs to be raised to FESCO with a firm stance from the QA community on the issue. JBG -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
dynamic configuration of wired network interfaces looks quite broken
Before I will waste more time on that does anybody know what broke dhclient on _wired_ interfaces? I was away for quite a while now and upon return I found that although I can still use DHCP to configure wireless interfaces of my laptops this is totally different story for _wired_ ones. In the first case I see in logs: dhclient[2304]: DHCPDISCOVER on ath0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 20 dhclient[2304]: DHCPOFFER from 192.168.xx.yy dhclient[2304]: DHCPREQUEST on ath0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 dhclient[2304]: DHCPACK from 192.168.xx.yy and an interfaces comes up. With a wired one I get: dhclient[2135]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 4 dhclient[2135]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 6 dhclient[2135]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 12 dhclient[2135]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 13 dhclient[2135]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 14 dhclient[2135]: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 12 dhclient[2135]: No DHCPOFFERS received. and no networking. This happens with my test rawhide installation, both before and after I applied a big pile of pending updates, and with Fedora 12 installations with all available updates applied. In all cases dhclient here talks to the same DHCP server, which happens to be some version of dnsmasq running on a WRTG router, and on the same network but only through different network interfaces. My test machine does not have a wireless one but only a wired which up to now was configured to use DHCP, and which I would prefer to keep that way for various reasons, so you can see the trouble. Asigning static IPs on wired interfaces makes a network to go alive again but this is quite bad option for laptops which travel from time to time with foreign networks not always wireless and a dynamic configuration should work anyway. There is still an option of wireless breaking the same way on the next update. Luckily my other not running Feodra wired DHCP clients, like a DHCP _requiring_ network interface of my printer - for example, still work just fine as before (and this shows that my DHCP server in use is fine). This does not look as a directly dhclient issue as reverting that to older version did not change anything (and it seems that I went back far enough). Also a status of selinux, on which I practically gave up anyway, is irrelevant. A search through bugzilla, quite possibly as unreliable as usual, also did not make me much wiser. My suspicion would be some other library doing some creative things with IPv6 but I do not have a smoking gun. I would file a bugzilla report but I have not a clue against what. Maybe this is already a well know problem? Hm, iptables? I did not try that yet. Again - the breakage may show up any time in the last two months and I had no way to notice it but only now. Michal -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
L10N QA Template for F14
Hello! This week at FUDCon Santiago we are willing to update the F13 QA Template [1] in order to improve it for using on Fedora's next release. If someone has some thoughts on this please let us know. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_13_l10n_Results_Template Regards, Igor -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [urgent] libsndfile security update needs 2 proventesters
On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 09:16 +0200, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: Hi folks, libsndfile for EL-5 has had a security vulnerability for many months, and now that it is actively maintained again, unfortunately hit the Bodhi proventester bottleneck (see forwarded announcement below) -- Forwarded message -- From: Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com Subject: Bodhi 0.7.5 release [...] Critical path package[0] updates now require positive karma from two proventesters[1], and a single +1 from one other community member. [...] We need two proventesters to approve this update: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libsndfile-1.0.17-3.el5 The patch applied is trivial (see the first linked bug report in the update request, and feel free to check out the libsndfile package and verify that the patch is applied to the EL-5 branch). Luke, I really think turning on critpath requirements for everything in the world is going to prove to be a problem. I certainly never expected this to hit EPEL, AFAIK Fedora QA and FESCo have no actual power to commit to this policy for EPEL. How hard would it be to just disable this requirement again for EPEL at least? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Fedora 14 Schedule Reminder
Start End Name Thu 08-Jul Fri 16-Jul Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan #1 Tue 13-Jul Tue 13-Jul Feature Submission Deadline Thu 15-Jul Thu 22-Jul Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan #2 Fri 16-Jul Fri 16-Jul Alpha Blocker Meeting (f14alpha) #1 Thu 22-Jul Thu 29-Jul Pre-Alpha Rawhide Acceptance Test Plan #3 Fri 23-Jul Fri 23-Jul Alpha Blocker Meeting (f14alpha) #2 Mon 26-Jul Fri 30-Jul Daily Review Notification of Open Alpha Blocker Bugs -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: reporting bugs upstream : nothing on the wiki?
It's packager/maintainer duty to be the bridge between upstream bugzilla and ours. It cant be expected nor required of either triagers and or reporters to create account and familiar themselves with upstream bugzilla and procedures and to even suggest that is simply ludicrous. Those packagers that are simply to lazy to obey this should move to another distro or their component be removed from bugzilla to avoid unnecessary confusion, burden and what not on the whole QA community. FESCO needs to make it mandatory requirements of packagers to be that bridge for the components they maintain. JBG -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: reporting bugs upstream : nothing on the wiki?
On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 15:00 -0400, Jonathan Kamens wrote: On 7/12/2010 2:58 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote: I'm just trying to think of a way to make users more involved in filing bugs and helping up stream in fixing them. I'm sure your motives are pure :-). I just don't think what you are proposing is realistic. It's a topic that's currently under discussion on -devel. In practice I'd say it varies. Some reporters certainly are willing to make good upstream reports. Some aren't, indeed, but I think Ankur's probably right that we can add value to the ecosystem (urgh, excuse me while I shoot myself for that one) by providing good instructions for those who _are_ willing to go the extra mile. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: dynamic configuration of wired network interfaces looks quite broken
--- On Mon, 7/12/10, Michal Jaegermann mic...@harddata.com wrote:
From: Michal Jaegermann mic...@harddata.com
Subject: Re: dynamic configuration of wired network interfaces looks quite
broken
To: For testers of Fedora development releases
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Date: Monday, July 12, 2010, 1:13 PM
xuTMoÛ8½óWré�c'è¡ð!hÑÝ`]
M¤è™–F×GKRQõïû†²�‹½‚,¾y_�...@*úzº¹èvs³!›is»½y¿Ýl¾Ðjón³©èÉÕ��
=ÍÁ9Ò%óÖÜÑsÇÔKÊ”\?x¦?lhhàØÙ!Q!Ù¿8Ó[⃷Áf'�}c{¦yÆhþýé+�...@»da2Õzw#7€¡Èi
—Çgn9q¥§Œù“Ó¯ç...@.dŽ¶æŠöcmd‡!Ê�Íìçÿg�...@npx´kcÚ-ÒiEÖû×?�™ Lù$ÛãgÜŸ!Ô»¨ü]£‡— rUÇ
ÓÕiêÁÑá�´¤®OŠm!¤70¨–Þ…Ã5Ñǃud‚Äí=÷
vä®L{¼¿ÿëII©AEVqFÅ$¨¹£]_À�iqYý«.é%é‡!ûpÀ'šŽi^§´Þ(—%¨%ÙÖi
$#¼ÔË[qc...@úñ[0ùÎÞwÐ ‚|îdtäò¹
(ÅL'«²zóJLßÙf39ıð¤ýŒÓ‰}«Úᛌèât²
/‘ÔB¨uÕ-©;®�Ü(
¸¤z=�¤Í%EøòøLãÐ H
*P¤õlCv=
;HXÝs#ÑRí”U-ÊÎí¹•¨¥º£O:V
¥®�iêà{aÌäåPlºtkY’®¬\'“V5rÍnÈgQç´/§2æ[ÀÐbË
`Ÿ]Ö]íǺSº£ÚŒ†%³0½×•+;Ûpª#†b›+ͪ^ö[Æ6^ò’Ë–ŸúY–¤M
Miichal,
Sorry, but I don't understand this. The message does not appear right. Which
language is it set?
Am I the only one who sees it/saw it this way?
I have gotten many replies of excellent quality, but this one does not appear
correctly :(
Thanks and sorry for not understanding your post.
Regards,
Antonio
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: dynamic configuration of wired network interfaces looks quite broken (looks like solved)
Still I think that I figured it out. It appears that a powered switch on my network decided to misbehave. After resetting it I started to see wired interfaces dynamically configured again. A mystery remains how my printer got its IP number. It is hanging from the same switch. Really weird ... could be only certain port in the switch. tried another? (like switch between printer's and computer's) -- Among the maxims on Lord Naoshige's wall, there was this one: Matters of great concern should be treated lightly. Master Ittei commented, Matters of small concern should be treated seriously. (Ghost Dog : The Way of The Samurai) -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
