Re: I can't create specific partition layout during F18 installation
On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:34 PM, Ian Pilcher arequip...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/08/2013 03:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: It can use existing or create new LVs in VGs directly on physical disks. But not when a VG (with or without LVs) is on md RAID. I just tried, and anaconda sees the mdmember partitions, doesn't assemble the RAID and therefore doesn't see the VG's on the RAID either. All I can do is start over with anaconda. Well, all I can say is that it works for me from smoke 8 on. ISTR to your using RAID-0, where I'm using RAID-1; maybe that explains the difference. Possibly. This is md RAID1? Chris Murphy -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: how add additional repos to ananconda installer?
On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 02:41 +0100, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote: I'm trying install F18, doing NFS graphical installation with XFCE desktop (and several add-ons groups). Installation started from installation CD (images/boot.iso image), anaconda 18.37.8, with repo=nfs:/server/repopath. How I can specify additional repos and select their packages? You can't, interactively. Also, how I can select other than these in add-ons groups and select individual packages? You also can't. You can do both these things via kickstart. Supplemental repositories should be back in F19 - they were supposed to be in F18, but no-one got time to write the code - but individual package selection is removed intentionally on the basis that it's not worth carrying a whole package installation GUI in the installer. In most cases you can tweak package selection post-install. If you really really need to do it at install time, you can use a kickstart. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: f18 i386 installer memory requirements
Adam Williamson ha scritto / said the followingil giorno/on 09/01/2013 03:08: On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 01:47 +0100, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote: i'm trying install f18 on older i686 machine (1.8GHz P4 CPU/512 MB RAM/160 GB HDD/Radeon 9000 64MB graphics), doing NFS graphical installation with XFCE desktop (and several add-ons groups). Installation started from installation CD (images/boot.iso image), anaconda 18.37.8. Install CD Media check is fine. Machine always stop respond in Checking software dependencies... phase; CD-ROM permanently rotate and it's all. I suspect this may be caused by insufficient RAM (althought I was hoping that 512 MB will be sufficient - F17 requires 768MB and it's installer seems be much cleverer and more functional than this in F18). Release notes and Installation guides F18 drafts seems not contain info about HW requirements, can someone say it? That probably is it, yes. I had checking the RAM requirements on my todo list for weeks, but never got time for it. I think, the last time anyone checked, it needed at least 768 in most cases. unless you say not to check memory on the command line of the installation tools :-) -- Antonio M Skype: amontag52 Linux Fedora F17 (Beefy Miracle) on Acer 5720 http://lugsaronno.altervista.org http://www.campingmonterosa.com -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: f18 i386 installer memory requirements
John Reiser wrote: On 01/08/2013 04:47 PM, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote: i'm trying install f18 on older i686 machine (1.8GHz P4 CPU/512 MB RAM/160 GB HDD/Radeon 9000 64MB graphics), doing NFS graphical installation with XFCE desktop (and several add-ons groups). Installation started from installation CD (images/boot.iso image), anaconda 18.37.8. Install CD Media check is fine. Machine always stop respond in Checking software dependencies... phase; CD-ROM permanently rotate and it's all. I suspect this may be caused by insufficient RAM ... If you have concerns about RAM, then your first attempt should be with no add-on groups. Or, if you do try add-ons but run into trouble then you should try again without the add-ons. I just tried Fedora-18-Final-RC2-i386-DVD after converting to USB2,0 using livecd-iso-to-disk. My 1.6GHz machine has 1GB RAM, but I restricted the kernel to 511MB by appending mem=511m to the end of the kernel command line [note the lower-case 'm'.] Switching to VT2 after boot [type Ctrl-Alt-F2] then cat /proc/meminfo showed MemTotal: 507984 kB, so I was running as if only 511MB of RAM. The graphics card is ATI 9250 (9200 PRO) with 128MB. [Switch back Ctrl-Alt-F6 for graphics.] I had no trouble Checking software dependencies with either the default Gnome3 desktop, or after changing to Xfce desktop. /proc/meminfo showed: MemFree:11180 kB Buffers:32664 kB Cached:269504 kB SwapTotal: 0 kB Committed_AS: 483308 kB and ps alx | grep anac showed anaconda with VSZ=219M and RSS=128M. I did not continue with actual installation because I didn't want my existing boot configuration (grub1, BIOS drives swapped, ...) clobbered. I had 2GB of swap space configured by manual partitioning, re-using an existing linux-swap(v1) partition; but note that no swap had been used yet because SwapTotal: 0 kB. So, I would say that 511MB is enough to start actual package installation for default Xfce desktop. [Last spring I installed Fedora 17 default Gnome3 desktop complete from USB2.0 using 383MB@700MHz and kernel boot parameter nomemcheck. It took 80 minutes versus 17 minutes on my 8GB@3GHz machine. I estimate DVD would have taken around 2.5 hours due to repeated spin-up and paging from squashfs on DVD.] It seems You are right, I now tried install Xfce with 512 MB RAM and without any add-ons and this work. But installation with add-ons and 1GB RAM had only ~ 1800 packages, which isn't too - on previous releases I routinely had installations with 3000-3500 RPM packages. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 18 status
Hey, folks. Just to keep everyone in the loop on F18 status: RC2 looks about 99.99% good. The only blocker found so far is that it's lacking the final cut of the release notes. We will therefore be getting an RC3 build in the morning, but the only difference from RC2 will be a new fedora-release-notes package. All we'll need to do is give it a smoke test to make sure nothing crazy happened during compose to make the new build broken, but other than that, all RC2 test results should be transferable to RC3. We have almost complete test coverage - only a few are missing: QA:Testcase_install_to_SCSI_device - this one we often waive as no-one has the hardware any more, but if anyone has a SCSI disk lying around and can test F18 RC2 or RC3 on it, it'd be appreciated QA:Testcase_Boot_Methods_Xen_Para_Virt - we need someone who's set up for Xen to test this, if Konrad is reading, are you able to check it? QA:Testcase_EC2_AMI_Validation - ditto for EC2, I think Tim or Dennis should be able to check this QA:Testcase_Anaconda_updates.img_via_installation_source - this one needs you to have an install repo you can manipulate, I could set up to test this, but I believe the RH folks in Brno can do it more easily, so I'm hoping Kamil or someone can get this one done between now and tomorrow morning. Of course, if anyone else happens to have the setup to test it, please do, thanks! QA:Testcase_upgrade_fedup_cli_previous_desktop - Tim has really done enough testing on this one, I'm sure he'll set it to PASS soon. All his tests have worked. So the schedule for tomorrow is that there should be a blocker review meeting at the usual time, and then Go/No-Go at 19:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 . Right now it's looking like we'll be signing off on RC3, unless there are any issues I'm not aware of, or any emerge overnight. If you're sitting on any major issues...well, last week would have been the perfect time to nominate them as blockers, but failing that, please do it now! Stuff that's in RC2/RC3 but not yet karma'd enough to be pushed stable: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnupg2-2.0.19-7.fc18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnupg-1.4.13-2.fc18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ibus-table-chinese-1.4.6-1.fc18 If we could get some testing on those so they can be pushed stable, it'd be awesome. Thanks! Thanks, everyone! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net ___ 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: how add additional repos to ananconda installer?
Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 02:41 +0100, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote: I'm trying install F18, doing NFS graphical installation with XFCE desktop (and several add-ons groups). Installation started from installation CD (images/boot.iso image), anaconda 18.37.8, with repo=nfs:/server/repopath. How I can specify additional repos and select their packages? You can't, interactively. And non-interactively? When I tried multiple repo= items on kernel cmdline, then it appears as only last is considered. Also, how I can select other than these in add-ons groups and select individual packages? You also can't. You can do both these things via kickstart. Supplemental repositories should be back in F19 - they were supposed to be in F18, but no-one got time to write the code - but individual package selection is removed intentionally on the basis that it's not worth carrying a whole package installation GUI in the installer. In most cases you can tweak package selection post-install. If you really really need to do it at install time, you can use a kickstart. And, please, is possible in any easy way create my own add-ons groups and replace currently present? Although groups as Medical, Robotics, Milkymist and some others demonstrates Fedora coverage, they are not for everybody. In my case, I frequently install Fedora distros for school 3-19 years old students (from nursery to high school), and great deal of installed (or rather used) packages is from old Education, Games, Graphics, Multimedia groups - and there is need for their selection (e.g. not all games are acceptable for nursery school). Then, some sort of customization installation process would be good. My usuall installation practice until now was installation from local nfs repos (Everything, Fupdates, rpmfusion*, my own). This had for me advantages: - I could fine select content for every installation - after installation i had fully updated system - when I did this installation for my usual installation types (~5), then I can use their /root/anaconda-ks.cfg as kickstart files for all rest of installations for given distro, and even (with small edit) for next Fedora version install. It seems for me as new F18 installer is significant step back for this practice. And when I remember, kickstart as was ~2 years back, could not do fine package selection, maybe was not able work with multiple repos too. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
F18 Eth config: return from p8p1 to eth0
First, I must commend for solving problems from older installers, where wasn't possible do manual network config for other nets different than was this in install time (network install) - in F18 this seems be finally working. But is possible in install time disable biosdevname and use old good ethX scheme? It is more human understandable, and almost always is unacceptable when I replace NIC or move it to other slot to that get new network device. Simply, in many cases is MAC-based NIC naming better. F18 installer can solve this? -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: f18 i386 installer memory requirements
hm, that reminds me of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887302 the relevant part of that report: Release notes for F18 do not mention minimum system requirements too, ouch - please clone this bug as appropriate (I'm not reporting for Release Notes as I do not know if that belongs there ... the sole point of this bug is that the user should *somehow* get the infromation that F18 needs _more than_ 768 MiB RAM, which is a thing that I was unable to found even after 10 minutes at Google ...) Dne St 9. ledna 2013 01:47:53, Frantisek Hanzlik napsal(a): i'm trying install f18 on older i686 machine (1.8GHz P4 CPU/512 MB RAM/160 GB HDD/Radeon 9000 64MB graphics), doing NFS graphical installation with XFCE desktop (and several add-ons groups). Installation started from installation CD (images/boot.iso image), anaconda 18.37.8. Install CD Media check is fine. Machine always stop respond in Checking software dependencies... phase; CD-ROM permanently rotate and it's all. I suspect this may be caused by insufficient RAM (althought I was hoping that 512 MB will be sufficient - F17 requires 768MB and it's installer seems be much cleverer and more functional than this in F18). Release notes and Installation guides F18 drafts seems not contain info about HW requirements, can someone say it? TIA, Franta -- Karel Volný QE BaseOs/Daemons Team Red Hat Czech, Brno tel. +420 532294274 (RH: +420 532294111 ext. 8262074) xmpp ka...@jabber.cz :: Never attribute to malice what can :: easily be explained by stupidity. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F18 Eth config: return from p8p1 to eth0
On 01/09/2013 11:17 AM, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote: First, I must commend for solving problems from older installers, where wasn't possible do manual network config for other nets different than was this in install time (network install) - in F18 this seems be finally working. But is possible in install time disable biosdevname and use old good ethX scheme? It is more human understandable, and almost always is unacceptable when I replace NIC or move it to other slot to that get new network device. Simply, in many cases is MAC-based NIC naming better. F18 installer can solve this? No installer will not fix this. How network interface get their device names is that first the Kernel assigns one then userspace will rename it when udev sees it. However ( hopefully ) this will be permanently fixed in F19 and onwards via [1]. ( the changes are already in rawhide and yes this will fix the annoying ks/cobbler ethX bug everyone is familiar with ) JBG 1. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: how add additional repos to ananconda installer?
My usuall installation practice until now was installation from local nfs repos (Everything, Fupdates, rpmfusion*, my own). This had for me advantages: - I could fine select content for every installation - after installation i had fully updated system - when I did this installation for my usual installation types (~5), then I can use their /root/anaconda-ks.cfg as kickstart files for all rest of installations for given distro, and even (with small edit) for next Fedora version install. It seems for me as new F18 installer is significant step back for this practice. And when I remember, kickstart as was ~2 years back, could not do fine package selection, maybe was not able work with multiple repos too. Hello, just study http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Kickstart or some other online documentation. Kickstart can do whatever you need - set up additional repositories, install package groups and individual packages. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
F-18 Branched report: 20130109 changes
Compose started at Wed Jan 9 09:15:32 UTC 2013 Updated Packages: anaconda-18.37.11-1.fc18 * Mon Jan 07 2013 Brian C. Lane b...@redhat.com - 18.37.11-1 - Fix Quit button in standalone network spoke (#892120) (rvykydal) - Force disk selection for interactive installs. (#888293) (cherry picked from commit 91fea0af242760e0ad83c1f467993ca091098b63) (dlehman) - Fix completeness check for md fwraid arrays. (#892621) (dlehman) - Fix handling of failure to create a new container. (#892046) (dlehman) - Do not lightbox the Add Mountpoint dialog (#875291). (clumens) - Try fallback if none exactly matching language is found (#891487) (vpodzime) * Fri Jan 04 2013 Brian C. Lane b...@redhat.com - 18.37.10-1 - Only skip welcome screen for ks installs (#891755) (bcl) - protect getDirSize from vanishing files (#891759) (bcl) - start vnc without ip address (#832510) (bcl) * Thu Jan 03 2013 Brian C. Lane b...@redhat.com - 18.37.9-1 - Update physical device's sysfs path for btrfs (sub)volumes. (#891443) (dlehman) - Raise DeviceError instead of ValueError from device ctor. (#888089) (dlehman) blueman-1.23-5.fc18 --- * Thu Dec 27 2012 Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org - 1.23-5 - Require pulseaudio-libs-glib2 (#856270) firstboot-18.6-2.fc18 - * Fri Jan 04 2013 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com - 18.6-2 - kbd.patch: don't try and read and apply keyboard config (#892097) lorax-18.29-1.fc18 -- * Thu Dec 20 2012 Martin Gracik mgra...@redhat.com 18.29-1 - Do not remove gtk3 share files (mgra...@redhat.com) * Wed Dec 19 2012 Martin Gracik mgra...@redhat.com 18.28-1 - Fix rexists (mgra...@redhat.com) - Several 'doupgrade' fixes in the x86 template. (dm...@redhat.com) - Missing semicolon (mgra...@redhat.com) * Tue Dec 18 2012 Martin Gracik mgra...@redhat.com 18.27-1 - Only run installupgradeinitrd if upgrade on s390x (mgra...@redhat.com) * Tue Dec 18 2012 Martin Gracik mgra...@redhat.com 18.26-1 - Only run installupgradeinitrd if upgrade (mgra...@redhat.com) * Tue Dec 18 2012 Martin Gracik mgra...@redhat.com 18.25-1 - Add --noupgrade option (mgra...@redhat.com) - Require fedup-dracut* only on Fedora. (dm...@redhat.com) pygobject3-3.4.2-6.fc18 --- * Fri Dec 21 2012 Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org 3.4.2-6 - Another upstream fix for copy/paste functionality in sugar (gnome#656312) * Wed Dec 19 2012 Ray Strode rstr...@redhat.com 3.4.2-5 - Fix rhythmbox crash Resolves: #872851 * Thu Dec 13 2012 Ray Strode rstr...@redhat.com 3.4.2-4 - Split non-cairo parts into a subpackage sugar-0.98.3-1.fc18 --- * Fri Dec 21 2012 Simon Schampijer si...@laptop.org - 0.98.3-1 - Sugar 0.98.3 stable release * Tue Dec 18 2012 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org 0.98.2-1 - Sugar 0.98.2 stable release sugar-artwork-0.98.2-1.fc18 --- * Tue Dec 18 2012 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org 0.98.2-1 - Sugar 0.98.2 stable release sugar-datastore-0.98.1-1.fc18 - * Tue Dec 18 2012 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org 0.98.1-1 - Sugar 0.98.1 stable release * Thu Nov 29 2012 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org 0.98.0-1 - Sugar 0.98.1 stable release sugar-paint-54-1.fc18 - * Thu Dec 20 2012 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org 54-1 - Release 54 sugar-physics-11-1.fc18 --- * Tue Dec 18 2012 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org 11-1 - Release 11 sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.98.3-1.fc18 * Fri Dec 21 2012 Simon Schampijer si...@laptop.org - 0.98.3-1 - Sugar 0.98.3 stable release * Tue Dec 18 2012 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@fedoraproject.org 0.98.2-1 - Sugar 0.98.2 stable release systemd-195-15.fc18 --- * Thu Jan 03 2013 Lennart Poettering lpoet...@redhat.com - 195-15 - https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59000 * Thu Jan 03 2013 Lennart Poettering lpoet...@redhat.com - 195-14 - Migrate old s-s-k X11 keyboard configuration file - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889699 Summary: Added Packages: 0 Removed Packages: 0 Upgraded Packages: 12 Compose finished at Wed Jan 9 13:35:17 UTC 2013 -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: how add additional repos to ananconda installer?
Kamil Paral wrote: My usuall installation practice until now was installation from local nfs repos (Everything, Fupdates, rpmfusion*, my own). This had for me advantages: - I could fine select content for every installation - after installation i had fully updated system - when I did this installation for my usual installation types (~5), then I can use their /root/anaconda-ks.cfg as kickstart files for all rest of installations for given distro, and even (with small edit) for next Fedora version install. It seems for me as new F18 installer is significant step back for this practice. And when I remember, kickstart as was ~2 years back, could not do fine package selection, maybe was not able work with multiple repos too. Hello, just study http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Kickstart or some other online documentation. Kickstart can do whatever you need - set up additional repositories, install package groups and individual packages. Thanks, Kamil, I'll did it. I know about kickstart, but as I says - when I tried it lastly (two, maybe more years ago), there was something what not satisfy me. Perhaps kickstart was evolved over this time too and will work fine for me now. Regards, Franta Hanzlik -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Just reporting....
that in rawhide if I try to edit a grub entry at boot time (too either set or unset something in the linux line for example) I get a blank screen and no ability to edit, boot, etc. without a hard reset. This is with the latest updates from yesterday. IMO, the boot menu has taken a step back in looks and, now, in functionality. -- Regards, Kevin Martin -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:05:06 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: that in rawhide if I try to edit a grub entry at boot time (too either set or unset something in the linux line for example) I get a blank screen and no ability to edit, boot, etc. without a hard reset. This is with the latest updates from yesterday. IMO, the boot menu has taken a step back in looks and, now, in functionality. Have you a list of said updates? That you can work through to find the culprit. -- Regards, Frank Still trying to learn, both old and new tricks --me . -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
Hasn't worked for quite a while (pretty much ever since they updated the grub menu boot time layout). Is the grub boot menu stuff in the anaconda package? I'm not even sure where to start looking for it. Kevin On 01/09/13 08:09, Frank Murphy wrote: On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:05:06 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: that in rawhide if I try to edit a grub entry at boot time (too either set or unset something in the linux line for example) I get a blank screen and no ability to edit, boot, etc. without a hard reset. This is with the latest updates from yesterday. IMO, the boot menu has taken a step back in looks and, now, in functionality. Have you a list of said updates? That you can work through to find the culprit. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On 01/09/13 08:20, Kevin Martin wrote: Hasn't worked for quite a while (pretty much ever since they updated the grub menu boot time layout). Is the grub boot menu stuff in the anaconda package? I'm not even sure where to start looking for it. Kevin On 01/09/13 08:09, Frank Murphy wrote: On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:05:06 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: that in rawhide if I try to edit a grub entry at boot time (too either set or unset something in the linux line for example) I get a blank screen and no ability to edit, boot, etc. without a hard reset. This is with the latest updates from yesterday. IMO, the boot menu has taken a step back in looks and, now, in functionality. Have you a list of said updates? That you can work through to find the culprit. Argh, sorry for the top post. Too used to answering email from those who expect top posting! Kevin -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:20:01 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: Hasn't worked for quite a while (pretty much ever since they updated the grub menu boot time layout). Is the grub boot menu stuff in the anaconda package? I'm not even sure where to start looking for it. Kevin What point did you upgrade to Rawhide. New grub2 is in use since Fedora 16 was released. -- Regards, Frank Still trying to learn, both old and new tricks --me . -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Installing F18 Beta on Dell XPX 15z
Hello All, I am trying to install Fedora 18 Beta x86+64 on my Dell XPS 15z, and would appreciate any help. I am running this laptop on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. This needs the following parameters on the 3.2.34 and later kernels to make the screen work: *acpi_backlight=vendor dell_laptop.backlight=0* On earlier kernels, it was solved with; *acpi=noirq* The default installation does of Fedora `8 not work, it displays a noveau error message and hangs. *nouveau :01:00.0: 0xD581: i2c wr fail: -6* It went beyond this just once (not sure how/why), and failed with the following; *no medium found on /dev/sr0** **dracut: FAIL : Failed to mount block device of live image* Questions - How do I get to edit the kernel parameters at install time, so that I can try the acpi switches ? Do I need to give additional kernel parameters for dracut to read the DVD ? Also, has any one successfully installed F18 on the Dell XPS 15z ? -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On 01/09/13 08:41, Frank Murphy wrote: On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 08:20:01 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: Hasn't worked for quite a while (pretty much ever since they updated the grub menu boot time layout). Is the grub boot menu stuff in the anaconda package? I'm not even sure where to start looking for it. Kevin What point did you upgrade to Rawhide. New grub2 is in use since Fedora 16 was released. Been running rawhide for well over a year. The boot editing issue has occurred essentially since the anaconda changes. I did a reinstall of my system with the F18 beta DVD about 4 months ago; that's when I started noticing the problem. I've since then been updating my system from the rawhide repos. Kevin -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fedora 18 status
RC3 seems to be already available http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/18-RC3/ Default DVD and netinst i386 install works OK. Default netinst x86_64 install works OK. Jskladan confirmed default DVD x86_64 install (with UEFI) works OK. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
I haven't tried editing any grub entries in my f18 system, but I did notice that f18 came with fancy gfx nonsense turned on. I wonder if deleting all the gfx junk from the config file and running grub with a plain old text console would allow editing to work? (Just a random thought). -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:11:18 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: Been running rawhide for well over a year. The boot editing issue has occurred essentially since the anaconda changes. I did a reinstall of my system with the F18 beta DVD about 4 months ago; that's when I started noticing the problem. I've since then been updating my system from the rawhide repos. Kevin You don't need anaconda for an installed system. Am running Rawhide here with no boot problems. Though I have removed all the advanced sub-menu as it wasn't necessary in my particular boxes. Can you boot from an earlier kernel? do your logs give any hint of a problem. -- Regards, Frank Still trying to learn, both old and new tricks --me . -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On 01/09/13 09:26, Frank Murphy wrote: On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:11:18 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: Been running rawhide for well over a year. The boot editing issue has occurred essentially since the anaconda changes. I did a reinstall of my system with the F18 beta DVD about 4 months ago; that's when I started noticing the problem. I've since then been updating my system from the rawhide repos. Kevin You don't need anaconda for an installed system. Am running Rawhide here with no boot problems. Though I have removed all the advanced sub-menu as it wasn't necessary in my particular boxes. Can you boot from an earlier kernel? do your logs give any hint of a problem. I understand that anaconda is not needed for a running system. And I'm not having a problem booting into any of my kernels; I found the problem when I went to add some debug information on the fly to the linux line in the kernel I was booting and found that after hitting 'e' to edit it showed nothing to edit, 'c' for commandline seemed to do nothing, the option for booting did nothing, and I couldn't get back to the grub menu. I had to hard reset to get back to where I could see the grub menu. Tom Horsley mentioned the gfx stuff in grub. I'm going to look at that and see what happens if I disable it. Kevin -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:32:50 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: Just a thought do you have the menu with advanced sub-menu Maybe you can only edit those in the sub-menu? If that's what you have. -- Regards, Frank Still trying to learn, both old and new tricks --me . -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Rawhide] Re: Just reporting....
On 01/09/13 09:46, Frank Murphy wrote: On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:32:50 -0600 Kevin Martin ktm...@gmail.com wrote: Just a thought do you have the menu with advanced sub-menu Maybe you can only edit those in the sub-menu? If that's what you have. So setting GRUB_TERMINAL=console and rebuilding my grub2.cfg does the trick. I now get the old style grub menu and can edit the entries, either directly or via the Advanced sub menu. Seems like another example of people fixing a non-existent problem. The grub menu doesn't need to be fancy, just operational. Adding complexity to it in the name of trying to make it look good is begging for problems. Thanks Tom and Frank for your help. Kevin -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 18 Final Release Candidate 3 (RC3) Available Now!
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Final Release Candidate 3 (RC3) is now available for testing. Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5406#comment:21 . 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 Desktop: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test Security Lab: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Security_Lab_Test Ideally, all Alpha, Beta, and Final priority test cases for Installation [2], Base [3], Desktop [4], and Security Lab [5] should pass in order to meet the Final Release Criteria [6]. Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [7], or on the test list [8]. Create Fedora 18 test compose (TC) and release candidate (RC) https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5406 Current Blocker and NTH bugs: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current [1] http://jreznik.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-18/f-18-quality-tasks.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Installation_validation_testing [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Base_validation_testing [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Desktop_validation_testing [5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Security_Lab_validation_testing [6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Final_Release_Criteria [7] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa [8] 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: [Test-Announce] Fedora 18 Final Release Candidate 3 (RC3) Available Now!
On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 12:19 -0500, Andre Robatino wrote: As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Final Release Candidate 3 (RC3) is now available for testing. As I posted yesterday - the sole difference between this and RC2 is an updated fedora-release-notes, so as long as we smoketest it, we can transfer all RC2 test results to RC3, we do not need to re-run all validation tests on RC3. There will be an RC4 build soon, with the fix for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810040 included. RC3 and RC4 are essentially competing for the title of F18 Final Contender: we are still arguing about whether it's worth the risk of taking the 810040 fix or not. We can still choose to ship RC3, at the go/no-go meeting. Please attend if you want to follow/take part in that debate. If people could give RC4 as much of a once-over as possible, once it lands - focusing on GNOME login stuff, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_login for GNOME - that would be great. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Fedora 18 status
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 09:51:06AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: Right. I'll mark the test as PASS for RC1, RC2 and RC3 with your input, thanks Matt. I'll check with dgilmore whether fprintd is in the AMI, for RC4 purposes (see test@ for the RC4 story). Thanks! It does not contain fprintd. -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ mat...@fedoraproject.org -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Dracut + Disk Crypt Passphrase Timeout
I haven't used the disk encryption features much so maybe this is normal, but what I saw seemed odd enough I thought I better post it here. I have just installed F18 (with RC1) and configured the disk crypt feature. I just did my first boot, saw the prompt for the passphrase come up when I got called off to tend to problems elsewhere. Upon returning I noticed that my system was now in a dracut emergency recovery shell. I saw some message about a timeout, but had already hit C-A-D before taking good mental notes. Is this timeout normal and expected or is it a bug? (I'm not worried about it, but thought someone might like to know if it's unexpected.) -- John Florian -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Dracut + Disk Crypt Passphrase Timeout
Is this timeout normal and expected or is it a bug? (I'm not worried about it, but thought someone might like to know if it's unexpected.) I've seen this as well. It's certainly disconcerting to come back to a workstation and find it dropped to an emergency shell. So, I'd certainly call it a bug. Others do too: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868421 -benjamin -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Dracut + Disk Crypt Passphrase Timeout
On 01/09/2013 01:09 PM, john.flor...@dart.biz wrote: I haven't used the disk encryption features much so maybe this is normal, but what I saw seemed odd enough I thought I better post it here. I have just installed F18 (with RC1) and configured the disk crypt feature. I just did my first boot, saw the prompt for the passphrase come up when I got called off to tend to problems elsewhere. Upon returning I noticed that my system was now in a dracut emergency recovery shell. I saw some message about a timeout, but had already hit C-A-D before taking good mental notes. Is this timeout normal and expected or is it a bug? Bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=861123 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=881670 but one that will probably be documented as a known bug rather than blocking the release of F18. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com+1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 18 status is Go, release planned for January 15, 2013
At the Fedora 18 Go/No-Go Meeting that just occurred, it was agreed to Go for the Fedora 18. The release is planned for Tuesday, January 15, 2013 [1]. See meeting minutes [2]. It was agreed that RC3 is GOLD for now, with possibility to raise the status of RC4 to be the final release based on outcome of supplemental testing due to the late acceptance of bug #810040 [3]. The final call will happen tomorrow, Thursday, January 10 at 16:00 UTC (11 AM EST, 8 AM PST, 17:00 CET), #fedora-meeting-2. Please help Fedora QA with supplemental testing - the RC2/RC3 test results will be pulled into the RC4 test matrices except the test cases required for RC4 re-verification. An email with more details will follow on Test list. Our lovely Spherical Cow would like to thank you everyone for that hard and sometimes dirty work that lead to it's release. M! Jaroslav [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/18/Schedule [2] http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2013-01-09/f18_final_gono-go_meeting.2013-01-09-19.00.html [3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810040 ___ 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
[Test-Announce] Last Minute Testing for Fedora 18 RC4
We find ourselves in a bit of an odd position for Fedora 18 - RC3 is go, but we need to finalize some testing in order to decide whether or not RC4 will supersede RC3 as the released version of Fedora 18. To that end, we have some testing to do. Since the change between RC2 and RC4 is so small, I've gone through and pulled results from RC2 and RC3 where appropriate into the test matrices (mostly the installation test matrices [1]). If you end up re-running any test cases, please overwrite any results marked 'previous RCX run'. Pulling results through isn't an indication that more testing isn't welcome, just that we don't think it's strictly _required_ for RC4. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test The testing that we're most interested in is the various desktop environments with an emphasis on the display managers (gdm, kdm, lightdm etc.) because any show-stopping problems are most likely to exist there. The second most likely place is inside any of the livecd desktop environments (kde, gnome, xfce etc.). To that end, if you have the time to download RC4 [2] and run through some or all of the desktop test cases [3], please do. The more testing we get on RC4, the easier tomorrow's decision to choose RC3 or RC4 will be. [2] http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/18-RC4/ [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test Happy testing, Tim signature.asc Description: PGP 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: [Test-Announce] Last Minute Testing for Fedora 18 RC4
RC4 is missing Wine and TigerVNC. -- Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX c...@omen.com www.omen.com Developer of Industrial ZMODEM(Tm) for Embedded Applications Omen Technology Inc The High Reliability Software 10255 NW Old Cornelius Pass Portland OR 97231 503-614-0430 -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Last Minute Testing for Fedora 18 RC4
Am Mittwoch, den 09.01.2013, 15:07 -0700 schrieb Tim Flink: The testing that we're most interested in is the various desktop environments with an emphasis on the display managers (gdm, kdm, lightdm etc.) because any show-stopping problems are most likely to exist there. The second most likely place is inside any of the livecd desktop environments (kde, gnome, xfce etc.). I have tested Xfce and lightdm and things are fine with both RC4 and RC3. However I'd like to ask you if we can go for RC4, because ... To that end, if you have the time to download RC4 [2] and run through some or all of the desktop test cases [3], please do. The more testing we get on RC4, the easier tomorrow's decision to choose RC3 or RC4 will be. RC3 Xfce x84_64 was slightly oversized with 701 MB. RC2 and RC4 on the other hand only were 691 MB. I've also tested the fprintd update to fix #810040, which AFAIK is the only difference between RC3 and RC4, so I'd opt for RC4. Kind regards, Christoph -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Test-Announce] Last Minute Testing for Fedora 18 RC4
Am Mittwoch, den 09.01.2013, 14:49 -0800 schrieb Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R: RC4 is missing Wine and TigerVNC. The Xfce spin never shipped wine or TigerVNC, actually I am not aware of any spin or media that ships them and if, it would have been more than 10 MB difference in size. Kind regrds, Christoph -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
update some testcases(2)
Hi all, I have taken part in the improve the test wiki pageproposed by Tao Wu. As there is huge change in f18, some test cases in the test wiki pageseem to be inapplicable. I suggest to modify some of them, as the following: Testcase::https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_autopart_%28encrypted%29_install How to test Boot the installer using any available means Make sure your disk is set to be encrypted you can encrypt the whole disk before custom partitioning your disk or encrypt part of the disk (for example,/root) after custom partitioning your disk Continue installation with choosing all provided defaults After installation is complete, perform QA:Testcase_base_startup to ensure the installed system boots correctly with the encrypted partitioning Repeat the test, selecting a non-English keyboard map and entering a passphrase which would not be input the same on an English keyboard map Testcase::https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_autopart_%28use_free_space%29_install How to test Boot the installer using any available means Make sure your disk is not set to be encrypted Continue installation with choosing all provided defaults， and make sure the existing partitions are not modified As in the text mode, you should choose option of using the free space for the Autopartitioning Options Expected Results The system should install successfully After install, the system initiates boot properly The existing partitions were not modified, the system is installed only into the previously free space. [[QA:Anaconda partitioning#custom|custom partitioning mode]]: Click into Installation Destination, select Continue select Let me custom the partitioning of the disk instead for INSTALLATION OPTIONS select Continue to custom the partition Testcase:: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Partitioning_No_Swap How to test Boot the installer using any available means (netinst/boot.iso, PXE, or DVD) In the INSTALLATION SUMMARY screen, [[QA:Anaconda partitioning#custom|custom partitioning mode]] At the manual partitioning screen, remove the swap partition created by anaconda, and proceed with installation. Complete the installation Testcase:: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_anaconda_ext3_rootfs_on_disk_partition How to test Boot the installer using any available means (netinst/boot.iso, PXE, or DVD) In the INSTALLATION SUMMARY screen, [[QA:Anaconda partitioning#custom|custom partitioning mode]] At the manual partitioning screen, place the root filesystem(/) on an ext3 formatted partition,and proceed with installation Complete the installation Testcase::https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_anaconda_xfs_rootfs_on_disk_partition Boot the installer using any available means (netinst/boot.iso, PXE, or DVD) In the INSTALLATION SUMMARY screen,[[QA:Anaconda partitioning#custom|custom partitioning mode]] At the manual partitioning screen, place the root filesystem(/) on an xfs formatted partition,and proceed with installation Complete the installation Testcase:: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_anaconda_ext4_rootfs_on_disk_partition Boot the installer using any available means (netinst/boot.iso, PXE, or DVD) In the INSTALLATION SUMMARY screen, [[QA:Anaconda partitioning#custom|custom partitioning mode]] At the manual partitioning screen, place the root filesystem(/) on an ext4 formatted partition,and proceed with installation Complete the installation Any comments on these will be welcome, and as soon as we have a decision on the changes, I will update the wiki-page. Thank you, Lili Nie -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 18 testing: final night!
Hey folks! So we are definitely on the final night of Fedora 18 testing now (everyone, take a drink). As it's Fedora, we came up with a fudge at the go/no-go meeting today: we agreed we're definitely shipping either RC3 or RC4. RC3 is RC2 with the final release notes, and RC4 is RC3 with the fprintd fix for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810040 . Those are the only differences between those builds (Xfce live came out correctly sized in RC4 and oversize in RC3, but that's just known weirdness in the compose process). A final go/no-go meeting will happen today/tomorrow (Thursday, Jan 10) to decide which one we ship. I'm not gonna hazard a guess as to what the call will be - there are arguments on both sides - but the last thing QA can do to provide useful data for the decision is to get as much validation testing done on RC3 and RC4 as reasonably possible. The matrices: RC3 --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC4_Install https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC4_Install -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net ___ 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
[Test-Announce] Fedora 18 testing: final night!
Sorry for the earlier incomplete version of this mail, sent in error. Damn ctrl-combinations. Hey folks! So we are definitely on the final night of Fedora 18 testing now (everyone, take a drink). As it's Fedora, we came up with a fudge at the go/no-go meeting today: we agreed we're definitely shipping either RC3 or RC4. RC3 is RC2 with the final release notes, and RC4 is RC3 with the fprintd fix for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810040 . Those are the only differences between those builds (Xfce live came out correctly sized in RC4 and oversize in RC3, but that's just known weirdness in the compose process). A final go/no-go meeting will happen today/tomorrow (Thursday, Jan 10) to decide which one we ship. I'm not gonna hazard a guess as to what the call will be - there are arguments on both sides - but the last thing QA can do to provide useful data for the decision is to get as much validation testing done on RC3 and RC4 as reasonably possible. The matrices: RC3 --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC3_Install https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC3_Base https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC3_Desktop RC4 --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC4_Install https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC4_Base https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_18_Final_RC4_Desktop They look pretty full, but anywhere a test is marked as 'previous RC2 run' or 'previous RC3 run', it would be better to replace it with an actual test of the build in question. The current level of testing is enough for us to ship RC3 with confidence at least, we decided that at today's meeting. So no-one needs to kill themselves working too hard on this. But if you were planning to do some QA today, that's the best QA to be doing :) Probably the more RC4 testing we have, the more likely we are to ship it; if the RC4 testing looks a bit thin, we may wind up going with RC3 for safety. RC4 really shouldn't break, but tflink calls 'should' 'the s word'... Thanks folks! Whichever way the decision goes, a huge thanks to everyone who spent so much time working on the validation tests and bug verification, this release would still be in delay hell without you all. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net ___ 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
[Test-Announce] Fedora 18 status
Hey, folks. Just to keep everyone in the loop on F18 status: RC2 looks about 99.99% good. The only blocker found so far is that it's lacking the final cut of the release notes. We will therefore be getting an RC3 build in the morning, but the only difference from RC2 will be a new fedora-release-notes package. All we'll need to do is give it a smoke test to make sure nothing crazy happened during compose to make the new build broken, but other than that, all RC2 test results should be transferable to RC3. We have almost complete test coverage - only a few are missing: QA:Testcase_install_to_SCSI_device - this one we often waive as no-one has the hardware any more, but if anyone has a SCSI disk lying around and can test F18 RC2 or RC3 on it, it'd be appreciated QA:Testcase_Boot_Methods_Xen_Para_Virt - we need someone who's set up for Xen to test this, if Konrad is reading, are you able to check it? QA:Testcase_EC2_AMI_Validation - ditto for EC2, I think Tim or Dennis should be able to check this QA:Testcase_Anaconda_updates.img_via_installation_source - this one needs you to have an install repo you can manipulate, I could set up to test this, but I believe the RH folks in Brno can do it more easily, so I'm hoping Kamil or someone can get this one done between now and tomorrow morning. Of course, if anyone else happens to have the setup to test it, please do, thanks! QA:Testcase_upgrade_fedup_cli_previous_desktop - Tim has really done enough testing on this one, I'm sure he'll set it to PASS soon. All his tests have worked. So the schedule for tomorrow is that there should be a blocker review meeting at the usual time, and then Go/No-Go at 19:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-2 . Right now it's looking like we'll be signing off on RC3, unless there are any issues I'm not aware of, or any emerge overnight. If you're sitting on any major issues...well, last week would have been the perfect time to nominate them as blockers, but failing that, please do it now! Stuff that's in RC2/RC3 but not yet karma'd enough to be pushed stable: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnupg2-2.0.19-7.fc18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnupg-1.4.13-2.fc18 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ibus-table-chinese-1.4.6-1.fc18 If we could get some testing on those so they can be pushed stable, it'd be awesome. Thanks! Thanks, everyone! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test-announce mailing list test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce
[Test-Announce] Fedora 18 Final Release Candidate 3 (RC3) Available Now!
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Final Release Candidate 3 (RC3) is now available for testing. Content information, including changes, can be found at https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5406#comment:21 . 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 Desktop: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test Security Lab: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Security_Lab_Test Ideally, all Alpha, Beta, and Final priority test cases for Installation [2], Base [3], Desktop [4], and Security Lab [5] should pass in order to meet the Final Release Criteria [6]. Help is available on #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net [7], or on the test list [8]. Create Fedora 18 test compose (TC) and release candidate (RC) https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5406 Current Blocker and NTH bugs: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current [1] http://jreznik.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-18/f-18-quality-tasks.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Installation_validation_testing [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Base_validation_testing [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Desktop_validation_testing [5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Security_Lab_validation_testing [6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Final_Release_Criteria [7] irc://irc.freenode.net/fedora-qa [8] 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
