Fedora 17 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora 17 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   0  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2597/kernel-3.7.8-102.fc17
   0  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2589/pigz-2.2.5-1.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2420/boost-1.48.0-14.fc17
  25  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1286/python-tw2-jquery-2.0.3-5.fc17
  15  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1320/dnsmasq-2.65-4.fc17
   4  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2315/rubygem-rack-1.4.0-4.fc17
  42  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0210/vdsm-4.10.0-13.fc17
   8  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2143/rubygem-rdoc-3.12-5.fc17
  42  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0231/ca-certificates-2012.87-1.fc17
  38  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0455/fedora-business-cards-1-0.1.beta1.fc17
  38  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-19606/cups-1.5.4-18.fc17
  68  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-20092/libproxy-0.4.11-1.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2391/rubygem-activemodel-3.0.11-3.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2351/rubygem-activerecord-3.0.11-6.fc17
   9  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1997/qt-4.8.4-11.fc17
  14  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1836/perl-5.14.3-221.fc17
   7  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2202/gnome-online-accounts-3.4.2-3.fc17
 226  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-10269/revelation-0.4.14-1.fc17
   9  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2023/tor-0.2.3.25-1700
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2352/mediatomb-0.12.1-23.fc17
  15  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1804/coreutils-8.15-10.fc17
   7  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2206/openssh-5.9p1-29.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2450/pixman-0.28.0-1.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2434/freeipa-2.2.2-1.fc17
   1  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2472/openconnect-4.08-1.fc17


The following Fedora 17 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:
 Age URL
   0  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2582/python-bugzilla-0.8.0-1.fc17
   0  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2597/kernel-3.7.8-102.fc17
   1  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2564/systemd-44-24.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2428/libgtop2-2.28.4-3.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2450/pixman-0.28.0-1.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2368/lxpanel-0.5.12-1.fc17
   3  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2400/xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.21.2-1.fc17
   4  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2298/libdrm-2.4.42-1.fc17
   4  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2304/taglib-1.8-3.20121215git.fc17
   7  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2163/policycoreutils-2.1.13-27.3.fc17
   7  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2202/gnome-online-accounts-3.4.2-3.fc17
   7  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2206/openssh-5.9p1-29.fc17
   8  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2124/abrt-2.1.1-1.fc17,libreport-2.1.1-1.fc17
   9  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2065/abrt-2.1.0-1.fc17,libreport-2.1.0-2.fc17
  12  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1926/xorg-x11-drv-evdev-2.7.3-5.fc17
  12  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1946/fedora-logos-17.0.3-3.fc17
  12  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1931/util-linux-2.21.2-4.fc17
  13  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-1881/phonon-backend-gstreamer-4.6.3-1.fc17
 178  
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-12509/PackageKit-0.7.6-1.fc17


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora 17 updates-testing

converseen-0.5.3-1.fc17
crda-1.1.3_2013.02.13-2.fc17
dsqlite-1.0-4.fc17
gogui-1.4.6-14.fc17
ikiwiki-3.20130212-1.fc17
kernel-3.7.8-102.fc17
openshift-origin-cartridge-abstract-1.4.4-1.fc17
openshift-origin-cartridge-cron-1.4-1.4.3-1.fc17
perl-CPAN-Perl-Releases-0.94-1.fc17
perl-Catalyst-View-Email-0.33-1.fc17
perl-MooseX-MethodAttributes-0.28-1.fc17
pigz-2.2.5-1.fc17
pnp4nagios-0.6.19-1.fc17
python-bugzilla-0.8.0-1.fc17
rubygem-openshift-origin-auth-mongo-1.4.1-2.fc17
rubygem-openshift-origin-common-1.4.2-2.fc17
rubygem-openshift-origin-controller-1.4.12-2.fc17
rubygem-openshift-origin-dns-bind-1.4.1-2.fc17
rubygem-openshift-origin-msg-broker-mcollective-1.4.6-2.fc17
rubygem-openshift-origin-node-1.4.5-2.fc17
xen-4.1.

Re: Proposal: "automatic blockers"

[Andre Robatino]

Beta criterion:

 The network installation image, DVD image, and live images for release-blocking
desktops must meet current size requirements

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Introduction

[Matthew Miller]

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 06:39:04PM -0430, Jesus Sanchez wrote:
> I'm an infrastructure team lead now but my background was mainly in
> Unix and Linux, I'm a RHCE and don't really have much spare teme but
> it is time to give some to the Fedora Project as I have been a RedHat
> and Fedora user for a long time.

Excellent. Welcome! Are there areas in your current infrastructure team work
(or in your personal interests) which drive an interest in a particular area
within Fedora?


-- 
Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

[Fedora QA] #346: Proposed Test Day - Virtualization

[Fedora QA]

#346: Proposed Test Day - Virtualization
--+
 Reporter:  crobinso  |   Owner:
 Type:  task  |  Status:  new
 Priority:  major |   Milestone:  Fedora 19
Component:  Test Day  | Version:
 Keywords:|  Blocked By:
 Blocking:|
--+
 I'd like to propose a test day for Virtualization.

 Preferably after the beta, preferred dates in order: 5/23, 5/30, 5/16

 We will be doing general virt testing, in addition to test cases for F19
 features:

 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Virtio_RNG
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Virt_Storage_Migration
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Virt_Device_Failover
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/MQ_virtio_net

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Proposal: "automatic blockers"

[drago01]

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 3:34 AM, Adam Williamson  wrote:
> Hey, folks. So here's another proposal from an idea that was mentioned
> during the F18 cycle.
>
> There's a few types of blocker bug that are basically no-brainers; it
> doesn't make a lot of sense to waste time in blocker meetings discussing
> them, and more importantly, sometimes they show up and we want to quickly
> accept them as blockers and get the fixes in, but we have to try and track
> down three people to vote +1 before they can be accepted.
>
> So I'm proposing we invent something called 'automatic blockers': a list of
> bug types that can be declared AcceptedBlocker by any single person in QA,
> releng or devel. That decision could of course be challenged and changed if
> needed.

Makes sense ... there is no point in discussion the obvious in
meetings ... the return of common sense ;)
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Proposal: "automatic blockers"

[Adam Williamson]

On 16/02/13 08:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:

On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:34:33 -0800
Adam Williamson  wrote:

...snip...


Any thoughts on the general idea, or on the specific list of bug
types I came up with - any more to add to the list, or remove from
it? I don't want to make the list _too_ big, and it shouldn't include
any type of bug that could possibly _not_ be a blocker, we want it to
be only the completely, 100%, screaming obvious slam-dunks. The last
entry is a bit of a 'possible' in my mind, there's an argument for
not including it, as people might interpret it too widely. It's meant
to cover only the case where we build a TC/RC and it's utterly DOA:
the image just flat out fails to boot, for everyone, no matter what
the hardware or configuration, it's just dead.


I don't object to the idea, and it might be mudding waters/adding
process, but couldn't these things be 'acceptance tests'?

ie, rel-eng composes the bits from devel, syncs them up and then a very
small set of acceptance tests are run on them. If they all pass, great,
and QA accepts the compose for testing. If they don't, then the compose
is dead and never goes to wider QA testing.


That's more or less effectively what happens anyway - most of the things 
on the list are the things that Andre always tests the moment the ISOs 
show up. I would be reluctant to make them formal acceptance tests, 
though, because in some circumstances it still makes sense to keep 
testing them - you can still do useful testing of an image that has a 
repoclosure failure, for instance, in some cases.



That may be too much red-tape and formal, or it might be more clear to
some people. :) Just thought I would toss it out there. :)

Anyhow, I'm +1 to the idea in general.

kevin







--
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: Proposal: "automatic blockers"

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:34:33 -0800
Adam Williamson  wrote:

...snip...

> Any thoughts on the general idea, or on the specific list of bug
> types I came up with - any more to add to the list, or remove from
> it? I don't want to make the list _too_ big, and it shouldn't include
> any type of bug that could possibly _not_ be a blocker, we want it to
> be only the completely, 100%, screaming obvious slam-dunks. The last
> entry is a bit of a 'possible' in my mind, there's an argument for
> not including it, as people might interpret it too widely. It's meant
> to cover only the case where we build a TC/RC and it's utterly DOA:
> the image just flat out fails to boot, for everyone, no matter what
> the hardware or configuration, it's just dead.

I don't object to the idea, and it might be mudding waters/adding
process, but couldn't these things be 'acceptance tests'? 

ie, rel-eng composes the bits from devel, syncs them up and then a very
small set of acceptance tests are run on them. If they all pass, great,
and QA accepts the compose for testing. If they don't, then the compose
is dead and never goes to wider QA testing. 

That may be too much red-tape and formal, or it might be more clear to
some people. :) Just thought I would toss it out there. :) 

Anyhow, I'm +1 to the idea in general. 

kevin




signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Proposal: "automatic blockers"

[Matthew Miller]

> So I'm proposing we invent something called 'automatic blockers': a
> list of bug types that can be declared AcceptedBlocker by any single
> person in QA, releng or devel. That decision could of course be
> challenged and changed if needed.

This seems completely reasonable.

-- 
Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Settings panel for desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded!

[Michael Schwendt]

Feb 16 13:13:02 localhost /etc/gdm/Xsession[10257]: JS LOG: Settings panel for 
desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded!
Feb 16 13:13:09 localhost /etc/gdm/Xsession[10257]: JS LOG: Settings panel for 
desktop file gnome-sound-panel.desktop could not be loaded!

$ cat /usr/share/applications/gnome-sound-panel.desktop|grep Exec
Exec=gnome-control-center sound

Running it manually works.

In case this is not known, hints on which component to choose when filing
a bug report appreciated.

-- 
Fedora release 19 (Rawhide) - Linux 3.8.0-0.rc7.git3.1.fc19.x86_64
loadavg: 0.06 0.34 0.52
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test