Re: First impression with f20-beta-tc2
On Oct 8, 2013, at 11:33 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX c...@omen.com wrote: On 10/08/2013 07:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Oct 8, 2013, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX c...@omen.com wrote: 64 bit netinstall with about 2700 packages successful on two machines. Are they UEFI? Netinst UEFI boot cannot access hard drives. I don't know what that means. I just did an EFI netinstl and it saw and installed to my hard drive just fine. You need to provide more information. Chris Murphy One machine does not have UEFI. The newer one has optional UEFI. TC2 netinstall worked normally when booted without UEFI. Well that would sorta implicate your firmware that drives are missing in action in UEFI mode, and are visible in CSM-BIOS mode. Is the firmware at the most current version? What does cannot access hard drives mean exactly? Can you put /tmp/storage.log somewhere? Chris Murphy -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: test matrix question, EFI vs x86_64
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 14:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: On Oct 8, 2013, at 1:59 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: but in terms of the *general approach*, it is that the 'x86_64' column represents x86_64 BIOS, and UEFI represents x86_64 UEFI. OK good. Followup question: Is Mac EFI a suitable substitute for UEFI? In a sense Mac EFI is more limited, so any failure there doesn't necessarily mean broader failure with UEFI. Mac EFI is sortofa canary in a mine. If it works, then UEFI should work. Well, there's always a slight element of subjectivity in filling out the matrix. If you have an extremely unusual bug that happens to affect your test configuration but would likely not affect anyone else's, you probably won't mark the box as 'fail' (perhaps 'warn'). I'd say that applies in this case: if the failure was one likely to affect other UEFI configs I'd mark it as 'fail', if it was exclusive to the config being tested, I'd say 'warn', it it works, 'pass'. If it's something that likely only affects EFI Macs, that's an...interesting question, but we do seem to mostly be on the 'block for Macs' side of the question at present, so probably 'fail'. Ultimately we can have multiple results for a matrix entry and the entries are only guidance for human evaluation anyway, so it's not too terribly important: the most important thing is that all potential blocker bugs are nominated as blockers. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin DOT net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Gnome 3.10: Network UI missing from new system status area
Yet several times after F20 alpha live installs I've had to go manually turn on the wired network, and the Connect Automatically option was unchecked. I suppose it could be a transient or imaginary problem. If I get something consistent I'll file a bug against network manager. I haven't seen it. If you find out when this happens, please do notify us (it might even be a blocker, with the new GNOME top bar style). Thanks! -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Gnome 3.10: Network UI missing from new system status area
John Morris jmorris at beau.org writes: Screen space is valuable so removing an icon that is 'always' there and isn't typically displaying useful information is sensible enough. Possibly a dumb question, but doesn't space have to always be available for the icon, whether it's displayed always or just some of the time? I mean, if there was no available space to display a wired connection icon, and the connection goes down, it would be impossible to show the disconnected icon either. This looks to me like it's being done just as part of the whole GNOME philosophy of minimizing the used screen space, even if it's already 90% unused, and it requires additional logic to identify when a GUI item does or doesn't need to be displayed. (For example, display Log out if and only if there is more than one user, OR more than one installed desktop, OR the dconf setting says to always display it.) -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Fedora 20 Gnome Test Day, October 10th
Hi, This Thursday, 10th of October, is Fedora Gnome Test day. Check out the test day page [1] if you are interested. You can test new Gnome 3.10 features [2] from Fedora 20 Live images and help to make this release better. Only YOU can test some new exciting features, including, but not only: * Gnome Software * Gnome Music * Gnome Maps * Wayland support ... and MUCH more. Join IRC #fedora-test-day on FreeNode if you get into trouble. Report all bugs preferably at upstream bugzilla [3] or Red Hat bugzilla [4]. You can also report other Fedora bugs not related to this Test Day. Feel free to ask on IRC, if you don't know against which component or on what bugzilla you should fill the report. Best Regards, Jan Sedlák, jsedlak Fedora QE, Red Hat Brno --- [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2013-10-10_Gnome_3.10. [2] https://help.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.10/ [3] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/ [4] http://bugzilla.redhat.com/ ___ 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 20 Gnome Test Day, October 10th
На 9.10.2013 15:50, Jan Sedlak написа: Join IRC #fedora-test-day on FreeNode if you get into trouble. Report all bugs preferably at upstream bugzilla [3] or Red Hat bugzilla [4]. Does this mean all apps will be latest greatest ? My experience with GNOME upstream is that if you are not using latest and greatest they just ignore bugs which are distro specific. -- Alex -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 20 Gnome Test Day, October 10th
On 10/09/2013 01:41 PM, Alexander Todorov wrote: Join IRC #fedora-test-day on FreeNode if you get into trouble. Report all bugs preferably at upstream bugzilla [3] or Red Hat bugzilla [4]. Does this mean all apps will be latest greatest ? My experience with GNOME upstream is that if you are not using latest and greatest they just ignore bugs which are distro specific. If you want Gnome bugs fixed the best way to achive that is to file them directly upstream JBG -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Fedora 20 nfs
Did a test install of F20 64bit on my normal workstation/desktop. Problem seems to be that after I setup nfs to mount, it won't do it automatically on boot. And this usually works just fine out of the box up to F19. I have to mount the directory manually once the system is booted. Is there a particular nfs service that isn't starting/working that would do this for me or something else? -- Mike Chambers Madisonville, KY Best little town on Earth! -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 20 Gnome Test Day, October 10th
На 9.10.2013 15:50, Jan Sedlak написа: Join IRC #fedora-test-day on FreeNode if you get into trouble. Report all bugs preferably at upstream bugzilla [3] or Red Hat bugzilla [4]. Does this mean all apps will be latest greatest ? Yes. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 20 Gnome Test Day, October 10th
Hi, This Thursday, 10th of October, is Fedora Gnome Test day. Check out the test day page [1] if you are interested. You can test new Gnome 3.10 features [2] from Fedora 20 Live images and help to make this release better. Only YOU can test some new exciting features, including, but not only: * Gnome Software * Gnome Music * Gnome Maps * Wayland support Actually, Wayland is scheduled for 2013-10-25. It is not part of this test day. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
F20 Beta Blocker Bug Review #3 Minutes
#fedora-blocker-review: f20beta-blocker-review-3 Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2013-10-09/f20beta-blocker-review-3.2013-10-09-16.01.html Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2013-10-09/f20beta-blocker-review-3.2013-10-09-16.01.txt Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2013-10-09/f20beta-blocker-review-3.2013-10-09-16.01.log.html Meeting summary --- * Roll Call (tflink, 16:01:25) * Introduction (tflink, 16:05:45) * Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and freeze exception bugs. (tflink, 16:05:54) * We'll be following the process outlined at: (tflink, 16:06:00) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting (tflink, 16:06:00) * The bugs up for review today are available at: (tflink, 16:06:05) * LINK: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current (tflink, 16:06:05) * The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at: (tflink, 16:06:12) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Beta_Release_Criteria (tflink, 16:06:12) * Up for review today, we have: (tflink, 16:06:17) * 6 Proposed Blockers (tflink, 16:06:26) * 12 Accepted Blockers (tflink, 16:06:26) * 2 Proposed Freeze Exceptions (tflink, 16:06:26) * 5 Accepted Freeze Exceptions (tflink, 16:06:26) * (1009809) KeyError: 'name' (tflink, 16:07:58) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1009809 (tflink, 16:07:58) * Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ON_QA (tflink, 16:07:59) * AGREED: 1009809 - RejectedBlocker - As stated in the F20 beta criteria, only one of [nfs, nfsiso] is required to work for beta. As nfs package sources have been confirmed to work, this is rejected as a release blocking bug for f20 beta. (tflink, 16:11:08) * (1013586) SizeNotPositiveError: spec= param must be =0 (tflink, 16:11:16) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013586 (tflink, 16:11:16) * Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW (tflink, 16:11:16) * AGREED: 1013586 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F20 beta release criterion for partitions not created using parted: When using the guided partitioning flow, the installer must be able to ... Complete an installation using any combination of disk configuration options it allows the user to select (tflink, 16:18:06) * (1015220) can't log in as ordinary user after text install unless under user spoke, password field is last one filled out (tflink, 16:18:29) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1015220 (tflink, 16:18:32) * Proposed Blocker, anaconda, VERIFIED (tflink, 16:18:34) * AGREED: 1015220 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F20 alpha release criterion for text installs where the user password isn't the last spoke entered: A system installed without a graphical package set must boot to a state where it is possible to log in through at least one of the default virtual consoles. (tflink, 16:23:23) * (1016927) Fedora 20 Beta TC2 Anaconda Netinstall gets error checking software configuration (tflink, 16:23:36) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016927 (tflink, 16:23:39) * Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW (tflink, 16:23:42) * AGREED: 1016927 - This would be a blocker if the broken packages were actually on any images but it was fixed quickly enough such that it was never included. Thus, it is rejected as a release blocking bug for f20 beta. (tflink, 16:34:11) * (1016959) ValueError: Cannot remove non-leaf device 'btrfs.14' (tflink, 16:34:24) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016959 (tflink, 16:34:27) * Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW (tflink, 16:34:30) * AGREED: 1016959 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F20 beta release criterion, assuming that the disk layout in question is not considered valid: When using the custom partitioning flow, the installer must be able to ... Reject or disallow invalid disk and volume configurations without crashing. (tflink, 17:00:13) * (1015234) F20 Beta TC1 ARM disk images unable to find root filesystem (tflink, 17:01:31) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1015234 (tflink, 17:01:34) * Proposed Blocker, dracut, NEW (tflink, 17:01:36) * AGREED: 1015234 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F20 alpha release criterion for ARM images in virt and on bare-metal: A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility.
Distribution sizes
When operating system distributions had to fit on a spool of paper tape, 144000 bytes was a limit to worry about. With DVD blanks selling for little more than the price of CD blanks, is there a need to limit the size of Live disros to 700k? With double layer DVD blanks and 8 GB USB drives coming down in cost, is there a need for a 4 GB limit? With netinst able to rad an ISO file on a hard drive, is there any limit? Perhaps the solution is a 4 GB install DVD with Xfce and no Gnome/KDE. On the giant economy size ISO please include Xfce, server and web server as installable packages alongside the Dev Sys main choice. The desire here is to minimize the downtime for installing Fedora on a server that is performing useful work. -- 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
wired networking disabled, was: Gnome 3.10: Network UI missing from new system status area
On Oct 9, 2013, at 2:37 AM, Kamil Paral kpa...@redhat.com wrote: Yet several times after F20 alpha live installs I've had to go manually turn on the wired network, and the Connect Automatically option was unchecked. I suppose it could be a transient or imaginary problem. If I get something consistent I'll file a bug against network manager. I haven't seen it. If you find out when this happens, please do notify us (it might even be a blocker, with the new GNOME top bar style). Thanks! At the moment, the current Live Desktop beta TC2, boots with networking disabled on baremetal. I have to go into setting and manually turn it on everytime. I filed a bug. Since the installer still works without a network connection, I don't know if this condition is blocking. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016970 Chris Murphy -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Distribution sizes
On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 12:46 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX wrote: When operating system distributions had to fit on a spool of paper tape, 144000 bytes was a limit to worry about. With DVD blanks selling for little more than the price of CD blanks, is there a need to limit the size of Live disros to 700k? With double layer DVD blanks and 8 GB USB drives coming down in cost, is there a need for a 4 GB limit? With netinst able to rad an ISO file on a hard drive, is there any limit? Perhaps the solution is a 4 GB install DVD with Xfce and no Gnome/KDE. On the giant economy size ISO please include Xfce, server and web server as installable packages alongside the Dev Sys main choice. The desire here is to minimize the downtime for installing Fedora on a server that is performing useful work. 1) This is not really a topic for test@, because it's not QA's decision. 2) This is not a new topic and it's kind of pointless to throw out a mail about it with zero acknowledgement of any of the history or context of the discussion. Find the previous zillion times this has been discussed, read through, and see if you have anything *new* to contribute. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin DOT net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Sunday 13th of October: SSD cache test day
Hi All, The Fedora SSD Cache is this sunday October 13th 2013. This Fedora Test Day will focus on bcache based SSD Caching in Fedora 20. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2013-10-13_SSD_Cache If you're interested in trying out the new bcache SSD caching functionality step by step instructions are available for: - bcache on physical hardware - bcache in a virtual machine - non-root FS on bcache (with or without LVM) - root FS on bcache (wtih or without LVM) The objective of this Test day is to demonstrate a working Fedora 20 system using bcache. Te be more specific: * The system boots OK; after booting bcache is operating as expected * The system updates (yum update) OK. After updating specifically the kernel the system boots OK. * The system is bootable when the caching device is disabled. Although testing on real hardware is closest to the real thing, testing in a VM may also provide good insights on the proper working of bcache (except for performance). If you can't make the date of the test day, adding test case results to the wiki anytime next week is fine as well. Though if you do plan on showing up to the test day, please add your name to the participant list on the wiki, and when the day arrives, pop into #fedora-test-day on freenode and give us a shout! If you can't make the date of the test day, adding test case results to the wiki anytime next week is fine as well. Though if you do plan on showing up to the test day, add your name to the participant list on the wiki, and when the day arrives, pop into #fedora-test-day on freenode and give us a shout! The Wiki page is still under development, so expect some improvements before sunday. Thanks, Igor Gnatenko Rolf Fokkens ___ 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: Fedora 20 nfs
On 10/09/13 22:47, Mike Chambers wrote: Did a test install of F20 64bit on my normal workstation/desktop. Problem seems to be that after I setup nfs to mount, it won't do it automatically on boot. And this usually works just fine out of the box up to F19. I have to mount the directory manually once the system is booted. Is there a particular nfs service that isn't starting/working that would do this for me or something else? Just installed F20-TC2 64 bit in a VM. Added the following to the fstab 192.168.0.55:/myhome /home/egreshko/misty nfs4defaults0 0 Edited the idmap.conf and rebooted. The mount worked as expected. No need to make any changes to systemd. -- Getting tired of non-Fedora discussions and self-serving posts -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Gnome 3.10: Network UI missing from new system status area
On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 11:46 +, Andre Robatino wrote: John Morris jmorris at beau.org writes: Screen space is valuable so removing an icon that is 'always' there and isn't typically displaying useful information is sensible enough. Possibly a dumb question, but doesn't space have to always be available for the icon, whether it's displayed always or just some of the time? I mean, if there was no available space to display a wired connection icon, and the connection goes down, it would be impossible to show the disconnected icon either. Nah, there are a lot of notifications icons that COULD appear, most don't unless they have something interesting to say. For example (not sure if the GNOMEs have defeatured it but it is there on 2 because it happened to me) if a drive is failing a SMART monitor tool will pop an icon into the system tray. Having it always there to say your drive is ok would not be useful. I have my power icon set to only appear if power is coming or going from the battery, same for the UPS's system tray icon. And there is always the icon that appears daily to let ya know you need to run update again. :) Really haven't though about what would happen if the system tray overflowed. Would it do like Windows and resort to a popup with more icons or like Android and slide? 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: Gnome 3.10: Network UI missing from new system status area
On Oct 9, 2013, at 5:23 PM, John Morris jmor...@beau.org wrote: On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 11:46 +, Andre Robatino wrote: John Morris jmorris at beau.org writes: Screen space is valuable so removing an icon that is 'always' there and isn't typically displaying useful information is sensible enough. Possibly a dumb question, but doesn't space have to always be available for the icon, whether it's displayed always or just some of the time? I mean, if there was no available space to display a wired connection icon, and the connection goes down, it would be impossible to show the disconnected icon either. Nah, there are a lot of notifications icons that COULD appear, most don't unless they have something interesting to say. At least with lives, I'm intermittently getting and not getting a wired connection. I only get an icon on the menu bar in the latter case. Chris Murphy -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F20 beta, swap failures
On Oct 7, 2013, at 1:38 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: Is anyone else seeing systemd report swap initialization errors? I'm always getting them. I'm still getting this, but a pattern has emerged. I never get it if swap is on an LV. If it's on a partition, it always happens. It adds roughly 11 seconds to boot as it tries to sort this out (maybe other things are happening in parallel but there is some delay). Filed a bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017509 Chris Murphy -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
[Test-Announce] Sunday 13th of October: SSD cache test day
Hi All, The Fedora SSD Cache is this sunday October 13th 2013. This Fedora Test Day will focus on bcache based SSD Caching in Fedora 20. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2013-10-13_SSD_Cache If you're interested in trying out the new bcache SSD caching functionality step by step instructions are available for: - bcache on physical hardware - bcache in a virtual machine - non-root FS on bcache (with or without LVM) - root FS on bcache (wtih or without LVM) The objective of this Test day is to demonstrate a working Fedora 20 system using bcache. Te be more specific: * The system boots OK; after booting bcache is operating as expected * The system updates (yum update) OK. After updating specifically the kernel the system boots OK. * The system is bootable when the caching device is disabled. Although testing on real hardware is closest to the real thing, testing in a VM may also provide good insights on the proper working of bcache (except for performance). If you can't make the date of the test day, adding test case results to the wiki anytime next week is fine as well. Though if you do plan on showing up to the test day, please add your name to the participant list on the wiki, and when the day arrives, pop into #fedora-test-day on freenode and give us a shout! If you can't make the date of the test day, adding test case results to the wiki anytime next week is fine as well. Though if you do plan on showing up to the test day, add your name to the participant list on the wiki, and when the day arrives, pop into #fedora-test-day on freenode and give us a shout! The Wiki page is still under development, so expect some improvements before sunday. Thanks, Igor Gnatenko Rolf Fokkens ___ test-announce mailing list test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce
