Thanks to everyone who participated in the FCOS 35 test day/week
I'd like to say the test day/week has been a huge success. We had reported results from 15 participants and found the following issues/docs updates: - FCOS with 5.14+ kernel fails to boot on xen instances - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/997 - kargs: interactive changes through editor always result in 'No changes' - https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree/issues/3182 - provisioning/ibmcloud: a few updates - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/pull/334 - provisioning/gcp: Define not supported login methods for GCP - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/pull/333 - tutorial-services: Add Wants=network-online.target - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/pull/331 - os-extensions: fix yaml file for dns issue - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/pull/330 - Fix 404 link to DigitalOcean's droplet metadata - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/pull/328 - provisioning-vmware: fix explanation of govc argument limit - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-docs/pull/327 #997 corresponds to an F35 blocker bug [BZ#2010058](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2010058) and prevented us from shipping a change to our `stable` stream that would have guaranteed breakage for some users. This also led us to expand our automated test coverage for this case in the future: - kola-aws: also run on m4.large - https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-pipeline/pull/416 The full test day results page can be viewed at: https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/122 We do still have some platforms that weren't tested so feel free to execute those test cases! Dusty Mabe ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Fedora 32 Final validation testing: Cloud
On 4/15/20 3:42 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi folks! So I'm checking over the F32 Final validation test results > for the current RC (1.3) and one thing we're missing is Cloud tests: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_32_RC_1.3_Cloud > > so far we only have the results from automated testing via the old > autocloud test suite (now run by openQA). No-one has yet done testing > in real cloud environments. If folks could help get those tests run, > it'd be great. Image download and AMI links, and general testing > instructions, can be found at the top of the page. You can edit results > directly into the page, or use 'relval report-results' (after 'dnf -y > install relval') to report results. > > Thanks a lot! > Just to make things a little easier here is the list of Amazon AWS AMIs: Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-northeast-1 ami-0953690841e86c4d1 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-northeast-2 ami-06cb889e4ef68d91d hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-south-1 ami-0fb04a73f1fd1f2e1 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-southeast-1 ami-0509b672f46e88aaf hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-southeast-2 ami-012f126b663eaf1a9 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ca-central-1 ami-027774d7a4a9158be hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 eu-central-1 ami-08187340abfd8df98 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 eu-west-1 ami-01d6773360d48dd55 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 eu-west-2 ami-0024c659643e3af72 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 sa-east-1 ami-0a36a76e0eda36b5a hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-east-1 ami-0061ee85a95862bef hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-east-2 ami-0d2bda053d12b10d1 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-west-1 ami-0c31c0d9be9a788f2 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-west-2 ami-0f5ed4ff9a69cfff7 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-northeast-1 ami-077c4a1a751d4563b hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-northeast-2 ami-0d721a56309bb1f63 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-south-1 ami-0b48d60fe77c11ce9 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-southeast-1 ami-022f463ddb4097aa3 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ap-southeast-2 ami-0ae7491757c9f8f48 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 ca-central-1 ami-01c4060605c1b2200 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 eu-central-1 ami-0b0df7071df68c65d hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 eu-west-1 ami-0b1283ae0d1b7927f hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 eu-west-2 ami-0556e8ab675119ffe hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 sa-east-1 ami-0a6aaca25b6d229bc hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-east-1 ami-0b6fb2f8c0a3244cd hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-east-2 ami-0f9238eab0f31b3c2 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-west-1 ami-0f1385da3a9564030 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.x86_64 us-west-2 ami-06810d4f95850a349 hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.aarch64 ap-northeast-1 ami-00a4c5cfc162ae5d2 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.aarch64 ap-northeast-2 ami-00a7b51981839b167 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.aarch64 ap-south-1 ami-09c196a2acb1e2ef2 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.aarch64 ap-southeast-1 ami-0ca9b2016f6efaf75 hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.aarch64 ap-southeast-2 ami-0e3f06954d78db89f hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.aarch64 ca-central-1 ami-018c47e185cc01f9e hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-32-1.3.aarch64 eu-central-1 ami-0ed9396544d2b32fb hvm
Re: Validation testing enhancement: AMI information
On 11/13/19 6:58 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hey folks! Hey Adam! > > So as part of the 'xen -> ec2' criteria migration, I noticed that it's > not really easy to find the appropriate AMIs for testing validation > candidate composes in EC2. I decided to make that better! > > I've enhanced wikitcms to be capable of generating a template page > containing AMI IDs for a given validation event, much like the page > which has all the image download links in it. I tweaked the wiki > validation instructions template to transclude that page in Cloud > validation pages (but not other validation pages, to avoid clutter and > confusion), and wrote a fedora-messaging consumer which should update > the AMI info page every time a new AMI image is published for a > validation candidate compose. So basically, when you look at the Cloud > validation page, you should see some handy tables with all the relevant > AMI IDs (and direct launch links). > > Here's how it looks for the current validation event: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_32_Rawhide_20191109.n.1_Cloud > > I hope it'll keep working as new validation events show up, I'll try > and keep an eye on it. > > Note this gets its data from the messages published by fedimg, so it > will *not* include any images *not* published by fedimg. This may > become an issue when CoreOS becomes release blocking, I guess. Yeah. There exists a side goal of not using fedimg in the future, but I think we would probably try to keep the messages the same so this consumer would still work. For Fedora CoreOS we are already uploading images in the new way and doing testing on them using some automated tests, so I think we're good there for now. > > If anyone's interested in the implementation details here, the new > consumer is in relvalconsumer: > > https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/relvalconsumer/c/3ceac217bc90a9d29bb8d7c6156e80e02985fca7?branch=master > > the other changes were in wikitcms: > > https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/python-wikitcms/c/49f450c19418adf82d9d071355198d574a838aad?branch=master > > and the wiki release validation instructions template: > > https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ARelease_validation_instructions&type=revision&diff=557996&oldid=505424 > > Let me know if you see any problems or have any suggestions for this. > thanks! Thanks Adam! Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [Xen-devel] Criteria / validation proposal: drop Xen
On 11/1/19 5:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2019-07-29 at 14:58 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 7:16 PM Adam Williamson >> wrote: >>> OK, so, to move forward with this (and looping in cloud list): does >>> someone want to propose a set (ideally small - 2 would be great, one >>> Xen and one non-Xen, if we can cover most common usages that way!) of >>> EC2 instance types we should test on? With that, we could tweak the >>> criteria a bit to specify those instance types, tweak the Cloud >>> validation page a bit, and then drop the Xen criterion and test case. >>> >> >> I'd suggest c5.large (KVM, afaict) and t3.large (Xen). >> >> My AWS experience is probably not representative (being mostly in the >> HPC space), but these seem like they'd hit the two use cases I'd >> expect to see for Fedora (compute and small servers). I would expect >> more people would use M rather than C for Fedora, but this gets us a >> KVM-based instance. >> >> Happy to hear why I'm wrong. :-) > > So, let's pick this up again. > > Here's my latest proposal for the criteria wording: > > "Release-blocking cloud disk images must be published to Amazon EC2 as > AMIs, and these must boot successfully and meet other relevant release > criteria on at least one KVM-based x86 instance type and at least one > Xen-based x86 instance type." > > I also propose we tweak the Cloud matrix: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Template:Cloud_test_matrix > > and replace the single "EC2" column with separate "EC2 (KVM)" and "EC2 > (Xen)" columns. We would update the ec2 instructions on that page to > include Matt Wilson's list of KVM and Xen instance types, and provide > info on how to actually find the right AMIs (the page it currently > links doesn't do that). > > How does that sound to everyone? Sounds good to me. Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposing new release criteria
On 8/29/19 10:33 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > I don't know the formal process for proposal but here is a shot at a bare > minimum > start for trying to add containers to the existing release criteria. This is > a suggestion > after we found podman can't pull containers from a registry in f31 [1]. > > New section for Containers and Container tools: > > - A Fedora system can install the podman container runtime > - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's > registry as root > - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's > registry as a non-root user> > As for the container I'd suggest the previous fedora release's container > (i.e. f30 for f31). > > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1737471#c22 > With all of the discussion that has taken place I think the only change I would make to the above proposal is to be more explicit about which container image to pull: - A Fedora system can install the podman container runtime - The podman container runtime can pull/run the previous release (N-1) base container from Fedora's registry as root - The podman container runtime can pull/run the previous release (N-1) base container from Fedora's registry as a non-root user For now I'd keep the list of container runtimes at just podman. Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposing new release criteria
On 8/30/19 9:36 AM, Kamil Paral wrote: > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 4:33 PM Dusty Mabe <mailto:du...@dustymabe.com>> wrote: > > I don't know the formal process for proposal but here is a shot at a bare > minimum > start for trying to add containers to the existing release criteria. This > is a suggestion > after we found podman can't pull containers from a registry in f31 [1]. > > New section for Containers and Container tools: > > - A Fedora system can install the podman container runtime > - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's > registry as root > - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's > registry as a non-root user > > As for the container I'd suggest the previous fedora release's container > (i.e. f30 for f31). > > > Correct me if I'm not thinking straight, but Fedora containers are not > release blocking right now. If we require that latest stable fedora container > must be pulled and run correctly, we will corner ourselves if the container > is broken. Because we will block the release on a compose artifact which is > itself not release blocking. So unless I'm talking nonsense, it might be > better to specify "any container" (and recommend to test with latest stable > fedora container). Your suggestion is exactly my suggestion above where I say: "As for the container I'd suggest the previous fedora release's container (i.e. f30 for f31)." Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposing new release criteria
On 8/29/19 2:36 PM, Daniel Walsh wrote: > On 8/29/19 2:16 PM, Mairi Dulaney wrote: >> On Lùna 29, 2019 aig 10:33:09m -0400, sgrìobh Dusty Mabe: >>> I don't know the formal process for proposal but here is a shot at a bare >>> minimum >>> start for trying to add containers to the existing release criteria. This >>> is a suggestion >>> after we found podman can't pull containers from a registry in f31 [1]. >>> >>> New section for Containers and Container tools: >>> >>> - A Fedora system can install the podman container runtime >>> - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's >>> registry as root >>> - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's >>> registry as a non-root user >>> >>> As for the container I'd suggest the previous fedora release's container >>> (i.e. f30 for f31). >> Is Podman are only officially supported container runtime? >> >> What about, say, Docker? > We no longer ship Docker, You need to get that from the vendor. We do > ship Moby. But this is not ready for the cgroup change, nor is RUNC. I think to the user a lot of people consider shipping moby as the same thing as shipping docker. If you want docker you can still get it through moby. Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposing new release criteria
On 8/29/19 11:13 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2019-08-29 at 10:33 -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote: >> I don't know the formal process for proposal > > Congratulations, you found it - mail this list, ideally including at > least one of the strings 'criter' or 'propos'. :P > >> but here is a shot at a bare minimum >> start for trying to add containers to the existing release criteria. This is >> a suggestion >> after we found podman can't pull containers from a registry in f31 [1]. >> >> New section for Containers and Container tools: >> >> - A Fedora system can install the podman container runtime >> - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's >> registry as root >> - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's >> registry as a non-root user >> >> As for the container I'd suggest the previous fedora release's container >> (i.e. f30 for f31). > > Do you think this should apply to all release-blocking installs, or > should it be specific to e.g. release-blocking cloud images? > Certainly anywhere where podman is shipped on media. Does podman ship in the server DVD? yes [1] It looks like workstation also ships it if I'm reading the logs [2] correctly. Dusty [1] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/latest-Fedora-31/compose/Server/x86_64/os/Packages/p/podman-1.5.1-2.16.dev.gitce64c14.fc31.x86_64.rpm [2] https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/9101/37319101/anaconda-packaging.log ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proposing new release criteria
> I don't know the formal process for proposal but here is a shot at a bare > minimum > start for trying to add containers to the existing release criteria. There is at least one deliverable that delivers podman in the image (Silverblue). Silverblue isn't release blocking. I don't know if there are others that do ship podman and are release blocking. ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Proposing new release criteria
I don't know the formal process for proposal but here is a shot at a bare minimum start for trying to add containers to the existing release criteria. This is a suggestion after we found podman can't pull containers from a registry in f31 [1]. New section for Containers and Container tools: - A Fedora system can install the podman container runtime - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's registry as root - The podman container runtime can pull/run a container from Fedora's registry as a non-root user As for the container I'd suggest the previous fedora release's container (i.e. f30 for f31). [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1737471#c22 ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora-29-updates-20190823.0 compose check report
On 8/22/19 10:46 PM, Fedora compose checker wrote: > No missing expected images. > > Failed openQA tests: 1/2 (x86_64) > > ID: 434613Test: x86_64 AtomicHost-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi > URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/434613 > > Passed openQA tests: 1/2 (x86_64) > Can someone tell me why that test failed? I don't see the normal information I expect when I usually click through to openqa. Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 28 Candidate RC-1.1 Available Now!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 04/25/2018 02:36 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > According to the schedule [1], Fedora 28 Candidate RC-1.1 is now > available for testing. Here are the Cloud Base AMIs for RC-1.1: Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-northeast-1 ami-a600e6d9hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-northeast-2 ami-a2ff56cchvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-south-1 ami-052a0b6ahvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-southeast-1 ami-04c7e878hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-southeast-2 ami-3f6ca65dhvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ca-central-1 ami-c40e8fa0hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 eu-central-1 ami-436640a8hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 eu-west-1ami-8b0824f2hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 eu-west-2ami-ca14f7adhvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 sa-east-1ami-9c8ad9f0hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 us-east-1ami-e754e298hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 us-west-1ami-77b3ae17hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 us-west-2ami-f5fc948dhvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-northeast-1 ami-8b05e3f4hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-northeast-2 ami-ddf851b3hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-south-1 ami-c12b0aaehvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-southeast-1 ami-b8c5eac4hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ap-southeast-2 ami-976ea4f5hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 ca-central-1 ami-67129303hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 eu-central-1 ami-6065438bhvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 eu-west-1ami-420d213bhvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 eu-west-2ami-691af90ehvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 sa-east-1ami-0e9dce62hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 us-east-1ami-5c69df23hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 us-west-1ami-25adb045hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28-1.1.x86_64 us-west-2ami-56fb932ehvm standard -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEPb6zG5c6sV89tRYPMwLb1zlS5nEFAlrhNNIACgkQMwLb1zlS 5nHxbA//cpYbNRulwldGfT6hWgX2h4RYzOuHjcvJ59PSRZFF5iJbkLyyYv+VhNJD ZAorhk94dabAVux3W8Ar/P35SvqoFR0o04Y9KKvfBQrZkNLASvOBCL+XypWy8rM3 sogeTQuB2T899hFElW8tKdJgtOB04d17zJI8ROKf8R/tj6WsRtlGimBstbLcqvRj AtUxaOVFSbsDQIdQHV1GrtM9xIsTj0h3L973x9pzgIkGNudLdFTjZyU3D/gkATkH a4Bix1i4G47Wc2lQMfqtugTRbquWRu0OUUkameMoSnttxPsN1rY9AOhAxXK+BCis P3WVxJU+w67XwH51vHwFhE5wZ7I5waH70Luc+UJ708rkJq0D8u8dtR7HWMlHNeAo mtddrYJKCJZBozOSIpY9ZYI/nqlwDqfC87MBXxVYcWxpW1fKD/5zSTlXWLwqbX93 OmEfXW49PMzFhlfyyUao6AXG+BxljKnB/x8Ed1/b5XSx7NSf593fh3hewnwWu7B3 90QBsWuQ1m3heSAdCDvGMyCfSdM4vz8jVi2tccR041ZhoY8tzf4+HL+2EM9d76N9 nhxg8RJi5jUMXSQi7mEqhOEiqiIpixgTtsQVvvNnC07R7bYsaZfb7l3zuKBuWY/J 22idYObBXNWeAxX38D0Tquy5nfNhDnidqflrvnKrtT9S/tWnvfM= =pBv2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora-Atomic 27-20180407.0 compose check report
On 04/07/2018 03:54 AM, Fedora compose checker wrote: > No missing expected images. > > Passed openQA tests: 2/2 (x86_64) > Can we get these emails to go to ato...@lists.fedoraproject.org? Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cloud Base validation tests missing for Fedora 28 Beta
On 03/29/2018 08:56 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > On 03/28/2018 09:48 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> Hi folks! I noticed that none of the Base validation tests for Cloud >> have been run for F28 Beta: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test >> >> It'd be great if we could get those filled out. We are also missing the >> Cloud validation tests for actual cloud environments (EC2 and >> Openstack): >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Cloud_Test >> >> Note some Cloud images are still considered release blocking at >> present: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/28/ReleaseBlocking >> >> so we do need these tests. Thanks! >> > > I just pinged some people to ask them to help with testing. I've > been using the vagrant images from f28 almost continuously for the > past few weeks so at least that angle should be covered. > Also.. Here is the list of AMIs for Beta 1.3: Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (ap-northeast-1) ami-cf4348b3hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (ap-southeast-1) ami-b0dc85cchvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (ap-southeast-2) ami-717bb713hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (eu-central-1) ami-8b623f60hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (eu-west-1) ami-4207553bhvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (sa-east-1) ami-4662352ahvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (us-east-1) ami-b6a47fcbhvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (us-west-1) ami-224c5d42hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (us-west-2) ami-a98c17d1hvm standard Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (ap-northeast-1) ami-78434804hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (ap-southeast-1) ami-51de872dhvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (ap-southeast-2) ami-4775b925hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (eu-central-1) ami-91613c7ahvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (eu-west-1) ami-111d4f68hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (sa-east-1) ami-e063348chvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (us-east-1) ami-f4a47f89hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (us-west-1) ami-114a5b71hvm gp2 Fedora-Cloud-Base-28_Beta-1.3.x86_64 EC2 (us-west-2) ami-128e156ahvm gp2 Dusty ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
