Re: fedora-easy-karma alternative: fedora-update-feedback
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 4:33 PM Alessio wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 15:59 +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > - download and extract tarball of the latest fedora-update-feedback > > release (or use git master, at your peril) > > - "dnf install cargo" (for the rust compiler and build system) (snip) > And also "dnf install openssl-devel", right? Correct, thanks for checking it out. I've added this dependency and some more instructions to the git repository's README file. It's now also possible to install it directly from crates.io (without downloading sources from GitHub) by just running "cargo install fedora-update-feedback". Fabio > Ciao, > A. > ___ > 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 ___ 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-easy-karma alternative: fedora-update-feedback
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020, 15:42 Adam Williamson wrote: > Hey folks! > > Just wanted to point up a neat project Fabio Valentini has been working > on. It's called fedora-update-feedback: > > https://github.com/ironthree/fedora-update-feedback > > it's an alternative to fedora-easy-karma, written in Rust. He says it > should be pretty much working at this point, and he'd be happy to get > bug reports or RFEs for it, if anyone wants to give it a spin. It is > not packaged for Fedora yet, but if you're comfortable building from > the git repository, feel free to try it out! I believe you would need > to build fedora-rs and bodhi-rs (in that order) first before it will > build and work: > > https://github.com/ironthree/fedora-rs > https://github.com/ironthree/bodhi-rs Thanks for the shout-out! I'll add more user-friendly installation instructions to the GitHub readme until it's available as a fedora package. But basically, it boils down to: - download and extract tarball of the latest fedora-update-feedback release (or use git master, at your peril) - "dnf install cargo" (for the rust compiler and build system) - "cargo install --path ." (fetches dependencies and builds the binary) - copy built binary into $PATH - create config file in ~/.config/fedora.toml with: ``` [FAS] username = "USERNAME" ``` I'm looking into creating RPM packages for this, and also publish it to crates.io. As Adam said, feel free to open RFE and bug tickets in the GitHub project. For example, it would be pretty easy to improve the UI and format of printed messages, but I'm crap with that kind of stuff :) Fabio > -- > 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 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: Trying a upgrade from 29 to 30
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 09:52 Ludovic Hirlimann wrote: > Hi all, > > > According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/30/Schedule 30 has > been branched. So time for me to upgrade from 29 so I can report issue > with the way I use fedora. > > > I'm using https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DNF_system_upgrade to upgrade. > > Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'luminoso-Signal-Desktop', ignoring > this repo. > Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'athmane-gns3-extra', ignoring this > repo. > Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-free-updates', ignoring > this repo. > Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-free', ignoring this repo. > Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree-updates', > ignoring this repo. > Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'rpmfusion-nonfree', ignoring this > repo. > Modular dependency problems: > > Problem 1: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > avocado:stable:3020190213205848:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Problem 2: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > bat:latest:3020190214090936:e50d0d19-0.x86_64 > Problem 3: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > dwm:6.1:3020190213215420:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Problem 4: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > exa:latest:3020190214120734:e50d0d19-0.x86_64 > Problem 5: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > fish:3:3020190216163513:602da195-0.x86_64 > Problem 6: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > gimp:2.10:20181223154246:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Problem 7: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > libgit2:0.27:3020190128145600:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Problem 8: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > meson:latest:3020190123223713:36245242-0.x86_64 > Problem 9: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > ninja:latest:3020190131012415:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Problem 10: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > ripgrep:latest:3020190214090003:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Problem 11: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > standard-test-roles:3.0:3020190214144451:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Problem 12: conflicting requests > - nothing provides module(platform:f30) needed by module > stratis:1:20181215204600:a5b0195c-0.x86_64 > Error: > Problem 1: package libibcm-16.2-3.fc28.x86_64 requires > rdma-core(x86-64) = 16.2-3.fc28, but none of the providers can be installed > - rdma-core-16.2-3.fc28.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade > repository > - problem with installed package libibcm-16.2-3.fc28.x86_64 > Problem 2: package libopenshot-0.2.2-1.fc29.x86_64 requires > libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.5()(64bit), but none of the providers can be > installed > - package libopenshot-0.2.2-1.fc29.x86_64 requires > libMagickWand-6.Q16.so.5()(64bit), but none of the providers can be > installed > - ImageMagick-libs-1:6.9.9.38-3.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a > distupgrade repository > - problem with installed package libopenshot-0.2.2-1.fc29.x86_64 > Problem 3: package rpmfusion-free-release-29-1.noarch requires > system-release(29), but none of the providers can be installed > - fedora-release-29-7.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository > - problem with installed package rpmfusion-free-release-29-1.noarch > Problem 4: package vlc-core-1:3.0.6-16.fc29.x86_64 requires > libprotobuf-lite.so.15()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - protobuf-lite-3.5.0-8.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade > repository > - problem with installed package vlc-core-1:3.0.6-16.fc29.x86_64 > Problem 5: package fedora-release-29-7.noarch requires fedora-repos(29) > >= 1, but none of the providers can be installed > - package rpmfusion-nonfree-release-29-1.noarch requires > system-release(29), but none of the providers can be installed > - fedora-repos-29-2.noarch does not belong to a distupgrade repository > - problem with installed package rpmfusion-nonfree-release-29-1.noarch > Problem 6: problem with installed package blender-1:2.79b-9.fc29.x86_64 > - package blender-1:2.79b-10.fc30.x86_64 requires > libboost_locale.so.1.66.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be > installed > - boost-locale-1.66.0-14.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade > repository > - blender-1:2.79b-9.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade > repository > Problem 7: problem with installed package darktable-2.6.0-2.fc29.x86_64 > - package darktable-2.6.0-2.fc30.x86_64 requires > libexiv2.so.26()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed > - exiv2-libs-0.26-12.fc29.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade > repository > -
Re: fc29 + nvidia + xorg
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 6:28 PM Julen Landa Alustiza wrote: > > Hi, I'm suffering a very strange behaviour on my wks and I would like to know > if it's a general issue or just my setup before going further. > > I upgraded an fc28 wks to fc29 yesterday. fc28 was almost a default wks + > nvidia drivers, I don't have more extra repos nor too much extra packages. It > had uncommented the waylandEnabled=false line on /etc/gdm/custom.conf > > After upgrading first boot went on and it worked properly. I rebooted the > machine and ended with a stucked gdm after login in with my standard user. It > looked like being to trying to go with wayland on nvidia, so I rebooted the > machine to init 3 to fix the problem. > > First weird situation: I found /etc/gdm/custom.conf with waylandEnabled=true. > wtf, i swear I did 't change it. I fixed the line and exec init 5 as root. > gdm goes properly to xorg and I continued working. > > Second reboot, and same gdm stucking issue. This time /etc/gdm/custom.conf > continues with false for waylandEnabled. there is nothing strange on > /run/gdm/custom.conf either. > > Ok, I went init 3 again. sudo init 5 just after login on text console ends > with a working gdm. going to runlevel 5 directly ends on gdm stucked after > login. > > I haven't have time to look further and I won't touch that box again until > monday > > Is someone else having this kind of issues with default workstatin install + > nvidia or it's just my box? > > It's a ryzen with a nvidia 1060. I have the same problems. I reported them at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1643302 There are also some users on reddit complaining about the same thing. Try dropping "rhgb" from the kernel command line, it seems to work around the problem. (to make this permanent for new kernels too, edit /etc/default/grub) Fabio > Regards, > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Cannot Boot After Doing system-upgrade
On Sun, Oct 14, 2018, 01:35 Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Garry T. Williams > wrote: > > By the way, from the journal during the dnf system-upgrade reboot: > > > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-common.noarch 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-efi-x64.x86_64 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-pc.x86_64 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-pc-modules.noarch 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-tools.x86_64 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-tools-efi.x86_64 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-tools-extra.x86_64 > > 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > Sep 30 10:02:27 vfr dnf[831]: grub2-tools-minimal.x86_64 > > 1:2.02-58.fc29 > > > > Sep 30 10:02:28 vfr dnf[831]: shim-x64.x86_64 15-5 > > > > And now: > > > > garry@vfr$ rpm -q grub2-common grub2-efi-x64 grub2-pc grub2-pc-modules > > grub2-tools grub2-tools-efi grub2-tools-extra grub2-tools-minimal > > shim-x64 > > grub2-common-2.02-62.fc29.noarch > > grub2-efi-x64-2.02-62.fc29.x86_64 > > grub2-pc-2.02-62.fc29.x86_64 > > grub2-pc-modules-2.02-62.fc29.noarch > > grub2-tools-2.02-62.fc29.x86_64 > > grub2-tools-efi-2.02-62.fc29.x86_64 > > grub2-tools-extra-2.02-62.fc29.x86_64 > > grub2-tools-minimal-2.02-62.fc29.x86_64 > > shim-x64-15-7.x86_64 > > garry@vfr$ > > > Good catch. It's vaguely possible there's a bug in either shim 15-5 or > grub2-efi 2.02-58 as it relates to your firmware, that caused it to > silently fail, and the firmware did a fallback to the 2nd BootOrder, > which is the Ubuntu entry. > > One way to find out, that probably isn't worth it, is to manually > downgrade to those versions, separately, to see which one (if any) > restores the problem. But, it's fixed so I probably wouldn't test it > as those versions have been superseded now. > This error happened to me too when I tried to upgrade to f29 about a week ago. fedora boot item is still there, but fails silently, and boot falls back to second item (Windows 10 in my case). Only reinstalling older versions of grub2 and shim from f28 "fixed" it. So the intermittently broken grub2/shim version theory seems plausible. Upgrading to f29 results in a booting system now. (Side note, fedora 29 continues to be unusable for me because of gdm/gnome issues with the nvidia driver, and nouveau is ... not good on 1000 series cards.) Fabio > > -- > Chris Murphy > ___ > test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html 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 29 Final Freeze
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:51 AM Mohan Boddu wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today, October 09th 2018, is an important day on the Fedora 29 > schedule [1], with significant cut-offs. > > Today we have the Final Freeze [2]. This means that only packages > which fix accepted blocker or freeze exception bugs [3][4][5] will be > marked as 'stable' and included in the Final composes. Other builds > will remain in updates-testing until the Final release is approved, at > which point the Final freeze is lifted and packages can move to the > 'updates' repository, pending updates will be pushed before final > release as zero day updates. > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/29/Schedule > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Milestone_freezes > [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process > [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process > [5] https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/29/final/buglist > > Regards, > Release Engineering Am I the only one who's worried that the f29 buildroot is broken right now, on the day of the final freeze? It looks like unbound was updated with an soname bump yesterday. This buildroot override for f29 is breaking a lot of things right now: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/overrides/unbound-1.8.1-1.fc29 This is the error: "nothing provides libunbound.so.2()(64bit) needed by gnutls-dane-3.6.4-1.fc29.x86_64" Maybe breaking changes shouldn't be submitted to f29 so late? I don't see any approved freeze exception for it either, so either the update should be pulled, or the appropriate paperwork for a freeze exception has yet to be filed. Fabio > ___ > test-announce mailing list -- test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
