Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 05:13 -0500, Temlakos wrote:

> Well, pots and kettles aside:
> 
> I just ran the update. The only thing I'm curious about:
> 
> 1. Fedup did not start any kind of GUI. It stayed in command-line prompt 
> mode. Actually that was an improvement: I could better watch its 
> progress. But I wasn't sure whether that was what the maintainers wanted 
> to achieve.

There (still) isn't a GUI for fedup 'stage 1' (the pre-reboot part), so
that much is normal. It would usually show a pulsing Fedora logo with a
small progress bar during the post-reboot stages, but there may be cases
where it doesn't. Have you modified  your grub.cfg to disable graphical
bootsplash, e.g. removing 'rhgb quiet'? I think the upgrade boot would
inherit that change if you did, since fedup uses 'new-kernel-pkg' to
create its grub entry.

> 2. After I ran the suggested yum distro-sync cleanup command, my system 
> rolled fedup back to version 0.7, along with some fifteen other packages 
> that apparently were no up to the latest-and-greatest in the F20 stable 
> repos. AFAIK, Im not missing anything, but I'm not sure I would know 
> about that.

Sometimes things in F(N-1) do get ahead of things in F(N), it's not
entirely unknown. Especially around release time, because there are
still more people on N-1. fedup 0.8 has not gone stable yet for F20,
which sort of makes sense, because how would you test it? Most people
aren't going to fedup to Rawhide :) (I have actually run a fedup to
Rawhide and it worked for me, but I'm kind of an outlier.)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Temlakos]

On 12/20/2013 05:04 AM, Phil Dobbin wrote:

On 19/12/13 23:49, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Gavin Flower
mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>
wrote:


long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You 
see,

in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
It's an old English saying in fact :)

Even an unwatched _*teapot*_ should not boil!

You mean a _*kettle*_?

I am English born.



"A watched pot never boils" is the way I've always heard it.


Well, I've been English all me life & live In London so I can say with 
some certainty that you're correct: 'a watched pot never boils' :-)


Cheers,

  Phil...



Well, pots and kettles aside:

I just ran the update. The only thing I'm curious about:

1. Fedup did not start any kind of GUI. It stayed in command-line prompt 
mode. Actually that was an improvement: I could better watch its 
progress. But I wasn't sure whether that was what the maintainers wanted 
to achieve.


2. After I ran the suggested yum distro-sync cleanup command, my system 
rolled fedup back to version 0.7, along with some fifteen other packages 
that apparently were no up to the latest-and-greatest in the F20 stable 
repos. AFAIK, Im not missing anything, but I'm not sure I would know 
about that.


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Phil Dobbin]

On 19/12/13 23:49, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Gavin Flower
mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>
wrote:


long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
It's an old English saying in fact :)

Even an unwatched _*teapot*_ should not boil!

You mean a _*kettle*_?

I am English born.



"A watched pot never boils" is the way I've always heard it.


Well, I've been English all me life & live In London so I can say with 
some certainty that you're correct: 'a watched pot never boils' :-)


Cheers,

  Phil...

--
currently (ab)using
Arch Linux, CentOS 6.5, Debian Squeeze & Wheezy, Fedora 19 & 20, OS X 
Snow Leopard & Tiger, Ubuntu Quantal, Raring & Saucy

GnuGPG Key : http://phildobbin.org/publickey.asc


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Gavin Flower]

On 20/12/13 12:50, Gavin Flower wrote:

On 20/12/13 12:51, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 12:44 +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:

Can there be anything more important than the correct way to make
tea???

Sure - vim versus emacs!

Possibly a close second...

Then again, some people might consider /the correct direction to turn 
the teapot in the Southern Hemisphere/, or /precisely how to hold one's 
finger when drinking from a teacup/, as being more important than /vim 
versus emacs arguments/!
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Gavin Flower]

On 20/12/13 12:51, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 12:44 +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:

Can there be anything more important than the correct way to make
tea???

Sure - vim versus emacs!

Possibly a close second...

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 12:44 +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:
> Can there be anything more important than the correct way to make
> tea???

Sure - vim versus emacs!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Gavin Flower  wrote:

> long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
> probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
> in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
>
> It's an old English saying in fact :)
>
>  Even an unwatched *teapot* should not boil!
>
> You mean a *kettle*?
>
> I am English born.
>


"A watched pot never boils" is the way I've always heard it.

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Gavin Flower]

Can there be anything more important than the correct way to make tea???

On 20/12/13 12:39, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:

Are you guys overtired or something? ;)

Thanks, Phil




On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote:


On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 10:39 +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:
> On 20/12/13 06:38, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:
> [...]
> > long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
> > probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway.
You see,
> > in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
> > It's an old English saying in fact :)
> Even an unwatched teapot should not boil!
>
> You mean a kettle?
>
> I am English born.

I'd actually always heard it as "A watched pot never boils" - not a
teapot, just a pot in general.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin
. net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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






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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Gavin Flower]

On 20/12/13 12:21, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 10:39 +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:

On 20/12/13 06:38, Adam Williamson wrote:


On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:

[...]

long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
It's an old English saying in fact :)

Even an unwatched teapot should not boil!

You mean a kettle?

I am English born.

I'd actually always heard it as "A watched pot never boils" - not a
teapot, just a pot in general.

Adam,  I think you are right!

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

Are you guys overtired or something? ;)

Thanks, Phil




On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 10:39 +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:
> > On 20/12/13 06:38, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:
> > [...]
> > > long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
> > > probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
> > > in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
> > > It's an old English saying in fact :)
> > Even an unwatched teapot should not boil!
> >
> > You mean a kettle?
> >
> > I am English born.
>
> I'd actually always heard it as "A watched pot never boils" - not a
> teapot, just a pot in general.
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 10:39 +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:
> On 20/12/13 06:38, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:
> [...]
> > long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
> > probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
> > in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
> > It's an old English saying in fact :)
> Even an unwatched teapot should not boil!
> 
> You mean a kettle?
> 
> I am English born.

I'd actually always heard it as "A watched pot never boils" - not a
teapot, just a pot in general.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Temlakos]

On 12/19/2013 04:39 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:

On 20/12/13 06:38, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:

[...]

long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
It's an old English saying in fact :)

Even an unwatched _*teapot*_ should not boil!

You mean a _*kettle*_?

I am English born.


Cheers,
Gavin




Yes, I meant a kettle.

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Frank Murphy]

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 10:39:04 +1300
Gavin Flower  wrote:
eapot never boils."
> > It's an old English saying in fact :)
> Even an unwatched _*teapot*_ should not boil!
> 

My Dad used boil it, crude oil yeuk!

-- 
Regards,
Frank 
www.frankly3d.com

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Gavin Flower]

On 20/12/13 06:38, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:

[...]

long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
It's an old English saying in fact :)

Even an unwatched _*teapot*_ should not boil!

You mean a _*kettle*_?

I am English born.


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 13:39 -0500, Temlakos wrote:
> On 12/19/2013 12:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:
> >
> >
>  The newest version of fedup available to me (not using
>  updates-testing) is 0.7. ne
> 
>  Is someone going to push fedup version 0,8 to updates (stable) soon?
>  Do I wait for that? Or enable updates-testing and run an update before
>  I proceed?
> >>> It's on its way to stable updates ATM so if you wait you won't have to
> >>> wait long, but it's perfectly safe to grab it from u-t if you want to
> >>> upgrade right now.
> >> I'm not in that kind of hurry. I saw a statement about known issues
> >> with updating. The official line seems to be: fedup version 0.7 will
> >> not work, so don't try it. Either wait, or enable u-t just long enough
> >> to grab version 0.8. (And if one does try it, the new fedup needs
> >> workarounds to clean up the garbage.)
> >>
> >> Since fedora-release also is at issue (for GPG signature checking),
> >> I'll watch the system updates closely for the new fedup.
> > It went to stable for f19 last night, should be making it to mirrors by
> > now. f18 seems to be a bit behind.
> >
> >> My last experience with fedup was instructive. Plymouth ran well with
> >> it, but showed me a very small progress bar that appeared frozen for a
> >> long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
> >> probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
> >> in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."
> > It's an old English saying in fact :)
> 
> OK, the current version of fedup made it out, and I now have it.
> 
> But: shouldn't I also wait for fedup-dracut and fedup-plymouth-dracut to 
> update also? They're still on Version 0.7.

No, you don't need to. Those packages aren't really used on your system,
they're used to generate the special update initramfs you download from
the servers as part of the upgrade process.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Temlakos]

On 12/19/2013 12:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:



The newest version of fedup available to me (not using
updates-testing) is 0.7. ne

Is someone going to push fedup version 0,8 to updates (stable) soon?
Do I wait for that? Or enable updates-testing and run an update before
I proceed?

It's on its way to stable updates ATM so if you wait you won't have to
wait long, but it's perfectly safe to grab it from u-t if you want to
upgrade right now.

I'm not in that kind of hurry. I saw a statement about known issues
with updating. The official line seems to be: fedup version 0.7 will
not work, so don't try it. Either wait, or enable u-t just long enough
to grab version 0.8. (And if one does try it, the new fedup needs
workarounds to clean up the garbage.)

Since fedora-release also is at issue (for GPG signature checking),
I'll watch the system updates closely for the new fedup.

It went to stable for f19 last night, should be making it to mirrors by
now. f18 seems to be a bit behind.


My last experience with fedup was instructive. Plymouth ran well with
it, but showed me a very small progress bar that appeared frozen for a
long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."

It's an old English saying in fact :)


OK, the current version of fedup made it out, and I now have it.

But: shouldn't I also wait for fedup-dracut and fedup-plymouth-dracut to 
update also? They're still on Version 0.7.


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 05:08 -0500, Temlakos wrote:


> > > The newest version of fedup available to me (not using
> > > updates-testing) is 0.7. ne
> > > 
> > > Is someone going to push fedup version 0,8 to updates (stable) soon?
> > > Do I wait for that? Or enable updates-testing and run an update before
> > > I proceed?
> > It's on its way to stable updates ATM so if you wait you won't have to
> > wait long, but it's perfectly safe to grab it from u-t if you want to
> > upgrade right now.
> 
> I'm not in that kind of hurry. I saw a statement about known issues
> with updating. The official line seems to be: fedup version 0.7 will
> not work, so don't try it. Either wait, or enable u-t just long enough
> to grab version 0.8. (And if one does try it, the new fedup needs
> workarounds to clean up the garbage.)
> 
> Since fedora-release also is at issue (for GPG signature checking),
> I'll watch the system updates closely for the new fedup.

It went to stable for f19 last night, should be making it to mirrors by
now. f18 seems to be a bit behind.

> My last experience with fedup was instructive. Plymouth ran well with
> it, but showed me a very small progress bar that appeared frozen for a
> long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
> probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
> in America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."

It's an old English saying in fact :)
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Temlakos]

On 12/18/2013 09:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 18:58 -0500, Temlakos wrote:

On 12/18/2013 06:50 PM, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:


   * I don't actually know one way or another but it feels like
 it might just be similar in my case since I've confirmed I'm
 using 0.8 and it's no different. Has anyone else *not* fixed
 this with the suggested update?

Thanks, Phil






On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Bruno Medeiros 
wrote:
 BrunoJCM
 (Enviado do Tablet)
 Em 17/12/2013 13:13, "Neal Becker" 
 escreveu:
 >
 > success/failure?
 
 I had this one, I reported on this list a few weeks ago:

 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038863
 
 fedup 0.8 also fixed the problem for me.
 
 Thanks,
 
 --

 Bruno Medeiros
 
 
 --

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





The newest version of fedup available to me (not using
updates-testing) is 0.7. ne

Is someone going to push fedup version 0,8 to updates (stable) soon?
Do I wait for that? Or enable updates-testing and run an update before
I proceed?

It's on its way to stable updates ATM so if you wait you won't have to
wait long, but it's perfectly safe to grab it from u-t if you want to
upgrade right now.


I'm not in that kind of hurry. I saw a statement about known issues with 
updating. The official line seems to be: fedup version 0.7 will not 
work, so don't try it. Either wait, or enable u-t just long enough to 
grab version 0.8. (And if one /does/ try it, the new fedup needs 
workarounds to clean up the garbage.)


Since fedora-release also is at issue (for GPG signature checking), I'll 
watch the system updates closely for the new fedup.


My last experience with fedup was instructive. Plymouth ran well with 
it, but showed me a /very/ small progress bar that appeared frozen for a 
long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I 
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see, in 
America we have a saying: "A watched teapot never boils."


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 18:58 -0500, Temlakos wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 06:50 PM, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> 
> >   * I don't actually know one way or another but it feels like
> > it might just be similar in my case since I've confirmed I'm
> > using 0.8 and it's no different. Has anyone else *not* fixed
> > this with the suggested update?
> > 
> > Thanks, Phil
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Bruno Medeiros 
> > wrote:
> > BrunoJCM
> > (Enviado do Tablet) 
> > Em 17/12/2013 13:13, "Neal Becker" 
> > escreveu:
> > >
> > > success/failure? 
> > 
> > I had this one, I reported on this list a few weeks ago:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038863
> > 
> > fedup 0.8 also fixed the problem for me.
> > 
> > Thanks, 
> > 
> > --
> > Bruno Medeiros 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > test mailing list
> > test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe:
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> The newest version of fedup available to me (not using
> updates-testing) is 0.7.
> 
> Is someone going to push fedup version 0,8 to updates (stable) soon?
> Do I wait for that? Or enable updates-testing and run an update before
> I proceed?

It's on its way to stable updates ATM so if you wait you won't have to
wait long, but it's perfectly safe to grab it from u-t if you want to
upgrade right now.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

from the wiki...

"*Usually, it is best to try first with the latest fedup available in the
stable update repository for the release you are running. If you encounter
problems with the upgrade, and a newer fedup is available in the
updates-testing repository for your current release, you may wish to try
with this newer version: yum --enablerepo=updates-testing install fedup at
the command line)*"

Thanks, Phil




On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Temlakos  wrote:

>  On 12/18/2013 06:50 PM, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
>
>
>- I don't actually know one way or another but it feels like it might
>just be similar in my case since I've confirmed I'm using 0.8 and it's no
>different. Has anyone else *not* fixed this with the suggested update?
>
>
>  Thanks, Phil
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>
>> BrunoJCM
>> (Enviado do Tablet)
>> Em 17/12/2013 13:13, "Neal Becker"  escreveu:
>> >
>> > success/failure?
>>
>> I had this one, I reported on this list a few weeks ago:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038863
>>
>> fedup 0.8 also fixed the problem for me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Bruno Medeiros
>>
>> --
>> test mailing list
>> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>>
>
>
>
>
> The newest version of fedup available to me (not using updates-testing) is
> 0.7.
>
> Is someone going to push fedup version 0,8 to updates (stable) soon? Do I
> wait for that? Or enable updates-testing and run an update before I proceed?
>
> Temlakos
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Temlakos]

On 12/18/2013 06:50 PM, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:


  * I don't actually know one way or another but it feels like it
might just be similar in my case since I've confirmed I'm using
0.8 and it's no different. Has anyone else *not* fixed this with
the suggested update?


Thanks, Phil




On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Bruno Medeiros > wrote:


BrunoJCM
(Enviado do Tablet)
Em 17/12/2013 13:13, "Neal Becker" mailto:ndbeck...@gmail.com>> escreveu:
>
> success/failure?

I had this one, I reported on this list a few weeks ago:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038863

fedup 0.8 also fixed the problem for me.

Thanks,

--
Bruno Medeiros


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






The newest version of fedup available to me (not using updates-testing) 
is 0.7.


Is someone going to push fedup version 0,8 to updates (stable) soon? Do 
I wait for that? Or enable updates-testing and run an update before I 
proceed?


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

   - I don't actually know one way or another but it feels like it might
   just be similar in my case since I've confirmed I'm using 0.8 and it's no
   different. Has anyone else *not* fixed this with the suggested update?


Thanks, Phil




On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Bruno Medeiros  wrote:

> BrunoJCM
> (Enviado do Tablet)
> Em 17/12/2013 13:13, "Neal Becker"  escreveu:
> >
> > success/failure?
>
> I had this one, I reported on this list a few weeks ago:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038863
>
> fedup 0.8 also fixed the problem for me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Bruno Medeiros
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Bruno Medeiros]

BrunoJCM
(Enviado do Tablet)
Em 17/12/2013 13:13, "Neal Becker"  escreveu:
>
> success/failure?

I had this one, I reported on this list a few weeks ago:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038863

fedup 0.8 also fixed the problem for me.

Thanks,

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 13:15 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> In case there clues here I'm not seeing, this is what I get after the
> fedup --network 20 command:
> 
> 
> WARNING: problems were encountered during transaction test:
>   broken dependencies
> kmod-VirtualBox-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64-4.3.4-1.fc19.x86_64
> requires kernel-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64,
> kernel-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64, kernel-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64
> libreoffice-core-1:4.1.3.2-11.fc19.x86_64 requires
> boost-date-time-1.53.0-14.fc19.x86_64
> libreoffice-pdfimport-1:4.1.3.2-11.fc19.x86_64 requires
> poppler-0.22.1-5.fc19.x86_64
> kmod-VirtualBox-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64-4.3.2-1.fc19.3.x86_64
> requires kernel-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64,
> kernel-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64, kernel-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64
> kmod-VirtualBox-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64-4.3.4-1.fc19.x86_64
> requires kernel-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64,
> kernel-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64, kernel-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64
> Continue with the upgrade at your own risk.

The LO stuff is known about, it shouldn't impede the upgrade, and should
be resolved when the newer F20 LO goes stable today. The others are
coming from rpmfusion, I guess - I think they're still flipping their
repos over, but you should be able to clean that up post-upgrade if you
can get the fusion repos configured.

-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

In case there clues here I'm not seeing, this is what I get after the fedup
--network 20 command:

WARNING: problems were encountered during transaction test:
  broken dependencies
kmod-VirtualBox-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64-4.3.4-1.fc19.x86_64 requires
kernel-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64, kernel-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64,
kernel-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64
libreoffice-core-1:4.1.3.2-11.fc19.x86_64 requires
boost-date-time-1.53.0-14.fc19.x86_64
libreoffice-pdfimport-1:4.1.3.2-11.fc19.x86_64 requires
poppler-0.22.1-5.fc19.x86_64
kmod-VirtualBox-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64-4.3.2-1.fc19.3.x86_64 requires
kernel-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64, kernel-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64,
kernel-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64
kmod-VirtualBox-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64-4.3.4-1.fc19.x86_64 requires
kernel-3.11.9-200.fc19.x86_64, kernel-3.11.10-200.fc19.x86_64,
kernel-3.11.3-201.fc19.x86_64
Continue with the upgrade at your own risk.

Thanks, Phil




On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 00:55 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Dec 18, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Chris Murphy 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > If anyone else is having such errors, is your rootfs btrfs by any
> chance?
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:57 PM, Adam Williamson 
> wrote:
> > > I can only think that using fedup 0.7 against upgrade
> > > kernel/image built with fedup-dracut 0.8 doesn't work.
> >
> > That seems more plausible.
> >
> > This:
> > mv /var/tmp/fedora-upgrade /var/tmp/system-upgrade
> > mv /var/lib/fedora-upgrade /var/lib/system-upgrade
> >
> > Plus updating to fedup 0.8 and reattempting works for me.
>
> I thought just doing the mv's without the upgrade of fedup might work
> too, but it seems not. Not that it really matters, but it's interesting.
>
> Anyway, I've updated Common Bugs and spammed everywhere I could think of
> with 'use 0.8!' messages. If others can help get the word out that'd be
> great :) And also up-karma the Fedora 18 fedup, it needs it. There's a
> fedora-release update with the GPG keys that should make --nogpgcheck
> unnecessary: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fedora-release-18-4
> - so test if you can do a successful fedup from 18 to 20 with fedup 0.8
> and that fedora-release and no special parameters, and if so, upkarma
> both, so we can get 'em stable ASAP.
>
> Common Bugs link, for informing people:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F20_bugs#fedup-07-fail .
>
> thanks folks!
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 00:55 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Chris Murphy  wrote:
> > 
> > If anyone else is having such errors, is your rootfs btrfs by any chance? 
> 
> On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:57 PM, Adam Williamson  wrote:
> > I can only think that using fedup 0.7 against upgrade
> > kernel/image built with fedup-dracut 0.8 doesn't work.
> 
> That seems more plausible.
> 
> This:
> mv /var/tmp/fedora-upgrade /var/tmp/system-upgrade
> mv /var/lib/fedora-upgrade /var/lib/system-upgrade
> 
> Plus updating to fedup 0.8 and reattempting works for me.

I thought just doing the mv's without the upgrade of fedup might work
too, but it seems not. Not that it really matters, but it's interesting.

Anyway, I've updated Common Bugs and spammed everywhere I could think of
with 'use 0.8!' messages. If others can help get the word out that'd be
great :) And also up-karma the Fedora 18 fedup, it needs it. There's a
fedora-release update with the GPG keys that should make --nogpgcheck
unnecessary: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fedora-release-18-4
- so test if you can do a successful fedup from 18 to 20 with fedup 0.8
and that fedora-release and no special parameters, and if so, upkarma
both, so we can get 'em stable ASAP.

Common Bugs link, for informing people:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F20_bugs#fedup-07-fail .

thanks folks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Chris Murphy]

On Dec 18, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Chris Murphy  wrote:
> 
> If anyone else is having such errors, is your rootfs btrfs by any chance? 

On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:57 PM, Adam Williamson  wrote:
> I can only think that using fedup 0.7 against upgrade
> kernel/image built with fedup-dracut 0.8 doesn't work.

That seems more plausible.

This:
mv /var/tmp/fedora-upgrade /var/tmp/system-upgrade
mv /var/lib/fedora-upgrade /var/lib/system-upgrade

Plus updating to fedup 0.8 and reattempting works for me.



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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 12/18/2013 08:12 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:


On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:37 PM, Chris Murphy  wrote:


Yeah I just did an F18 live desktop install to kvm, installed 0.7.3-4, ran it 
with:

fedup --network 20 --debuglog fedupdebug.log

The download is fine. The grub.cfg is correct. The reboot fails and before I 
can read anything it reboots and the grub.cfg has changed such that the fedup 
option isn't present. The screen shots I captured of the reboot failure shows a 
couple hints:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss1.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss2.png

That looks to me like the initramfs possibly doesn't contain the right root.


Weird. /system-upgrade-root exists so the 2nd screen shot complaint indicating 
it doesn't is bogus. The next complaint, that /system-upgrade-root/sysimage is 
true, it doesn't exist. The debug log shows:

[  5678.220] (II) fedup.sysprep:setup_upgraderoot() creating upgraderoot dir: 
/system-upgrade-root


An earlier screenshot of boot shows:

dracut-pre-pivot: Warning: UPGRADEROOT isn't unset, can't save initramfs


If anyone else is having such errors, is your rootfs btrfs by any chance?


I am also observing these messages. No, my rootfs is ext4, not btrfs.

Ralf

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Chris Murphy]

On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:37 PM, Chris Murphy  wrote:
> 
> Yeah I just did an F18 live desktop install to kvm, installed 0.7.3-4, ran it 
> with:
> 
> fedup --network 20 --debuglog fedupdebug.log
> 
> The download is fine. The grub.cfg is correct. The reboot fails and before I 
> can read anything it reboots and the grub.cfg has changed such that the fedup 
> option isn't present. The screen shots I captured of the reboot failure shows 
> a couple hints:
> 
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss1.png
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss2.png
> 
> That looks to me like the initramfs possibly doesn't contain the right root.

Weird. /system-upgrade-root exists so the 2nd screen shot complaint indicating 
it doesn't is bogus. The next complaint, that /system-upgrade-root/sysimage is 
true, it doesn't exist. The debug log shows:

[  5678.220] (II) fedup.sysprep:setup_upgraderoot() creating upgraderoot dir: 
/system-upgrade-root


An earlier screenshot of boot shows:

dracut-pre-pivot: Warning: UPGRADEROOT isn't unset, can't save initramfs


If anyone else is having such errors, is your rootfs btrfs by any chance? It's 
possible for a couple things to get confused about where the real root is if 
it's not groking it's on its own subvolume. (I'm not sure that's the problem, 
still looking and may even give up if no else is having this problem or if 0.8 
solves it.)

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[William Morris]

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:

>
> On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Adam Williamson  wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 23:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson 
> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:02 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
>  So it appears I'm stuck at "mounted /boot." At the top I can see an
>  error "Start Load Kernel Modules" "FAILED" or something similar.
> >>>
> >>> Can you get the precise message, and/or a picture of the screen?
> Thanks!
> >>
> >> On Dec 17, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Philippe LeCavalier <
> supp...@plecavalier.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Pics are awaiting approval by the moderator…
> >>>
> >>
> >> Please no, don't attach pics and send it to 3000 people on a list
> serve. It's 2013. Stick it in dropbox public and post a link, or google
> drive, or it doesn't really matter. That's faster than waiting for a
> moderate who really shouldn't approve attachments anyway.
> >
> > I saw them on the moderation request. Looks like the same issue several
> > people have hit today. It's kinda curious that this is suddenly
> > happening, I know we tested 0.7 and it worked. Oh, well. So, yeah,
> > Philippe, try the standard advice of the day: upgrade to fedup 0.8 and
> > try again. Seems to be working for people.
>
> Yeah I just did an F18 live desktop install to kvm, installed 0.7.3-4, ran
> it with:
>
> fedup --network 20 --debuglog fedupdebug.log
>
> The download is fine. The grub.cfg is correct. The reboot fails and before
> I can read anything it reboots and the grub.cfg has changed such that the
> fedup option isn't present. The screen shots I captured of the reboot
> failure shows a couple hints:
>
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss1.png
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss2.png
>
> That looks to me like the initramfs possibly doesn't contain the right
> root.
>
>
> Chris Murphy
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>




I am getting a weird error message. Not sure what it means exactly.

sudo fedup -v --iso
~/Downloads/Fedora-Live-Desktop-i686-20/Fedora-Live-Desktop-i686-20-1.iso
fedup INFO: /bin/fedup starting at Wed Dec 18 02:09:15 2013
setting up repos...
fedup.yum INFO: FedupDownloader(version=None,
cachedir=/var/tmp/fedora-upgrade)
fedup.yum INFO: checking repos
fedup.yum INFO: repo fedupiso seems OK
getting boot images...

Downloading failed: couldn't get boot images: Local file does not exist:
/tmp/fedup.mnt.lwL9hb/.treeinfo
fedup INFO: Downloading failed: couldn't get boot images: Local file does
not exist: /tmp/fedup.mnt.lwL9hb/.treeinfo
fedup INFO: /bin/fedup exiting at Wed Dec 18 02:09:15 2013

-- 
Will Morris
Fedora Bugzapper, Amabasador
irc: wmorri
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Chris Murphy]

On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Adam Williamson  wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 23:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson  
>>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:02 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
 So it appears I'm stuck at "mounted /boot." At the top I can see an
 error "Start Load Kernel Modules" "FAILED" or something similar.
>>> 
>>> Can you get the precise message, and/or a picture of the screen? Thanks!
>> 
>> On Dec 17, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Philippe LeCavalier  
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Pics are awaiting approval by the moderator…
>>> 
>> 
>> Please no, don't attach pics and send it to 3000 people on a list serve. 
>> It's 2013. Stick it in dropbox public and post a link, or google drive, or 
>> it doesn't really matter. That's faster than waiting for a moderate who 
>> really shouldn't approve attachments anyway.
> 
> I saw them on the moderation request. Looks like the same issue several
> people have hit today. It's kinda curious that this is suddenly
> happening, I know we tested 0.7 and it worked. Oh, well. So, yeah,
> Philippe, try the standard advice of the day: upgrade to fedup 0.8 and
> try again. Seems to be working for people.

Yeah I just did an F18 live desktop install to kvm, installed 0.7.3-4, ran it 
with:

fedup --network 20 --debuglog fedupdebug.log

The download is fine. The grub.cfg is correct. The reboot fails and before I 
can read anything it reboots and the grub.cfg has changed such that the fedup 
option isn't present. The screen shots I captured of the reboot failure shows a 
couple hints:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss1.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3253801/fedupfailss2.png

That looks to me like the initramfs possibly doesn't contain the right root.


Chris Murphy

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 23:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson  
> > wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:02 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> > > So it appears I'm stuck at "mounted /boot." At the top I can see an
> > > error "Start Load Kernel Modules" "FAILED" or something similar.
> > 
> > Can you get the precise message, and/or a picture of the screen? Thanks!
> 
> On Dec 17, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Philippe LeCavalier  
> wrote:
> 
> > Pics are awaiting approval by the moderator…
> > 
> 
> Please no, don't attach pics and send it to 3000 people on a list serve. It's 
> 2013. Stick it in dropbox public and post a link, or google drive, or it 
> doesn't really matter. That's faster than waiting for a moderate who really 
> shouldn't approve attachments anyway.

I saw them on the moderation request. Looks like the same issue several
people have hit today. It's kinda curious that this is suddenly
happening, I know we tested 0.7 and it worked. Oh, well. So, yeah,
Philippe, try the standard advice of the day: upgrade to fedup 0.8 and
try again. Seems to be working for people.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Chris Murphy]

> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson  wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:02 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> > So it appears I'm stuck at "mounted /boot." At the top I can see an
> > error "Start Load Kernel Modules" "FAILED" or something similar.
> 
> Can you get the precise message, and/or a picture of the screen? Thanks!

On Dec 17, 2013, at 4:17 PM, Philippe LeCavalier  
wrote:

> Pics are awaiting approval by the moderator…
> 

Please no, don't attach pics and send it to 3000 people on a list serve. It's 
2013. Stick it in dropbox public and post a link, or google drive, or it 
doesn't really matter. That's faster than waiting for a moderate who really 
shouldn't approve attachments anyway.

Thanks,

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

Pics are awaiting approval by the moderator...

Thanks, Phil




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:02 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> > So it appears I'm stuck at "mounted /boot." At the top I can see an
> > error "Start Load Kernel Modules" "FAILED" or something similar.
>
> Can you get the precise message, and/or a picture of the screen? Thanks!
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:02 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> So it appears I'm stuck at "mounted /boot." At the top I can see an
> error "Start Load Kernel Modules" "FAILED" or something similar.

Can you get the precise message, and/or a picture of the screen? Thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

So it appears I'm stuck at "mounted /boot." At the top I can see an error
"Start Load Kernel Modules" "FAILED" or something similar.

Thanks, Phil




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Philippe LeCavalier <
supp...@plecavalier.com> wrote:

> Okay. Thanks! I'll try that tonight.
>
> Thanks, Phil
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 11:29 -0600, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
>> > Agreed. I only supplied the info that was given on the screen. When I
>> > boot into F20 to perform the fedup I don't get past the
>> > progress-bar-type splash screen and thus have no details to provide
>> > other than the aforementioned. Perhaps calling it an "error" was an
>> > error ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > On the same note; how do I get the real error to you guys? None of the
>> > TTYs seem to respond to alt+1/2/3...etc. I appeared stuck on that
>> > progress-bar screen.
>>
>> Try booting the upgrade session with the 'rhgb quiet' parameters
>> removed, and see if that provides more useful information.
>> --
>> Adam Williamson
>> Fedora QA Community Monkey
>> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
>> http://www.happyassassin.net
>>
>> --
>> test mailing list
>> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>>
>
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Dan Scott]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Neal Becker  wrote:
> success/failure?

I had total success about 10 days ago with fedup f19->f20 on two
different x86_64 systems: a Thinkpad 400 and an el-cheapo Acer AMD
dual-core desktop.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

Okay. Thanks! I'll try that tonight.

Thanks, Phil




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 11:29 -0600, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> > Agreed. I only supplied the info that was given on the screen. When I
> > boot into F20 to perform the fedup I don't get past the
> > progress-bar-type splash screen and thus have no details to provide
> > other than the aforementioned. Perhaps calling it an "error" was an
> > error ;)
> >
> >
> > On the same note; how do I get the real error to you guys? None of the
> > TTYs seem to respond to alt+1/2/3...etc. I appeared stuck on that
> > progress-bar screen.
>
> Try booting the upgrade session with the 'rhgb quiet' parameters
> removed, and see if that provides more useful information.
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 11:29 -0600, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> Agreed. I only supplied the info that was given on the screen. When I
> boot into F20 to perform the fedup I don't get past the
> progress-bar-type splash screen and thus have no details to provide
> other than the aforementioned. Perhaps calling it an "error" was an
> error ;)
> 
> 
> On the same note; how do I get the real error to you guys? None of the
> TTYs seem to respond to alt+1/2/3...etc. I appeared stuck on that
> progress-bar screen.

Try booting the upgrade session with the 'rhgb quiet' parameters
removed, and see if that provides more useful information.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

Agreed. I only supplied the info that was given on the screen. When I boot
into F20 to perform the fedup I don't get past the progress-bar-type splash
screen and thus have no details to provide other than the aforementioned.
Perhaps calling it an "error" was an error ;)

On the same note; how do I get the real error to you guys? None of the TTYs
seem to respond to alt+1/2/3...etc. I appeared stuck on that progress-bar
screen.

Thanks, Phil




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 11:30 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> > Sure but I still couldn't successfully complete the fedup 20 due to
> > the "notice".
>
> I don't think that's correct. I had one of these notices on my upgrade,
> and the upgrade worked.
>
> I'm not saying you didn't have a problem, I'm saying that the problem
> you saw is probably not related to the note about non-updatable
> packages. The difference between correlation and causation.
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 11:30 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> Sure but I still couldn't successfully complete the fedup 20 due to
> the "notice".

I don't think that's correct. I had one of these notices on my upgrade,
and the upgrade worked.

I'm not saying you didn't have a problem, I'm saying that the problem
you saw is probably not related to the note about non-updatable
packages. The difference between correlation and causation.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Joel Gomberg]

On 12/17/2013 07:13 AM, Neal Becker wrote:

success/failure?

Success on two machines.  I did have to import keys for the rpmfusion repos, 
though.  Otherwise, worked like a charm.  Fedup is a huge improvement over 
preupgrade.


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

Sure but I still couldn't successfully complete the fedup 20 due to the
"notice".
 On Dec 17, 2013 11:14 AM, "Adam Williamson"  wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 09:19 -0600, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> > Failed for me on 64-bit. However, error was 'no updates for following
> > pckgs' and pckgs in question(allot) were almost all non-stock/post
> > install.
>
> That's not an error, it's just an informational message. If that was the
> _only_ message you got (aside from 'reboot now to upgrade!'), it didn't
> fail.
>
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 10:13 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
> success/failure?

Quite a few people have reported success on G+ and in the forums, that
I've seen. Aside from validation testing (where it worked, of course) I
fedup'ed my server VM host from 18 to 20 without issues yesterday. Heck,
I fedup'ed my desktop from 20 to Rawhide. fedup for life, yo.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 09:19 -0600, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> Failed for me on 64-bit. However, error was 'no updates for following
> pckgs' and pckgs in question(allot) were almost all non-stock/post
> install.

That's not an error, it's just an informational message. If that was the
_only_ message you got (aside from 'reboot now to upgrade!'), it didn't
fail.

-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

Yes and no. I couldn't boot into 20 at all. But I easily recovered by
simply choosing the previous F19 entry in GRUB.

Thanks, Phil




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Neal Becker  wrote:

> Did it fail badly - leaving you a mess?
>
> Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
>
> > Failed for me on 64-bit. However, error was 'no updates for following
> > pckgs' and pckgs in question(allot) were almost all non-stock/post
> install.
> >
> > This was about 3 days ago.
> >
> > Thanks, Phil
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Neal Becker 
> wrote:
> >
> >> success/failure?
> >>
> >> --
> >> test mailing list
> >> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> To unsubscribe:
> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Neal Becker]

Did it fail badly - leaving you a mess?

Philippe LeCavalier wrote:

> Failed for me on 64-bit. However, error was 'no updates for following
> pckgs' and pckgs in question(allot) were almost all non-stock/post install.
> 
> This was about 3 days ago.
> 
> Thanks, Phil
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Neal Becker  wrote:
> 
>> success/failure?
>>
>> --
>> test mailing list
>> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test


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

Re: any report of fedup f19->f20?

[Philippe LeCavalier]

Failed for me on 64-bit. However, error was 'no updates for following
pckgs' and pckgs in question(allot) were almost all non-stock/post install.

This was about 3 days ago.

Thanks, Phil




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Neal Becker  wrote:

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