Re: New blocker bug in kernel

thx. I added this bug to blockers. Thank you for your understanding. On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 23:06 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 23:05 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 09:44 +0400, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=90

[Test-Announce] 2013-05-06 @ 16:00 UTC - F19 Beta Blocker Bug Review #3

# F19 Beta Blocker Review meeting #3 # Date: 2013-05-06 # Time: 16:00 UTC (12:00 EDT, 09:00 PDT) (after QA meeting) # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net The third blocker review meeting for F19 Beta will follow right after the QA meeting. We have quite a few proposed blockers to

Re: New blocker bug in kernel

On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 23:05 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 09:44 +0400, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903136 > > This bug affected ALL ThinkPads of 2012! > > Can you add in blocker release bugs ? > > https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blocker

Re: New blocker bug in kernel

On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 09:44 +0400, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903136 > This bug affected ALL ThinkPads of 2012! > Can you add in blocker release bugs ? https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: a

[Test-Announce] 2013-05-06 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting

# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting # Date: 2013-05-06 # Time: 15:00 UTC (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto) # Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net Greetings testers! It's meeting time again today/tomorrow! We'll check in on the status of Beta, and jreznik also wanted

2013-04-29 - Fedora QA Meeting - recap

As always, minutes and IRC transcript available on the wiki at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20130429 Next meeting is scheduled for 2013-05-06 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting. If you have topics you think we should bring up at the meeting, please add them to the Wiki page at https://f

New blocker bug in kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903136 This bug affected ALL ThinkPads of 2012! Can you add in blocker release bugs ? -- Best Regards, Igor Gnatenko -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

persistent Grey square on the top left hand corner of the screen while doing to drag and drop

I use rawhide and whenever I drag and drop the files using nautilus or nemo there is a persistent square on the top left hand corner of my screen both in gnome-shell and xfce. It disappears with closing of the file manager. can you guys help? here is the screenshot. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.c

Fedora 17 updates-testing report

The following Fedora 17 Security updates need testing: Age URL 304 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-10269/revelation-0.4.14-1.fc17 116 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0455/fedora-business-cards-1-0.1.beta1.fc17 86 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/up

Fedora 18 updates-testing report

The following Fedora 18 Security updates need testing: Age URL 117 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0416/fedora-business-cards-1-0.1.beta1.fc18 86 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-2131/rubygem-rdoc-3.12-6.fc18 82 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/upd

Re: Manual partitioning: Label field

On May 5, 2013, at 6:19 PM, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote: > On 05/05/2013 12:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> For LVM, the Name field is used for the Logical Volume name. Label field is >> available, but appears it's not used for anything. >> >> For Btrfs, the Name field is used for the subvolume name.

Re: Manual partitioning: Label field

On 05/05/2013 12:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: For LVM, the Name field is used for the Logical Volume name. Label field is available, but appears it's not used for anything. For Btrfs, the Name field is used for the subvolume name. Again, the label field is available, but the entry is unused. Fo

Re: QA:Testcase_desktop_updates proposal

On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 14:18 -0400, Bob Lightfoot wrote: > On 05/05/2013 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 21:07 -0400, Bob Lightfoot wrote: > >> Dear Testers: > >> I have run the test at > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_updates several fimes > >>

Re: QA:Testcase_desktop_updates proposal

On 05/05/2013 01:10 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 21:07 -0400, Bob Lightfoot wrote: >> Dear Testers: >> I have run the test at >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_updates several fimes >> recently and would like to propose the following clarifiction additi

Re: Manual partitioning: Label field

On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 10:43 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > For LVM, the Name field is used for the Logical Volume name. Label field is > available, but appears it's not used for anything. > > For Btrfs, the Name field is used for the subvolume name. Again, the label > field is available, but the e

Re: Beta TC3 karma requests

On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 18:48 -0700, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: > On May 4, 2013 6:44 PM, "Ed Greshko" wrote: > > > > On 05/05/13 04:08, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 12:57 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > >> Hey folks! Just wanted to let everyone know, if TC3 installation > is

Re: Beta TC3 karma requests

On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 10:18 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 05/05/13 09:48, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: > > > > On May 4, 2013 6:44 PM, "Ed Greshko" > > wrote: > > > > > > On 05/05/13 04:08, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 12:57 -0700, Adam Williamso

Re: Request for focused testing on containers (LVM, btrfs) in F19 Beta TCs

On May 3, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Well, it's a UI *change* - this is now in the properties of the > container. If you pick any subvol, you should see a button that lets you > edit the properties of the volume, and you can set its name, target size > and RAID level from there

Re: Many different failures with Fedora-19-Beta-TC3-x86_64-netinst.iso, no successes

On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 23:18 -0700, Jay Finger wrote: > I would like to create a bug in bugzilla for this issue, but I can't > seem to locate a button to do so. Probably a noob issue. Regardless, > how do I do so? There's only a 'magic button' for reporting crashes - that process runs through lib

Re: Many different failures with Fedora-19-Beta-TC3-x86_64-netinst.iso, no successes

On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 23:27 -0700, Jay Finger wrote: > Ok, I just figured out how to file a bug. There's too many different > things that one needs to log into for this. It'd be nice if we could use FAS login for Bugzilla, yeah; it is shared with RH, but it should still be possible. I don't know

Re: QA:Testcase_desktop_updates proposal

On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 21:07 -0400, Bob Lightfoot wrote: > Dear Testers: > I have run the test at > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_updates several fimes > recently and would like to propose the following clarifiction addition > for others who might run this test. > > How to

Fedora 19 updates-testing report

The following Fedora 19 Security updates need testing: Age URL 32 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-4753/microcode_ctl-2.0-3.1.fc19 24 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-5411/php-geshi-1.0.8.11-3.fc19 23 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA

Manual partitioning: Label field

For LVM, the Name field is used for the Logical Volume name. Label field is available, but appears it's not used for anything. For Btrfs, the Name field is used for the subvolume name. Again, the label field is available, but the entry is unused. For Standard Partitions, the Name field is graye

Re: Fedora 19 Beta RC3

Lawrence Graves gmail.com> writes: > There seems to be some discrepancy > in the size of footprint given as to the actual > size for the footprint of the package. It says it is 4.5 when > in fact it is 4.8. That is larger than RC2 which was 4.7.  The exact sizes o

Fedora 19 Beta RC3

There seems to be some discrepancy in the size of footprint given as to the actual size for the footprint of the package. It says it is 4.5 when in fact it is 4.8. That is larger than RC2 which was 4.7. -- All things are workable but don't all things work. Prov. 3:5 & 6 -- test mailing list tes

F-19 Branched report: 20130505 changes

Compose started at Sun May 5 09:15:02 UTC 2013 Broken deps for x86_64 -- [byzanz] byzanz-0.3-0.5.fc17.x86_64 requires libpanel-applet-4.so.0()(64bit) [deltacloud-core] deltacloud-core-1.0.5-2.fc19.noarch requires ruby(abi) =

rawhide report: 20130505 changes

Compose started at Sun May 5 08:15:03 UTC 2013 Broken deps for x86_64 -- [byzanz] byzanz-0.3-0.5.fc17.x86_64 requires libpanel-applet-4.so.0()(64bit) [cinnamon] cinnamon-menu-editor-1.6.7-7.fc19.noarch requires gnome-panel [d

Re: [Fedora QA] #345: Fedora 19 Translation (l10n) Test Day

#345: Fedora 19 Translation (l10n) Test Day ---+--- Reporter: aalam | Owner: aalam Type: task | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 19 Component: Test Day |Version: Resolution:| Keywords: