On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 23:26 -0500, John Dulaney wrote:
Ahoy,
So, I am with Adam on this one (I'm not a mod?).
You weren't actually in the group when I checked, IIRC, and I didn't
want to start adding many more people until I floated the idea on the
list first. Seems like most everyone is
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 10:15 +0530, Akshay Vyas wrote:
So I'm proposing we do something simple: let's just go ahead and stick
everyone who can reasonably be considered a 'QA team member' in the FAS
'qa' group. This wouldn't be hard to do, I can make sure sufficient
people within and
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 00:57 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 16, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
Actually - it'd basically just be the 'guided installation' table from
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill/Draft_storage_matrix#Guided_installationwithout
On Dec 17, 2013, at 12:57 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Dec 16, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
Actually - it'd basically just be the 'guided installation' table from
As explained a few times: there are things within Fedora as a whole (not
the QA group) which you need to be a member of a FAS group other than
'cla_done' to get access to - the intent being that only people who are
'members' of Fedora in some way should get them. Space on
fedorapeople.org and
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 8:32 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 12:23 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
Right now me, James Laska, Will Woods and Jesse Keating are the admins
of the QA group. This is obviously a bit silly. I'll drop jlaska's,
wwoods' and jesses'
On Dec 17, 2013, at 1:07 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 00:57 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 16, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
Actually - it'd basically just be the 'guided installation' table from
On 12/16/2013 11:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I'm still scratching my head over the other applications not
saving/restoring correctly,
Next probably genuine xfce bug: thunar File Manager windows do not get
restored to their position they had carried before.
Bug filed:
On þri 17.des 2013 04:26, John Dulaney wrote:
Ahoy,
So, I am with Adam on this one (I'm not a mod?). I've been +1 for this
idea for quite some time now.
Johann, I've been around for a long time, even longer than Adam, and I don't
remember the original purpose for the QA group; I do vaguely
Greetings!
We can say with great certainty the Fedora Project is pleased to announce the
release of Fedora 20 (Heisenbug), which coincides with the 10th anniversary
of the creation of the Fedora Project.
Download this leading-edge, free and open source operating system now:
success/failure?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
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 ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
success/failure?
--
test
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 ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
Did it fail badly - leaving you a mess?
Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
Failed for me on
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_
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
Sure but I still couldn't successfully complete the fedup 20 due to the
notice.
On Dec 17, 2013 11:14 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com 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
On Dec 14, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
I really would like to see other people's proposals in this area. I'm
not at all convinced I'm going to be the person who comes up with the
best idea. I'd love to know what cmurf would suggest as an overall
approach to
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
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 09:45 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 14, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
I really would like to see other people's proposals in this area. I'm
not at all convinced I'm going to be the person who comes up with the
best idea. I'd love
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
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
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
Okay. Thanks! I'll try that tonight.
Thanks, Phil
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.comwrote:
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
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013, Akshay Vyas wrote:
If we can do every QA stuff without being a part of QA group then
what's the use of creating a QA group
How do you STOP people from doing QA, and reporting stuff
either to bugzilla or the mailing list? But I think the issue
is that at least one
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 13:29 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
The following Fedora 18 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
241
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-6117/eucalyptus-3.2.2-1.fc18
88
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com 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
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 09:45 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 14, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
I really would like to see other people's proposals in this area. I'm
not at all convinced I'm going to be the person who comes up with the
best idea. I'd love
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 21:21 +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:17:37PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 13:29 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
The following Fedora 18 Security updates need testing:
Age
Adam Williamson wrote:
The submitter has just submitted it for stable, so it should make it on
the next push.
Thanks, Adam. People are usually responsive to my e-mails and the ball starts
rolling.
Wireshark is the last update that needs attention.
--
test mailing list
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 14:59 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Adam Williamson wrote:
The submitter has just submitted it for stable, so it should make it on
the next push.
Thanks, Adam. People are usually responsive to my e-mails and the ball starts
rolling.
Wireshark is the last
upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
The following Fedora 18 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
241
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-6117/eucalyptus-3.2.2-1.fc18
88
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-17195/spice-gtk-0.18-3.fc18
82
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,
The following Fedora 18 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
241
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-6117/eucalyptus-3.2.2-1.fc18
88
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-17195/spice-gtk-0.18-3.fc18
82
On 17/12/13 22:46, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 12/16/2013 11:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
I'm still scratching my head over the other applications not
saving/restoring correctly,
Well, some of these obviously are Gnome3 regressions:
Next bug filed:
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
It did succeed. But I thought it wasn't going to. After reboot into fedup, it
gave *no indication at all* that it was doing anything. I was sure it was
hosed, but left and went to lunch. No visual indication anything was happening,
no flickering of the disk activity light. I switched
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 14:07 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
It did succeed. But I thought it wasn't going to. After reboot into fedup,
it
gave *no indication at all* that it was doing anything. I was sure it was
hosed, but left and went to lunch. No visual indication anything was
happening,
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 12:52:16 +
From: johan...@gmail.com
To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Proposal: let's just use the FAS group already
Purpose and a fact of being elitist group which caused more harm then
good in the QA community and what I'm worried about is
Pics are awaiting approval by the moderator...
Thanks, Phil
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.comwrote:
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
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:59:20AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 14:07 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
After reboot into fedup, it
gave *no indication at all* that it was doing anything. I was sure it was
hosed,
It should show a graphical bootsplash with a
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:45 -0700, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:59:20AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 14:07 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
After reboot into fedup, it
gave *no indication at all* that it was doing anything. I was sure it
was
On þri 17.des 2013 23:05, John Dulaney wrote:
What do you mean, mutilate it to serv it's corporate purpose? Are you
stating that since I now work for Red Hat, I'm evil?
No I'm stating that because of the history and that history should not
be allowed to be forgotten and you are not suddenly
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:45 -0700, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:59:20AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 14:07 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
After reboot into fedup, it
gave *no indication at all* that it was doing anything.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com 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
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 23:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
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
On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 23:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 16:02 -0500, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
So it appears I'm stuck
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 21:47 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 15:16 -0800, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
I have a tendency to upgrade to a new Fedora release as soon as it's
final, and I sometimes upgrade even sooner. ISTM that the official
upgrade process is almost always
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.comwrote:
On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 23:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Tue,
On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:37 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com 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
On 12/18/2013 08:12 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 17, 2013, at 11:37 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com 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
On Dec 18, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com 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 awill...@redhat.com wrote:
I can only think that using fedup 0.7 against upgrade
kernel/image
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 21:47 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 15:16 -0800, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
I have a tendency to upgrade to a new Fedora release as soon as it's
final, and I sometimes upgrade even sooner. ISTM that the official
upgrade process is almost always
52 matches
Mail list logo
