The following Fedora 20 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
123 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-5897/nrpe-2.15-2.fc20
73
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-7551/asterisk-11.10.2-2.fc20
72
The following Fedora 19 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
311
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19963/openstack-glance-2013.1.4-1.fc19
123 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-5896/nrpe-2.15-2.fc19
74
#452: Proposed Test Day - Jenkins
---+---
Reporter: msrb | Owner: pschindl
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 21
Component: Test Day |Version:
Resolution:| Keywords:
i'm having a strange and recent issue with a commercial PDF editor
running on rawhide that i've been using without issue for quite some
time -- this showed up just a few days ago in conjunction with both a
new release of the product *and* an update of rawhide, so it might be
related to one, the
NOTE: There are no cloud images in TC5 due to some issue with anaconda
and kickstart parsing.
As per the Fedora 21 schedule [1], Fedora 21 Alpha Test Compose 5 (TC5)
is now available for testing. Content information, including changes,
can be found at
I previously had vte-0.34.9-3.fc20 installed in F20 stable (installed on
July 3, which is probably the push date) but a yum distro-sync downgraded it
to vte-0.34.9-2.fc20, and the -3 version does not appear in Bodhi. What
happened to it?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 11:35:59 + (UTC)
Andre Robatino robat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I previously had vte-0.34.9-3.fc20 installed in F20 stable (installed
on July 3, which is probably the push date) but a yum distro-sync
downgraded it to
I could install the F21/Alpha TC5 from the Life x86_64/DVD without any
flaw to a VirtualBox virtual machine (4G ram, 12 GB VDI-Disk, own
partitioning with 10 for / and 2 for swap).
Compared to the very early days of F20, this F21 installation was a
childs play :-)
--
Fedora release 20
Andre Robatino robatino at fedoraproject.org writes:
I previously had vte-0.34.9-3.fc20 installed in F20 stable (installed on
July 3, which is probably the push date) but a yum distro-sync downgraded it
to vte-0.34.9-2.fc20, and the -3 version does not appear in Bodhi. What
happened to it?
Compose started at Tue Sep 2 07:15:02 UTC 2014
Broken deps for armhfp
--
[APLpy]
APLpy-0.9.8-5.fc21.noarch requires pywcs
[PyKDE]
PyKDE-3.16.6-14.fc20.armv7hl requires sip-api(10) = 0:10.0
[PyQuante]
I have this from today:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7509031
Where do I find the checksum for this ISO?
Once dd'd to two different USB sticks, it fails the boot time media check. So
either two downloads are bad, or two sticks are bad, or we have a bug.
Chris Murphy--
downloads are bad, or two sticks are bad, or we have a bug.
This is SHA1.
$ shasum /Users/chris/Downloads/Fedora-Live-Workstation-x86_64-21-20140902.iso
345a461abda525c2f2bf80faae60e09693baa31c
/Users/chris/Downloads/Fedora-Live-Workstation-x86_64-21-20140902.iso
--
test mailing list
test
`On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 10:42 +0200, Petr Schindler wrote:
NOTE: There are no cloud images in TC5 due to some issue with anaconda
and kickstart parsing.
I just wanted to note that there are some more serious known issues than
this. The blocker list was linked in the announcement, but
OK so I downloaded TC5 and I have the same problem:
- the downloaded ISO checksum matches the published one
- when dd'd to multiple USB sticks, it fails rd.live.check
And yet in a VM the image passes rd.live.check. Weird. Bit of a WTF moment here.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
On Sep 2, 2014, at 1:23 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
OK so I downloaded TC5 and I have the same problem:
- the downloaded ISO checksum matches the published one
- when dd'd to multiple USB sticks, it fails rd.live.check
And yet in a VM the image passes rd.live.check.
Hi,
I remember participating the the gnome test day[1]. Yesterday, I finally
decided to take the leap to gnome-documents. I organised a lot of my
documents etc., and in the process crashed into a plethora of bugs. The
I realised that we didn't test documents at all in the test day. We
tested
On 01.09.2014 23:16, poma wrote:
On 01.09.2014 23:15, poma wrote:
On 01.09.2014 17:12, poma wrote:
$ rpm -q xorg-x11-server-Xorg
xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.16.0-6.fc22.x86_64
(EE)
(EE) Backtrace:
(EE) 0: /usr/libexec/Xorg.bin (OsLookupColor+0x119) [0x59bea9]
(EE) 1: /lib64/libc.so.6
17 matches
Mail list logo