EC2 AMIs from F30 Candidate Beta-1.7 are available here for testing -
x86_64:
Fedora-Cloud-Base-30_Beta-1.7.x86_64 eu-west-2
ami-07113cd6306968db2 hvm gp2
Fedora-Cloud-Base-30_Beta-1.7.x86_64 ap-northeast-1
ami-078b26746abbe6bcc hvm gp2
Fedora-Cloud-Base-30_Bet
Yesterday I tried to install Fed30 beta-1.7 on a Dell Precision 5530.
(late 2018 model, i5-8300H & UHD graphics 630, came with Ubuntu 18.04
and had Fed29 installed and working without problems)
Almost immediately after the first few lines of the startup messages
the screen went black and nothing
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 16:28 +0100, AV wrote:
> Yesterday I tried to install Fed30 beta-1.7 on a Dell Precision 5530.
> (late 2018 model, i5-8300H & UHD graphics 630, came with Ubuntu 18.04
> and had Fed29 installed and working without problems)
> Almost immediately after the first few lines of th
Had the same thing happen on my Lenovo W530 on F29.
Issue is there regardless of kernel (4.20 or 5.0.3)
I created bug 1692817, I found 2 work arounds so far.
1) switch from gdm to sddm or another dm
2) or remove rhgb from GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX
Upon further testing this morning appears like reintr
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 12:15 -0400, Michael Erwin wrote:
> Had the same thing happen on my Lenovo W530 on F29.
>
> Issue is there regardless of kernel (4.20 or 5.0.3)
Then it's probably not actually the same bug. Since for AV, 4.20 works.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw |
EC2 AMIs from F30 Beta-1.8 Candidate are available here for testing -
x86_64:
Fedora-Cloud-Base-30_Beta-1.8.x86_64 eu-west-2
ami-046c505fbb4c86bd4 hvm gp2
Fedora-Cloud-Base-30_Beta-1.8.x86_64 ap-northeast-1
ami-017383174198e2937 hvm gp2
Fedora-Cloud-Base-30_Bet
AdamW, You are correct. I could get to the text terminals and login with either
kernel.
-Mike
304.638.8909
This plant powered email is RFC 1925 compliant. No electrons were harmed during
composition.
> On Mar 26, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 12:15
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 6/142 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
ID: 372170 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/372170
ID: 372190 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso apps_startstop
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/37219
Hi folks!
So at last week's Fedora 30 Beta Go/No-Go meeting, it was decided that
the Basic release criterion:
"Boot menu contents
The boot menu for all supported installer and live images should
include an entry which causes both installation and the installed
system to use a generic, highly com
OLD: Fedora-30-20190324.n.0
NEW: Fedora-30-20190326.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:3
Dropped images: 5
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 2
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 11:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> The justification for this is, I hope I am correctly representing all
> views here (please say so if not), that this mechanism is both less
> necessary (due to a general reduction in the amount of 'weird' graphics
> hardware out there,
Could someone please point me to the current method to determine if a
package passed testing prior to being shipped? I'm having issues with a
package on Fedora 29 and the errors I'm seeing make it look like it was
shipped without ever actually having been installed and run... (ceph and
associat
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-03-26 11:38 (UTC-0700):
To be clear, this is about DDX drivers, not kernel drivers, right? Seeing
"driver" used willy nilly in discussing video issues and configuration is
confusing.
> ...when a *new* graphics card comes out, one that the
> nouveau driver doesn't
Missing expected images:
Atomichost raw-xz x86_64
Atomichost qcow2 x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 14/142 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
ID: 372528 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/372528
ID: 372529 Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_defa
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 15:33 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> Adam Williamson composed on 2019-03-26 11:38 (UTC-0700):
>
> To be clear, this is about DDX drivers, not kernel drivers, right? Seeing
> "driver" used willy nilly in discussing video issues and configuration is
> confusing.
The mail you're
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 11:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> The justification for this is, I hope I am correctly representing all
> views here (please say so if not), that this mechanism is both less
> necessary (due to a general reduction in the amount of 'weird' graphics
> hardware out there, an
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 15:30 -0400, Andrew J. Hutton wrote:
> Could someone please point me to the current method to determine if a
> package passed testing prior to being shipped?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy
> I'm having issues
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 16:02 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> So with the above caveat understood that "work correctly" has a bunch
> of asterisks next to it and you will probably be able to tell that
> you're using a fallback path, I don't think it's intrinsically less
> likely that graphics fallback w
Due to the context and actual bugs, and what we see during the argues, the
main idea about "work correctly" is that you should be able to launch a
working desktop where typical use of some tools and specialy the installer
process can be launched and executed with success.
Yeah, with caveats, a sub
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 15:19 +, rawh...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> According to the schedule [1], Fedora 30 Candidate Beta-1.8 is now
> available for testing. Please help us complete all the validation
> testing! For more information on release validation testing, see:
> https://fedoraproject.or
My two cents:
If there's a fallback option, and if the user selects it, they
shouldn't end up in an unambiguous state. Right now we're seeing
systems hanging. I'd rather see a crash than a hang where the user
can't get to a shell, and sees no useful information on the screen
that tells them why th
Turns out there's a bug report on this; time to add a new dependency and get an
update out? :)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662496
On 3/26/19 4:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 15:30 -0400, Andrew J. Hutton wrote:
Could someone please point me to the current
22 matches
Mail list logo
