| adamw
|
#startmeeting Fedora QA meeting
|
15:01
|
| zodbot
|
Meeting started Mon May 14 15:01:31 2012 UTC. The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
|
15:01
|
| zodbot
|
Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
|
15:01
|
| adamw
|
#meetingname fedora-qa
|
15:01
|
| zodbot
|
The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
|
15:01
|
| adamw
|
#topic roll call
|
15:01
|
| * pschindl is here
|
15:01
|
| * satellit_ listening
|
15:02
|
| * tflink is here
|
15:02
|
| adamw
|
oh goody, lots of people for blocker fun!
|
15:02
|
| * kparal can't miss it
|
15:02
|
| * jskladan tips his hat
|
15:02
|
| * brunowolff is here
|
15:03
|
| adamw
|
how much do you generally tip your hat, anyway? 10%?
|
15:03
|
| * nirik is lurking around
|
15:03
|
| tflink
|
adamw: depends on how quickly my hat brings me drinks and food
|
15:03
|
| * maxamillion is here
|
15:04
|
| adamw
|
alrighty, let's get going
|
15:04
|
| adamw
|
#topic Previous meeting follow-up
|
15:05
|
| adamw
|
just the eternal topic on the list, "adamw to check in on Boxes test day once more"
|
15:05
|
| adamw
|
it's now set for 2012-05-17 and, who knows, may even happen then.,
|
15:05
|
| kparal
|
exciting
|
15:06
|
| maxamillion
|
exciting indeed
|
15:06
|
| adamw
|
now both Duke Nukem Forever and Chinese Democracy exist, I have no idea what to compare it to. =)
|
15:06
|
| maxamillion
|
is there a wiki page for that test day?
|
15:06
|
| tflink
|
adamw: halflife 2 episode 3
|
15:06
|
| adamw
|
ooh, good one.
|
15:06
|
| maxamillion
|
equality in america?
|
15:06
|
| maxamillion
|
>.>
|
15:06
|
| adamw
|
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2012-05-17_Gnome_Boxes
|
15:06
|
| kparal
|
maxamillion: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2012-05-17_Gnome_Boxes
|
15:06
|
| adamw
|
ooh, political!
|
15:06
|
| * maxamillion is very bitter about the NC crap even though he doesn't live there
|
15:07
|
| * adamw is bitter about many things but aims to keep them out of QA meetings
|
15:07
|
| maxamillion
|
adamw, kparal: thanks for the linkage
|
15:07
|
| maxamillion
|
adamw: fair point
|
15:07
|
| adamw
|
#info "adamw to check in on Boxes test day once more": test day has been moved out once more and looks like it may actually happen now
|
15:08
|
| adamw
|
#topic Fedora 17 Final status/planning
|
15:08
|
| adamw
|
welp, here's the big one
|
15:08
|
| maxamillion
|
so gnome boxes is a front end to kvm? ... like virt-manager?
|
15:08
|
| adamw
|
maxam: more or less, yeah. also, vnc.
|
15:09
|
| maxamillion
|
rgr
|
15:09
|
| adamw
|
because it seemed to logically go together, apparently.
|
15:09
|
| tflink
|
adamw: I have IRC stuff prepped we want to do a blocker-review here
|
15:09
|
| adamw
|
yeah, at least the proposed blockers, i think
|
15:09
|
| adamw
|
#topic Fedora 17 Final status/planning: mini-blocker review
|
15:10
|
| adamw
|
take it away, tflink
|
15:10
|
| tflink
|
adamw: chair?
|
15:10
|
| adamw
|
shoot
|
15:11
|
| adamw
|
#chair tflink
|
15:11
|
| zodbot
|
Current chairs: adamw tflink
|
15:11
|
| adamw
|
#chair kparal
|
15:11
|
| zodbot
|
Current chairs: adamw kparal tflink
|
15:11
|
| tflink
|
#topic (820366) Cannot boot 17 Beta installer: /dev/root does not exist
|
15:11
|
| tflink
|
#link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820366
|
15:11
|
| tflink
|
#info Proposed Blocker, NEW
|
15:11
|
| adamw
|
#chair maxamillion
|
15:11
|
| zodbot
|
Current chairs: adamw kparal maxamillion tflink
|
15:11
|
| * j_dulaney waves
|
15:11
|
| * tflink remembers talking with the reporter about this over IRC
|
15:12
|
| adamw
|
bcl seems baffled
|
15:13
|
| tflink
|
I still think that we need more info
|
15:13
|
| tflink
|
it would be helpful if the reporter could try a public mirror
|
15:13
|
| adamw
|
have you verified you can still do PXE installs fine?
|
15:13
|
| maxamillion
|
o.O'
|
15:13
|
| tflink
|
not with TC5, no
|
15:13
|
| tflink
|
TC4 worked, though
|
15:13
|
| j_dulaney
|
If bcl is baffled, then, wow
|
15:13
|
| kparal
|
I booted TC5 anaconda over PXE today, all fine
|
15:14
|
| * j_dulaney did pxe with TC5
|
15:14
|
| kparal
|
I did not finish the installation though, just booted installer
|
15:14
|
| j_dulaney
|
What kparal said
|
15:14
|
| adamw
|
still, it booted
|
15:14
|
| kparal
|
yes
|
15:14
|
| kparal
|
i386
|
15:14
|
| adamw
|
i just wanted to be sure we had enough 'it works' confidence
|
15:14
|
| tflink
|
when I was talking with the reporter, he was attempting PXE with a different initrd/vmlinuz than was on the mirror he was using
|
15:14
|
| tflink
|
he kept changing that up, though
|
15:15
|
| adamw
|
in general i'd be okay with punting, but we don't really have a whole lot of punting room at this point
|
15:15
|
| adamw
|
i'm inclined to go -1 on the info that PXE works for at least two others and probably three
|
15:15
|
| * j_dulaney is -1 blocker at this point
|
15:15
|
| tflink
|
we don't have enough information, what else can we do other than reject it?
|
15:15
|
| tflink
|
reject or punt
|
15:15
|
| pjones
|
I think we've actually seen, very infrequently, reports along these lines for past distros as well, and never could figure it out
|
15:16
|
| pjones
|
tflink: if nobody else can reproduce it, it certainly isn't a blocker
|
15:16
|
| adamw
|
pjones: i just worry about the case where we finally realize 'oh yeah, he has (some trivial difference in config to our other testers) and that triggers a genuine bug'
|
15:17
|
| tflink
|
pjones: assuming that we're not doing something different enough to not hit whatever the reporter is hitting
|
15:17
|
| adamw
|
but it doesn't seem like a huge likelihood at this point, and we can always re-vote it.
|
15:17
|
| tflink
|
true
|
15:17
|
| adamw
|
so, -1
|
15:17
|
| tflink
|
-1
|
15:17
|
| * nirik is -1 given what we know currently
|
15:17
|
| pjones
|
adamw: and if he does - how much configuration is there really in terms of booting the network install image? I'm inclined to say you're talking about /misconfiguring/ something.
|
15:17
|
| brunowolff
|
-1 blocker
|
15:17
|
| * pjones obs -1 as well
|
15:18
|
| kparal
|
-1
|
15:18
|
| adamw
|
pjones: true.
|
15:18
|
| tflink
|
proposed #agreed - 820336 - RejectedBlocker - Other testers have been unable to reproduce the issue described and with the information currently available, this is not severe enough to warrant blocker status.
|
15:18
|
| rbergeron
|
ack
|
15:18
|
| j_dulaney
|
ack
|
15:19
|
| kparal
|
ack
|
15:19
|
| pschindl
|
ack
|
15:19
|
| tflink
|
#agreed - 820336 - RejectedBlocker - Other testers have been unable to reproduce the issue described and with the information currently available, this is not severe enough to warrant blocker status.
|
15:19
|
| tflink
|
#topic (813648) gnome-shell shows blank windows on hardware lacking NPOT textures
|
15:19
|
| tflink
|
#link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813648
|
15:19
|
| tflink
|
#info Proposed Blocker, MODIFIED
|
15:19
|
| tflink
|
was this pulled in to TC5?
|
15:20
|
| adamw
|
yipe!
|
15:21
|
| adamw
|
ironically as this bug came up, my entire desktop suddenly started blacking out
|
15:21
|
| adamw
|
two windows disappeared, then rapidly, all the other interface elements...
|
15:21
|
| adamw
|
tflink: I believe i put it in, yeah
|
15:21
|
| kparal
|
we need someone to test it
|
15:22
|
| tflink
|
adamw: yes, it was in the TC5 request
|
15:22
|
| drago01
|
kparal: easy to test on any hardware
|
15:22
|
| adamw
|
drago01: disable a GL extension?
|
15:22
|
| kparal
|
it needs to be old nvidia
|
15:22
|
| drago01
|
kparal: just run gnome-shell --cogl-debug=disable-npot-textures --replace
|
15:22
|
| j_dulaney
|
adamw: Yeah, I've had my whole screen blanking out then coming back, but not just under Gnome
|
15:23
|
| drago01
|
kparal: no
|
15:23
|
| kparal
|
ah
|
15:23
|
| drago01
|
kparal: you can force it to use that code path
|
15:23
|
| * j_dulaney hasn't quite figured the cause, so no bug report just yet
|
15:23
|
| adamw
|
can you put that info in the bug / update request, drago? thanks!
|
15:23
|
| * kparal is testing it
|
15:23
|
| tflink
|
so, any thoughts on blockery-ness?
|
15:24
|
| drago01
|
adamw: 1) ajax already did 2) don't seem to have enough powers to edit the update despite being provenpacker
|
15:24
|
| kparal
|
+1 blocker, we need to either fix or blacklist
|
15:24
|
| adamw
|
at the last meeting it looks like you kinda fudged this one
|
15:25
|
| adamw
|
took it as nth and left blocker status open
|
15:25
|
| * j_dulaney is also +1 blocker
|
15:25
|
| adamw
|
fwiw i always figured that if we took the low VRAM bug as a blocker we should logically take this too: most hardware affected by low VRAM is also NPOT
|
15:25
|
| tflink
|
yeah, there wasn't a consensus on whether or not it was blocker material
|
15:25
|
| drago01
|
yeah having black textures instead of windows is a clear blocker
|
15:25
|
| drago01
|
+1
|
15:25
|
| adamw
|
so there's not much point fixing the low VRAM bug and not fixing this, because it'll help almost no-one
|
15:25
|
| adamw
|
just a few NV4x users like kparal
|
15:26
|
| tflink
|
if this was the last blocker bug left, would we slip for it?
|
15:26
|
| adamw
|
tflink: i would slip if for some reason we couldn't write a blacklist, yes.
|
15:26
|
| adamw
|
it'd take me 20 seconds to write a blacklist, of course. :)
|
15:26
|
| * rbergeron grins
|
15:26
|
| tflink
|
don't we already have a blacklist, though?
|
15:26
|
| adamw
|
not for this hardware.
|
15:27
|
| adamw
|
er, possibly we do, actually. lemme check exactly what went into beta.
|
15:27
|
| adamw
|
yeah, we only blacklisted NV30 for beta.
|
15:27
|
| adamw
|
so I think we're actually trying to render Shell on NV10/NV20.
|
15:27
|
| kparal
|
I can confirm the fix using that reproducer
|
15:28
|
| brunowolff
|
I have an nv28 that I run in fallback mode that works fine.
|
15:28
|
| tflink
|
looks like we're mostly +1 blocker today
|
15:28
|
| adamw
|
brunowolff: but if you set it to Shell, it probably doesn't render it right?
|
15:29
|
| brunowolff
|
I think the actual effect is a blocker, but I don't know the number of people that will be affected.
|
15:29
|
| adamw
|
we could pull numbers from smolt. i'd ballpark it in the low single digits %age-wise.
|
15:29
|
| adamw
|
low single *whole* digits, though. :)
|
15:30
|
| brunowolff
|
I don't usually use the shell, because I don't like it. There was a point about a month ago where I used the shell by mistake and it broke things.
|
15:30
|
| pjones
|
adamw: .9 is plural.
|
15:30
|
| brunowolff
|
I haven't tried it again since. So I don't know the current status.
|
15:30
|
| tflink
|
proposed #agreed - 813648 - AcceptedBlocker - violates "Following on from the previous criterion, after firstboot is completed and on subsequent boots, a system installed according to any of the above criteria (or the appropriate Beta or Final criteria, when applying this criterion to those releases) must boot to a working graphical environment without unintended user intervention. This includes correctly accessing any encrypted partitions when the co
|
15:31
|
| brunowolff
|
I think a few percent would be significant and worth blocking for.
|
15:31
|
| tflink
|
that criterion is too long :(
|
15:31
|
| adamw
|
tflink: yeah, i keep loading it up.
|
15:31
|
| adamw
|
ack
|
15:31
|
| brunowolff
|
ack
|
15:31
|
| kparal
|
ack
|
15:31
|
| drago01
|
tflink: just assign them numbers so that you can say violates cirterion #X
|
15:31
|
| j_dulaney
|
ack
|
15:32
|
| kparal
|
numbers change in time
|
15:32
|
| tflink
|
#agreed - 813648 - AcceptedBlocker - violates "Following on from the previous criterion, after firstboot is completed and on subsequent boots, a system installed according to any of the above criteria (or the appropriate Beta or Final criteria, when applying this criterion to those releases) must boot to a working graphical environment without unintended user intervention. This includes correctly accessing any encrypted partitions when the correct pas
|
15:32
|
| tflink
|
#topic (820985) Searching for duplicate anaconda bugs while reporting exception against partner-bugzilla during install fails
|
15:32
|
| tflink
|
#link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820985
|
15:32
|
| tflink
|
#info Proposed Blocker, MODIFIED
|
15:32
|
| tflink
|
this is a pretty clear cut blocker to me
|
15:33
|
| adamw
|
well...what data do we lose?
|
15:33
|
| tflink
|
proposed #agreed - 820985 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the F17 alpha release criterion "The installer must be able to report failures to Bugzilla and local disk, with appropriate information included" once bugzilla.redhat.com is upgraded
|
15:33
|
| adamw
|
the info that multiple people are hitting the bug, i guess
|
15:34
|
| tflink
|
adamw: duplicate reporting and it looks bad
|
15:34
|
| adamw
|
all the bugs would still get reported
|
15:34
|
| * adamw just trying to be careful :)
|
15:34
|
| tflink
|
"hey, we hit this problem but we won't let you report it"
|
15:34
|
| kparal
|
sometimes the duplicate detection is totally wrong
|
15:34
|
| tflink
|
the failure mode doesn't say anything about why, just failes with issue (null)
|
15:34
|
| j_dulaney
|
Goes against the bug reporting criterion, I think
|
15:35
|
| adamw
|
tflink: where's that commit from?
|
15:35
|
| * j_dulaney is +1 blocker
|
15:35
|
| tflink
|
adamw: libreport, I think
|
15:35
|
| adamw
|
j_dulaney: yeah, it's a conditional breakage of that criterion in the case of 'reporting a dupe bug'
|
15:35
|
| tflink
|
I don't think we have a new build yet, though
|
15:35
|
| kparal
|
ack
|
15:35
|
| adamw
|
tflink: note you'll want the next patch in the series too
|
15:36
|
| adamw
|
as the first one just unconditionally changes to 'id'
|
15:36
|
| adamw
|
so it'd break existing bugzilla instead =) the next one queries version and DTRT
|
15:36
|
| adamw
|
okay, ack.
|
15:36
|
| tflink
|
proposed #agreed - 820985 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the F17 alpha release criterion "The installer must be able to report failures to Bugzilla and local disk, with appropriate information included" for detected duplicates once bugzilla.redhat.com is upgraded
|
15:36
|
| kparal
|
ack
|
15:37
|
| brunowolff
|
ack
|
15:37
|
| tflink
|
#agreed - 820985 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the F17 alpha release criterion "The installer must be able to report failures to Bugzilla and local disk, with appropriate information included" for detected duplicates once bugzilla.redhat.com is upgraded
|
15:37
|
| tflink
|
#topic (821122) repoclosure failure on 17.TC5 DVDs (zif)
|
15:37
|
| tflink
|
#link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821122
|
15:37
|
| tflink
|
#info Proposed Blocker, NEW
|
15:37
|
| adamw
|
well, ack, repoclosure. but how did this happen?
|
15:37
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: ?
|
15:37
|
| adamw
|
hum. i see two versions of PackageKit in the file list.
|
15:38
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: it failed because we exclude every javadoc package
|
15:38
|
| tflink
|
proposed #agreed - 821122 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the Fedora 17 alpha criterion "There must be no file conflicts (cases where the files in some packages conflict but the packages have explicit Conflicts: tags are acceptable) or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (DVD) install"
|
15:39
|
| j_dulaney
|
+1 blocker
|
15:39
|
| adamw
|
this is PackageKit-zif.
|
15:39
|
| dgilmore
|
i tried a few things to pull in just the one requested
|
15:39
|
| j_dulaney
|
ack
|
15:39
|
| kparal
|
acl
|
15:39
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: wrong bug.
|
15:39
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: im going to have to remove the removal of javadoc packages
|
15:39
|
| brunowolff
|
Pungi will pull in all matches, so if two versions are available, I think you get both.
|
15:39
|
| tflink
|
#agreed - 821122 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the Fedora 17 alpha criterion "There must be no file conflicts (cases where the files in some packages conflict but the packages have explicit Conflicts: tags are acceptable) or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (DVD) install"
|
15:39
|
| brunowolff
|
ack
|
15:39
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: what bug is it?
|
15:39
|
| j_dulaney
|
kparal: Atlantic Coast Line
|
15:39
|
| adamw
|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813648 . wrong version of PackageKit-zif on the DVD.
|
15:39
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: the mysql one the package wasnt pushed to stable so we have bothe versions
|
15:39
|
| tflink
|
j_dulaney: access control list :)
|
15:39
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: we exclude PackageKit-zif from being on the dvd
|
15:40
|
| adamw
|
well, that doesn't appear to be working
|
15:40
|
| adamw
|
i think i can see part of the answer
|
15:40
|
| adamw
|
PackageKit has an open-ended "Requires: PackageKit-backend"
|
15:40
|
| adamw
|
still, no, that doesn't explain why it'd pull an old zif...gr.
|
15:40
|
| adamw
|
oh hey, i linked the wrong bug. heh.
|
15:41
|
| brunowolff
|
dgilmore: I add some more info to bug 819138 that might allow us to exclude javadoc stuff without adding two many lines to the ks file.
|
15:41
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: sorry, it's https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821122 . still can't see why it'd happen, though. i'm guessing it's somehow related to both PK builds being on the DVD, but that's as far as I can getr.
|
15:41
|
| brunowolff
|
I haven't properly tested it thow.
|
15:41
|
| * jskladan is back after interwebz failure
|
15:41
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: there is a packagekit update in the bleed repo
|
15:42
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: yes.
|
15:42
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: some subpackage must have changed arch or something to cause both to be pulled in
|
15:42
|
| j_dulaney
|
So, why exactly are we bringing in two PK builds?
|
15:42
|
| adamw
|
j_dulaney: it sometimes happens when we want to pull in a new build from the side repo
|
15:43
|
| adamw
|
since the older build is still in the main repo
|
15:43
|
| j_dulaney
|
Ah
|
15:43
|
| adamw
|
depending on dependencies (hah), that can result in both winding up on the media
|
15:43
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: and my run of repoclosure on the tc5 tree did not show any PackageKit issues
|
15:43
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: i guess we can just see what happens with TC6/RC1 if we do a stable push first
|
15:44
|
| * j_dulaney doesn't quite see how that makes sense
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
Repos looked at: 1
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
f17-TC5
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
Num Packages in Repos: 3346
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
package: 1:eclipse-jdt-4.2.0-0.20.I201205031800.fc17.x86_64 from f17-TC5
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
unresolved deps:
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
java-javadoc >= 1:1.7.0
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
package: 1:mysql-connector-java-5.1.17-4.fc17.x86_64 from f17-TC5
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
unresolved deps:
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
libgcj_bc.so.1()(64bit)
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
java-gcj-compat >= 0:1.0.31
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
java-gcj-compat >= 0:1.0.31
|
15:44
|
| dgilmore
|
thats what i got and what i expected
|
15:44
|
| adamw
|
j_dulaney: see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819139 for one example of a case where it happens
|
15:44
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: what do you think of the 'push it stable and try again' plan?
|
15:45
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: i pushed stable what i could on friday
|
15:45
|
| adamw
|
we'd need more karma on https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-7740 , everyone.
|
15:45
|
| adamw
|
yeah, we can get some karma in and do another.
|
15:45
|
| j_dulaney
|
Testing
|
15:46
|
| tflink
|
is FESCo right after us or is there an hour gap?
|
15:46
|
| kparal
|
FESCo is from 17 UTC
|
15:46
|
| fossjon
|
y wud a bug fix need karma lol just apply it man
|
15:47
|
| maxamillion
|
adamw: firing up a VM, should have karma in shortly
|
15:47
|
| tflink
|
ok, just making sure
|
15:47
|
| tflink
|
fossjon: assuming that your question was more serious than your phrasing - because it could cause regressions that are worse than the current situation
|
15:48
|
| j_dulaney
|
Dang it, getting mirror wonkiness
|
15:48
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: the issue with PackageKit is the update dropped 5 subpackages
|
15:48
|
| j_dulaney
|
There we go
|
15:48
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: i checked that zif was in there, though?
|
15:48
|
| dgilmore
|
well maybe not
|
15:48
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: yeah seems we dropped the excluding of zif somewhere
|
15:49
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: need to add that back
|
15:49
|
| adamw
|
okay
|
15:49
|
| tflink
|
that's all of the proposed blockers
|
15:49
|
| j_dulaney
|
packagekit updating, will test when complete
|
15:49
|
| adamw
|
can people vote on proposed NTH in the bug reports, please?
|
15:50
|
| adamw
|
i'll go through and gather up votes later
|
15:50
|
| * nirik sees 820750 is bouncing back and forth between anaconda and desktop. Fun times. ;(
|
15:50
|
| * tflink will put together a requested blocker karma/testing/voting email after this meeting
|
15:51
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: but when i ran repoclosure on the TC5 tree i did not see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821122
|
15:51
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: so i dont know how robitno did
|
15:51
|
| * j_dulaney added PK karma
|
15:52
|
| adamw
|
dgilmore: ran it on the media not the tree?
|
15:53
|
| nirik
|
if it was excluded from the dvd, and they installed, repoclosure would see it as missing because only the old one is in the repos...
|
15:53
|
| * adamw will brb, call of nature
|
15:53
|
| adamw
|
if someone wants to move on through the agenda, please do
|
15:53
|
| dgilmore
|
adamw: the tree is the media
|
15:53
|
| dgilmore
|
ls /srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-*
|
15:53
|
| dgilmore
|
/srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-0.7.4-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm /srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-gstreamer-plugin-0.7.
|
15:53
|
| adamw
|
note the go/no-go has been moved to thursday
|
15:53
|
| dgilmore
|
/srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-0.7.4-2.fc17.x86_64.rpm /srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-gtk3-module-0.7.4-2.f
|
15:53
|
| dgilmore
|
/srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-command-not-found-0.7.4-2.fc17.x86_64.rpm /srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-qt-0.7.4-2.fc17.x86_6
|
15:53
|
| dgilmore
|
/srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-device-rebind-0.7.4-2.fc17.x86_64.rpm /srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-yum-0.7.4-2.fc17.x86_
|
15:54
|
| dgilmore
|
/srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-glib-0.7.4-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm /srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-yum-plugin-0.7.4-2.fc
|
15:54
|
| dgilmore
|
/srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-glib-0.7.4-2.fc17.x86_64.rpm /srv/pungi/17.TC5/17-TC5/Fedora/x86_64/os/Packages/p/PackageKit-zif-0.7.4-1.fc17.x86_
|
15:54
|
| * kparal notes PackageKit-0.7.4-2.fc17 now has enough karma for stable repo
|
15:54
|
| dgilmore
|
thats pretty clearly not right though
|
15:54
|
| nirik
|
yeah. ;(
|
15:54
|
| tflink
|
anything else on this or are we good to move on?
|
15:55
|
| tflink
|
moving on, then :)
|
15:56
|
| tflink
|
#topic Upcoming QA Events
|
15:56
|
| tflink
|
looking a the agenda, there are 2 events coming up
|
15:56
|
| tflink
|
#info GNOME Boxes test day scheduled for 2012-05-17
|
15:56
|
| * nirik has an item for open floor when that arrives.
|
15:56
|
| * tflink hasn't looked into it himself but hears that it might actually happen this time
|
15:57
|
| * jskladan sacrifices a pig...
|
15:57
|
| j_dulaney
|
Can I have the bacon?
|
15:57
|
| tflink
|
nirik: ok, will ping you @ open floor when we get there
|
15:57
|
| * j_dulaney will actually do his job and promote it
|
15:58
|
| tflink
|
how confidant are we that it'll actually happen this time?
|
15:58
|
| tflink
|
they should probably update those media links :)
|
15:58
|
| tflink
|
I see test cases, though
|
15:58
|
| jskladan
|
pschindl might know, if he's still into that
|
15:59
|
| tflink
|
the matrix needs to be updated but that should be pretty easy
|
15:59
|
| pschindl
|
I wasn't working on it this week
|
15:59
|
| adamw
|
back
|
15:59
|
| tflink
|
but I'm not sure there is much we can do from our end right now
|
15:59
|
| pschindl
|
but I think it's on good way
|
15:59
|
| tflink
|
#action j_dulaney to actually do his job and promote the GNOME boxes test day
|
16:00
|
| * j_dulaney is writing the blog post even now
|
16:00
|
| tflink
|
adamw: ok, I think we're pretty much done with discussing the GNOME boxes test day
|
16:00
|
| tflink
|
the only other thing is the go/no-go meeting on thursday 2012-05-17
|
16:02
|
| tflink
|
not much to say there, either
|
16:02
|
| tflink
|
need an RC, need testing :)
|
16:02
|
| tflink
|
I think that's it for upcoming events, though
|
16:02
|
| cmurf
|
when is RC expected?
|
16:02
|
| j_dulaney
|
Never
|
16:03
|
| tflink
|
cmurf: soon :)
|
16:03
|
| cmurf
|
I suspected this answer.
|
16:03
|
| adamw
|
#info go/no-go has been rescheduled to 2012-05-17
|
16:03
|
| adamw
|
cmurf: you can pick either. :P
|
16:03
|
| cmurf
|
Wait what are my choices again?
|
16:04
|
| tflink
|
"real soon now" and "never"
|
16:04
|
| j_dulaney
|
I was first with a reply, so my answer takes precedence
|
16:04
|
| j_dulaney
|
!
|
16:04
|
| cmurf
|
These are binary options?
|
16:04
|
| adamw
|
oh, for the love of...
|
16:05
|
| spot
|
as thrilling as this is...
|
16:06
|
| adamw
|
now my desktop has hit another damn bug. sigh.
|
16:06
|
| adamw
|
#topic AutoQA update
|
16:06
|
| adamw
|
#info no news due to Final testing
|
16:06
|
| adamw
|
#topic open floor
|
16:06
|
| adamw
|
floor is open for an extremely limited engagement
|
16:06
|
| spot
|
820973
|
16:06
|
| spot
|
can we revisit that quickly?
|
16:06
|
| cmurf
|
Bug 810104 needs to be reopened I think
|
16:06
|
| tflink
|
adamw: you missed a topic
|
16:06
|
| adamw
|
yes
|
16:06
|
| adamw
|
tflink: what did I miss?
|
16:06
|
| j_dulaney
|
tflink: He closed it
|
16:06
|
| tflink
|
adamw: pending RHBZ awesomeness
|
16:07
|
| adamw
|
tflink: oh. well, i thought you said we were done with upcoming events.
|
16:07
|
| tflink
|
I wasn't thinking of it as an upcoming event, I guess
|
16:07
|
| tflink
|
more of a question of how much we care about our current tools
|
16:07
|
| adamw
|
tflink: oh, you made it a sub-topic of upcoming events in the agenda.
|
16:07
|
| * kparal is confused
|
16:08
|
| tflink
|
yeah, I screwed up the formatting
|
16:08
|
| adamw
|
#topic Open floor: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820973
|
16:08
|
| adamw
|
so, see comment #2, i'm okay with considering it not a blocker on the basis the menu item actually works as intende
|
16:08
|
| adamw
|
s
|
16:08
|
| adamw
|
intended. grr.
|
16:08
|
| kparal
|
no changes needed in software -> no bug
|
16:08
|
| j_dulaney
|
+1
|
16:08
|
| * spot isn't even sure it merits a NTH, since no package update would be needed
|
16:08
|
| * j_dulaney will go for that
|
16:09
|
| kparal
|
we can't force transmission upstream to create those pages
|
16:09
|
| adamw
|
yeah, i don't see what we can change as nth
|
16:09
|
| kparal
|
just close NOTABUG or CANTFIX
|
16:09
|
| j_dulaney
|
CANTFIX better
|
16:09
|
| tflink
|
CANTFIX seems closer in this case
|
16:09
|
| adamw
|
propose #agreed #820973 is no longer considered a blocker as the menu entry works as intended, but upstream has not yet written the online documentation to which it points
|
16:10
|
| jskladan
|
ack
|
16:10
|
| tflink
|
ack
|
16:10
|
| spot
|
ackity ack
|
16:10
|
| pschindl
|
ack
|
16:10
|
| kparal
|
ack
|
16:10
|
| j_dulaney
|
ack
|
16:10
|
| adamw
|
#agreed #820973 is no longer considered a blocker as the menu entry works as intended, but upstream has not yet written the online documentation to which it points
|
16:11
|
| adamw
|
someone suggested...
|
16:11
|
| adamw
|
#topic Open floor: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810104
|
16:11
|
| adamw
|
cmurf: oh, you. in general, please don't assume Macs ever behave like anything else.
|
16:11
|
| cmurf
|
I don't ever assume such craziness.
|
16:12
|
| adamw
|
has anyone yet tested writing TC4/TC5 to actual silver disc and booting it EFI on a non-mac?
|
16:12
|
| * j_dulaney has no EFI h/w
|
16:12
|
| * nirik neither.
|
16:13
|
| spot
|
adamw: there isn't too much non-mac EFI around, matthew might have some
|
16:13
|
| adamw
|
if not, let's leave it open to testing. the test is in the matrix anyway.
|
16:13
|
| adamw
|
spot: i have one. i think satellit does.
|
16:13
|
| * tflink does as well
|
16:13
|
| spot
|
i stand corrected.
|
16:13
|
| adamw
|
#action adamw and tflink to check status of #810104 with TC5
|
16:14
|
| adamw
|
okay, back to...
|
16:14
|
| adamw
|
#topic Pending RHBZ upgrade
|
16:14
|
| adamw
|
you have the floor, tflink
|
16:14
|
| tflink
|
there is an upgrade to RHBZ scheduled for 2012-05-19
|
16:14
|
| tflink
|
I probably should have done this earlier, but I started testing stuff against the staging instance to make sure that stuff doesn't explode
|
16:15
|
| adamw
|
because, y'know, it's a great time to do that.
|
16:15
|
| tflink
|
at least it's not 2012-05-21 any more
|
16:15
|
| adamw
|
Reasons We Need A Fedora Bugzilla, #546633
|
16:15
|
| tflink
|
adamw: I hear a volunteer to setup and admin :)
|
16:16
|
| j_dulaney
|
LOL
|
16:16
|
| tflink
|
anyways, there is breakage
|
16:16
|
| tflink
|
there are going to be issues with libreport in released installers
|
16:16
|
| tflink
|
but I'm not so worried about that
|
16:16
|
| tflink
|
the script that makes the blocker bug wiki page will not work with the new RHBZ
|
16:16
|
| tflink
|
neither will the script I use to help with blocker review meetings
|
16:17
|
| tflink
|
there are other issues, but those are outside the scope of QA
|
16:17
|
| nirik
|
so, we just need to have f17 ready to go before then, right? ;)
|
16:17
|
| * nirik runs
|
16:17
|
| kparal
|
is it hard to update those scripts?
|
16:17
|
| tflink
|
my question is - how useful is the blocker wiki page?
|
16:17
|
| kparal
|
I use it exclusively
|
16:18
|
| adamw
|
pretty useful. though sometimes problematic
|
16:18
|
| adamw
|
i found out recently it doesn't cover indirect blockers
|
16:18
|
| tflink
|
kparal: jlaska and I poked at it on friday, it won't be a trivial fix
|
16:18
|
| adamw
|
i.e. it doesn't list https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819371 , because it doesn't block f17blocker directly
|
16:18
|
| tflink
|
there has been some talk about re-thinking that to be a little more sophisticated
|
16:18
|
| adamw
|
you can use custom bugzilla searches to do everything the page does functionally, but it's nowhere near as nice a layout.
|
16:18
|
| tflink
|
the wiki page or some replacement, I mean
|
16:18
|
| brunowolff
|
I once looked at doing something similar for verified bugs.
|
16:18
|
| tflink
|
so my question is - is making sure the wiki page works post RHBZ-upgrade important enough to do instead of some testing?
|
16:19
|
| tflink
|
or do we leave it alone for F17 and work on some sort of replacement for F18+
|
16:19
|
| adamw
|
the other annoyance with the custom search approach is you have to keep making new searches for alpha, beta, final, next release alpha, beta, final, ad infinitum
|
16:19
|
| brunowolff
|
It looked possible to add recursive searching with a postgres backend, but I ended up doing other stuff instead of working on that.
|
16:19
|
| adamw
|
tflink: no.
|
16:20
|
| adamw
|
tflink: leave it alone until we sign off on f17.
|
16:20
|
| tflink
|
adamw: no? to what?
|
16:20
|
| j_dulaney
|
tflink: Leave it for f18
|
16:20
|
| adamw
|
it's not more important than testing.
|
16:20
|
| adamw
|
i can throw up some shared bugzilla searches for f17 final.
|
16:20
|
| * jskladan is afk for a while
|
16:20
|
| j_dulaney
|
tflink: But, yeah, the wiki page is way useful
|
16:20
|
| kparal
|
I think it's enough to replace the wiki contents with links to bz queries once rhbz is updated
|
16:20
|
| tflink
|
adamw: I know that you think that way - AFAIK, you don't even like the current wiki page
|
16:20
|
| kparal
|
and fix it for f18
|
16:20
|
| adamw
|
tflink: er, that's not what i said?
|
16:20
|
| adamw
|
"<adamw> pretty useful. though sometimes problematic"
|
16:21
|
| tflink
|
adamw: ok, I'm mistaken
|
16:21
|
| brunowolff
|
Is there going to be an outage during the cut over for a significant amount of time?
|
16:21
|
| * nirik nods. Shouldn't spend energy on this now, work on f17, _then_ work on fixing it or redoing it.
|
16:21
|
| tflink
|
brunowolff: 3 hours are planned
|
16:21
|
| nirik
|
brunowolff: it's 3 hours I think
|
16:21
|
| tflink
|
ok, works for me. just figured that I would bring it up so it isn't a surprise
|
16:21
|
| brunowolff
|
That's not too bad unless it hits a blocker meeting.
|
16:21
|
| tflink
|
brunowolff: it won't if we don't slip :)
|
16:22
|
| tflink
|
nvm, I misread
|
16:22
|
| * j_dulaney sees that as unlikely
|
16:22
|
| tflink
|
the upgrade is on saturday
|
16:22
|
| adamw
|
oh good, i'm scheduled to drink myself into a coma on friday, so no conflicts!
|
16:23
|
| tflink
|
so it won't hit the blocker meeting on friday unless it is beyond epic :)
|
16:23
|
| nirik
|
yeah, but if we slip we will have no webpage or blockerscript tools... but I hope we can muddle along.
|
16:23
|
| tflink
|
nirik: if it's only a week, I can do it by hand
|
16:23
|
| nirik
|
yeah.
|
16:23
|
| adamw
|
that's how i always used to do it anyway.
|
16:23
|
| tflink
|
I/we/whomever
|
16:23
|
| nirik
|
and hopefully numbers of bugs would be small.
|
16:23
|
| j_dulaney
|
tflink: You've doomed us to an uber blocker meeting
|
16:23
|
| adamw
|
right
|
16:23
|
| * j_dulaney notes that he may not be available for said meeting
|
16:24
|
| * tflink will ask jlaska to stop running the script after the meeting on friday
|
16:24
|
| adamw
|
okay
|
16:25
|
| adamw
|
i'll put together some saved searches and send out a mail or something
|
16:25
|
| tflink
|
we'll figure out what we want to do post F17
|
16:25
|
| tflink
|
hopefully bodhi will work with the new RHBZ :)
|
16:26
|
| nirik
|
yeah, lmacken is going to be doing testing with it this week.
|
16:27
|
| nirik
|
hopefully no big issues.
|
16:27
|
| tflink
|
yeah, I'm hoping that isn't going to be a problem
|
16:27
|
| tflink
|
but considering what we were hitting on friday, I'm not sure how likely it is :'(
|
16:27
|
| j_dulaney
|
Why, oh why, are they doing it at this point in the release cycle?
|
16:28
|
| tflink
|
ok, that's all I wanted to bring up
|
16:28
|
| adamw
|
okay.
|
16:29
|
| adamw
|
j_dulaney: note that it's bugzilla.redhat.com .
|
16:29
|
| tflink
|
j_dulaney: the original F17 release was supposed to have happened already :)
|
16:29
|
| adamw
|
oh, and that.
|
16:29
|
| adamw
|
okay
|
16:29
|
| adamw
|
we did open floor already
|
16:29
|
| adamw
|
but let's just re-check
|
16:30
|
| tflink
|
adamw: nirik had something for open floor
|
16:30
|
| adamw
|
oh, and log that section
|
16:30
|
| nirik
|
oh yeah...
|
16:30
|
| adamw
|
#info Bugzilla will be upgraded to 4.2 on 2012-05-19
|
16:30
|
| adamw
|
#info this may cause problems for bug reporting from anaconda in older releases, and will break our 'current release blockers' wiki page and blocker meeting helper scripts
|
16:30
|
| adamw
|
#action adamw to create some shared bugzilla searches for F17 final blocker/nth to replace the wiki page
|
16:31
|
| adamw
|
#info tflink will look into options for the broken tools once f17 is signed off
|
16:31
|
| adamw
|
#topic Open floor
|
16:31
|
| brunowolff
|
I notice that bugmail is now going to come in html by default. I'll be turning that off (html) right away.
|
16:31
|
| adamw
|
what's up, nirik?
|
16:31
|
| nirik
|
so, I thought I would mention to QA folks: I was looking at updating boot.fedoraproject.org... it's been on my list for a long time. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/2012-May/011721.html we can back it out if it causes problems easily. I don't know how many people use b.fp.o. There is no release critera affected.
|
16:31
|
| tflink
|
brunowolff: wait, what? really? damnation, I'll have to change that option, too
|
16:32
|
| nirik
|
but perhaps down the road we should add it to critera, etc.
|
16:32
|
| nirik
|
brunowolff: ? yuck
|
16:32
|
| adamw
|
nirik: yeah, it's like EC2 at present, not covered but probably should be.
|
16:32
|
| brunowolff
|
http://www.bugzilla.org/releases/4.2/release-notes.html#v42_feat_email
|
16:32
|
| tflink
|
adamw: isn't EC2 covered?
|
16:32
|
| nirik
|
anyhow, wanted to mention it, and get any feedback about it... and testing would of course be welcome after it's switched.
|
16:33
|
| tflink
|
as final - the Xen release criteria
|
16:33
|
| adamw
|
tflink: well, sorta indirectly, yeah.
|
16:33
|
| j_dulaney
|
nirik: Propose a test day
|
16:33
|
| tflink
|
adamw: EC2 was the reason we wrote that criterion, though
|
16:33
|
| adamw
|
that criterion probably wouldn't cover just some kind of error in our EC2 applicance image, though. well, burn that bridge when we get to it.
|
16:34
|
| adamw
|
not entirely. ec2 is one of the major reasons we accepted the principle of xen being a final blocker.
|
16:34
|
| j_dulaney
|
BURNING BRIDGES!
|
16:34
|
| adamw
|
but that was more 'use of fedora on ec2' than 'use of any specific image fedora project releases for ec2'
|
16:34
|
| * j_dulaney is a pyro
|
16:34
|
| nirik
|
j_dulaney: sure...
|
16:34
|
| adamw
|
anyhow...we're way over time
|
16:34
|
| brunowolff
|
That's a good song.
|
16:34
|
| adamw
|
#info nirik will be updating boot.fedoraproject.org for F17, he welcomes input and testing
|
16:35
|
| nirik
|
ipxe should add lots of more hardware support, FYI.
|
16:35
|
| nirik
|
and some wireless even
|
16:35
|
| adamw
|
oh yay.
|
16:36
|
| adamw
|
okay...so, anything else? last call!
|
16:36
|
| * nirik has nothing
|
16:36
|
| adamw
|
well FINALLY you're satisfied
|
16:37
|
| adamw
|
:P
|
16:37
|
| nirik
|
:)
|
16:37
|
| adamw
|
thanks for coming, all
|
16:37
|
| adamw
|
time to go bash some blockers
|
16:37
|
| adamw
|
#endmeeting
|
16:37
|
