No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-36-20220418.0):
ID: 1234299 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1234299
Passed openQA tests: 15/15 (x86_64), 14/15 (aarch64)
Missing expected images:
Iot dvd aarch64
Iot dvd x86_64
Failed openQA tests: 2/15 (aarch64)
ID: 1234269 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1234269
ID: 1234282 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso release_identification@uefi
URL: https
I'm getting: There are currently no products linked to this invitation code...
---
Chris Murphy
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://d
Adam Jackson wrote:
> Turns out the support story is less bad than I thought, the simpledrm
> change was more powerful than I knew. I've updated the change again
> but the short story is vga= on kcmdline will give you just as good of
> support as UEFI framebuffer.
Or rather, as bad of support, bec
On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 17:49 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >
> Thanks, I have expired the overrides and have read about the side tags.
> Am I understanding correctly that these only work for rawhide?
Nope, you can use them for all releases now.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter
Hi,
Upgrading NetworkManager-sstp to the latest version, I've noticed that
there is a failed test related to missing branch protection on AArch64
[1]. After reading that and [2], I know what it is all about, however, I
wonder what is the best way to apply it to my package?
Should I check if the b
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:09 PM Demi Marie Obenour
wrote:
>
[snip]
> > I'm also not sure I agree it's clear that we'd find more bugs if the
> > fallback path didn't exist. People don't usually just boot straight in
> > "basic graphics mode", after all. They try a regular boot, and if it
> > fai
W dniu 21.04.2022 o 21:22, Julian Sikorski pisze:
Hello,
I have created two PRs against minizip which are yet to be merged:
- https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/minizip/pull-request/3
- https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/minizip/pull-request/4
The first one should be a low risk one and should
On 4/21/22 12:35, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 10:10 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 6:06 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Adam Williamson wrote:
Right now it's not entirely clear whether this is considered part of
the Change scope or no
Hello,
I have created two PRs against minizip which are yet to be merged:
- https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/minizip/pull-request/3
- https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/minizip/pull-request/4
The first one should be a low risk one and should allow pkg-config using
dependencies like (shameles
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 8:39 PM Julian Sikorski wrote:
>
> Am 21.04.22 um 20:30 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> > On 21. 04. 22 20:23, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >> Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
> >>> On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
Am 21.04.22 um 20:30 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 20:23, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Hello,
I have recently created
On 21. 04. 22 20:23, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Hello,
I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
- https
Am 21.04.22 um 20:11 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Hello,
I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-202
On 21. 04. 22 17:49, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Hello,
I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.o
On 22. 03. 22 19:48, Adam Williamson wrote:
now we have convenient self-service side tags,*please use them*.
Especially for something as major as a bump of perl that changes
dependencies of packages built against it like this. Side tags avoid
this mess entirely. Using the mechanism to produce an
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:10 AM Adam Jackson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 6:06 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > Right now it's not entirely clear whether this is considered part of
> > > the Change scope or not. The paragraph about the `uvesafb` drive
On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 10:10 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 6:06 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
> wrote:
> >
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > Right now it's not entirely clear whether this is considered part of
> > > the Change scope or not. The paragraph about the `uvesafb` drive
Hi,
This is the official unresponsive maintainer check for rosslagerwall.
I have tried a direct mail already some time ago, but did not get an answer.
Last login in FAS:
rosslagerwall 2015-12-03
Last package update on bodhi:
2015-10-05 20:52:38 on package libnfs-1.9.8-1.fc22
Associated bz:
htt
Hi,
This is the official unresponsive maintainer check for rosslagerwall.
I have tried a direct mail already some time ago, but did not get an answer.
Last login in FAS:
rosslagerwall 2015-12-03
Last package update on bodhi:
2015-10-05 20:52:38 on package libnfs-1.9.8-1.fc22
Associated bz:
htt
On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 17:21 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
>
> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject
Am 21.04.22 um 17:42 schrieb Miro Hrončok:
On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Hello,
I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
- https://b
On 21. 04. 22 17:21, Julian Sikorski wrote:
Hello,
I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 9:30 AM Julian Sikorski wrote:
> I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
>
> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
> - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FE
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 6/229 (x86_64), 8/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220420.n.0):
ID: 1233509 Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1233509
ID: 1233611 Test: aarch64
Hello,
I have recently created 3 updates to goffice and gnumeric:
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-a7a300f5b1
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9a07603dd6
- https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ab9857bfaf
Despite putting the gnome-chemistr
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 6:06 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
wrote:
>
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Right now it's not entirely clear whether this is considered part of
> > the Change scope or not. The paragraph about the `uvesafb` driver seems
> > kind of aspirational and doesn't seem to commit to anyth
On 21/04/2022 13:20, Vít Ondruch wrote:
It is quite common, to have some sources, which are not available as a
tarball from upstream. In case of rubygem- packages, they quite often do
not ship their test suites. In this case, our .spec file contains
something like [1]:
I prefer a separate mak
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:01 AM Colin Walters wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022, at 7:19 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >
> > - dnf-daemon would be dbus-activated and exit-on-idle after a suitable
> > timeout
>
> This is how rpm-ostree has worked for about 5 years now:
> https://gith
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022, at 7:19 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>
> - dnf-daemon would be dbus-activated and exit-on-idle after a suitable
> timeout
This is how rpm-ostree has worked for about 5 years now:
https://github.com/coreos/rpm-ostree/pull/606
(Lots of useful references in that
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 10/231 (x86_64), 16/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20220419.n.2):
ID: 1232800 Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-i
OLD: Fedora-36-20220420.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220421.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 4
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
Dne 21. 04. 22 v 13:20 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Now I am looking for feedback about general approach. Of course it could be somehow polished and improved to hide some
boiler plate.
This part:
%{echo:%(
[ ! -e %{S:1} ] &&
Looks really clumsy. After reading the
https://pagure.io/packaging-commit
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 6:56 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 20. 04. 22 v 8:55 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a):
>>
>>
>> I've gotta ask... How much memory does the new dnf daemon take while idle?
>
>
> We do not have any measurements right now. Please feel free to test it. We
> have a repository with
Another status update for transparency purposes:
1. openssl-3.0.2-3 and crypto-policies-20220412-1.git97fe449
now distrust SHA-1 signatures in FUTURE policy or NO-SHA1 subpolicy.
Meaning that updating the packages and issuing
`update-crypto-policies --set FUTURE` /
`update-crypto-polic
Hey all,
As we get ready to release Fedora Linux 36, another anticipated moment
has arrived: the Fedora contributor tee shirt giveaway! Sending a huge
“THANK YOU!!” to everyone who works to make Fedora the amazing
community it is. The Mindshare Committee is excited to be able to
share swag with our
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/8 (x86_64), 1/8 (aarch64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-34-20220420.0):
ID: 1233075 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 12:45:48PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 20. 04. 22 v 8:55 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a):
> >
> >
> > I've gotta ask... How much memory does the new dnf daemon take while
> > idle?
> After installation:
> Memory: 1.6M
> CPU: 23ms
>
> After upgrade of fe
Hi,
It is quite common, to have some sources, which are not available as a
tarball from upstream. In case of rubygem- packages, they quite often do
not ship their test suites. In this case, our .spec file contains
something like [1]:
~~~
# Tests are not packaged with the gem. You may get t
Dne 20. 04. 22 v 8:55 Jaroslav Mracek napsal(a):
I've gotta ask... How much memory does the new dnf daemon take while idle?
We do not have any measurements right now. Please feel free to test it. We have a repository with DNF5/Microdnf
nightly builds - https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/c
And its probably down again. Last notification I received was at
2022-04-20 16:37:08 UTC
Vít
Dne 20. 04. 22 v 17:04 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 19. 04. 22 v 20:35 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 07:48:56PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
I think this is broken again. Last notifica
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220419.n.2
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220421.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:1
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 7
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 104
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 59.61 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 11:01 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> > * Compatibility
> > ** To improve user experience and to unify dnf/microdnf behavior we
> > were unable to keep 100% compatibility with formal Microdnf in
> > command-line and in behavior
>
> Can you comment more on this par
> * Compatibility
> ** To improve user experience and to unify dnf/microdnf behavior we
> were unable to keep 100% compatibility with formal Microdnf in
> command-line and in behavior
Can you comment more on this part? yum/dnf command-line and behaviour
compatiblity made adoption fairly easy. (I k
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/MajorUpgradeOfMicrodnf
Overall, the new architecture is a huge improvement and should fix many
of the long-standing issues.
Would it be possible to extend the How To Test section with installation
and commandline-use instructions? Is the stuff planned in t
Hi,
i wrote:
> Whatever, if you want to try already now with the buggy result,
It comes to me that the MBR signature will be missing too. So it won't
be recognized by BIOS and its x86 code won't start.
The signature could be inserted by
echo $'\x55'$'\xAA' | dd of="$new_iso" conv=notrunc bs=1
Hi,
i wrote:
> > Does it boot with ubuntu-21.10-desktop-amd64.iso ?
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> It doesn't. Same error.
> [...]
> $ grub2-mkrescue -o output-mbr.iso --mbr-force-bootable minimal
> gives me the "Operation System not found" BIOS error again.
> > Building something neare
47 matches
Mail list logo
