On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 9:36 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> While handling this bug with a Common Bugs report is suboptimal, it
> has long been expected that users should read Common Bugs before
> installing or upgrading their systems. Making that advice more
> prominent might be reasonable.
I never
On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 1:45 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> This makes the assumption, which was also made earlier in the thread,
> that it's somehow impossible to check what bootloader is installed.
> Why? My bootloader is happy to tell me its version:
> $ bootctl
> ...
> Curren
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1706481
Jitka Plesnikova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
Fixed In Version|
On 5/5/19 7:59 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 7:49 AM Roberto Ragusa wrote:
[root@localhost ~]# grep fedora-release /root/install.log
Installing fedora-release-3-8.i386.
[root@localhost ~]# uname -a
Linux localhost 5.0.4-200.fc29.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Mar 25 02:27:33 UTC 2019
Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 12:33 -0400, Steve Grubb a écrit :
> On Sunday, May 5, 2019 11:39:50 AM EDT Nicolas Mailhot via devel
> wrote:
> > It would be nice to have a robust upgradeable bootloader setup. I'm
> > pretty
> > sure that ranks before having a pretty flicker-free boot to Fedora
> > user
Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 16:14 -0600, Chris Murphy a écrit :
>
> Right and that's the same with beta testing, which is how bugs like
> this can sometimes not even get found until after release. A lot of
> tests are done on pristine systems that are throw away. It's entirely
> understandable few p
We have orphaned rubygem-paranoia discussing co-maintainer, as It is
not a required package to install Rails.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1675942#c7
--
Jun Aruga / He - His - Him
jar...@redhat.com / IRC: jaruga
___
devel mailing list --
I wish you have removed @ruby-packagers-sig from the list of maintainers
prior orphaning the package. Anyway, I have opened releng ticket to get
this fixed:
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8328
Vít
Dne 06. 05. 19 v 12:03 Jun Aruga napsal(a):
> We have orphaned rubygem-paranoia discussing co-ma
On 5/6/19 10:46 AM, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 12:33 -0400, Steve Grubb a écrit :
On Sunday, May 5, 2019 11:39:50 AM EDT Nicolas Mailhot via devel
wrote:
It would be nice to have a robust upgradeable bootloader setup. I'm
pretty
sure that ranks before having a pr
Hey everyone, I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting tomorrow, Monday, May
6. Adam is on vacation and we don't have many action items from last week
that we need to discuss, at least not right away. If you have something
urgent, please send a message to the test list or respond to this email.
Other
On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 09:52 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
> Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 16:14 -0600, Chris Murphy a écrit :
> > Right and that's the same with beta testing, which is how bugs like
> > this can sometimes not even get found until after release. A lot of
> > tests are done on p
Thanks for the action, Vit.
I take care for next time.
--
Jun Aruga / He - His - Him
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.or
Nicolas Mailhot via devel igorleak hau
idatzi zuen (2019 mai. 6, al. 09:59):
Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 16:14 -0600, Chris Murphy a écrit :
>
> Right and that's the same with beta testing, which is how bugs like
> this can sometimes not even get found until after release. A lot of
> tests are done
Due to lack of popular support for the idea (to put it mildly), I
won't be doing this.
Thank you all for participating in the discussion and good arguments
(both pro and con).
Zbyszek
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 08:55:56PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> currently, we
I am looking for arch container archive files like
"Fedora-Container-Base-30-1.2.aarch64.tar.xz
" for Fedora 30.
I found the x86_64, aarch64 and s390x's archive files in below directory.
But where is the archive file of armv7hl, i686 and ppc64le?
I assume the multi archs except x86_64, aarch64 and
For some reason, a "mock install" ends up running %post scripts with
LC_ALL=en_US.UTF8, for which I need glibc-all-langpacks.
This does not happen with a manual install from a mock shell.
The tiny spec file below reproduces the problem.
If I use "mock -n install" (I have a few other things in
On 5/6/19 1:40 PM, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
We found this bug before releasing, but it is not a release blocking bug (the
upgrade criteria just cover clean n and n-1 upgrading to n+1 and this bug just
happens whith continously upgraded systems since fc21 or lower)
Wait a moment, is n and
On 5/5/19 6:29 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 8:22 AM Steven A. Falco wrote:
>>
>> I just upgraded my machine from F29 to F30. Now, whenever I install a new
>> kernel, the new kernel does not automatically become the default. In other
>> words, when I reboot, the previous ker
Roberto Ragusa igorleak hau idatzi zuen (2019 mai.
6, al. 15:34):
> On 5/6/19 1:40 PM, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
>
> > We found this bug before releasing, but it is not a release blocking bug
> (the upgrade criteria just cover clean n and n-1 upgrading to n+1 and this
> bug just happens whith c
On Mon, 6 May 2019 at 09:26, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> On 5/6/19 1:40 PM, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
>
> > We found this bug before releasing, but it is not a release blocking bug
> (the upgrade criteria just cover clean n and n-1 upgrading to n+1 and this
> bug just happens whith continously upgr
On Mo, 06.05.19 09:20, Dridi Boukelmoune (dridi.boukelmo...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 1:45 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
>
> > This makes the assumption, which was also made earlier in the thread,
> > that it's somehow impossible to check what bootloader is installed.
Podman 1.2 and Docker CE 18.09.5 on My Fedora 30 work for your use case.
$ rpm -q kernel
kernel-5.0.5-200.fc29.x86_64
kernel-5.0.10-200.fc29.x86_64
kernel-5.0.10-300.fc30.x86_64
$ podman --version
podman version 1.2.0
$ podman run -it --rm docker.io/php:7-fpm-alpine sh
/var/www/html # uname -a
L
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 09:54:33AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Mon, 6 May 2019 at 09:26, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
>
> > On 5/6/19 1:40 PM, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
> >
> > > We found this bug before releasing, but it is not a release blocking bug
> > (the upgrade criteria just cover c
The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they
are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know for sure
that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper reason:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life
Note: If
Once upon a time, qca needed this, but hasn't for quite awhile, so I'm no
longer interested in maintaining compat-opensl10-pkcs11-helper
According to repoquery, one item (still) depends on it:
gnupg-pkcs11-scd
-- Rex
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lis
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:52 AM Nicolas Mailhot
wrote:
>
> Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 16:14 -0600, Chris Murphy a écrit :
> >
> > Right and that's the same with beta testing, which is how bugs like
> > this can sometimes not even get found until after release. A lot of
> > tests are done on pristine
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 9:13 PM jaltman
> Then I think you want the fhs-discuss mailing list, to help this get
> through, at https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/fhs-discuss.
> It's a pretty quiet list, so there may be a more active relevant chat
> channel. Does anyone else know
Am 04.05.19 um 22:50 schrieb Sam Varshavchik:
> Chris Murphy writes:
>
>> This bug itself was expected to be an edge case, that not many users
>> would be affected, in that not many would have a stale Fedora 20 or
>> older bootloader. Surely 'grub2-install' would have been manually run,
>> or the u
I change my question.
Do you know who is creating this kind of multi arch container images?
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/30/Container/aarch64/images/
Jun
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe sen
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:25 AM Roberto Ragusa wrote:
>
> On 5/6/19 1:40 PM, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
>
> > We found this bug before releasing, but it is not a release blocking bug
> > (the upgrade criteria just cover clean n and n-1 upgrading to n+1 and this
> > bug just happens whith contino
I found Fedora 30 armhfp container image here.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/30/Container/
I am still looking for Fedora 30 armv7hl, i686 and ppc64le container images.
--
Jun Aruga / He - His - Him
jar...@redhat.com / IRC: jaruga
___
On 5/6/19 4:58 AM, Jun Aruga wrote:
> I am looking for arch container archive files like
> "Fedora-Container-Base-30-1.2.aarch64.tar.xz
> " for Fedora 30
> I found the x86_64, aarch64 and s390x's archive files in below directory.
> But where is the archive file of armv7hl, i686 and ppc64le?
> I ass
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 8:47 AM Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>
> % dnf --releasever=31 system-upgrade download
> Before you continue ensure that your system is fully upgraded by running
> "dnf --refresh upgrade". Do you want to continue [y/N]:
>
> So this message should read “Ensure your system is differe
On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 12:09 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:25 AM Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> > On 5/6/19 1:40 PM, Julen Landa Alustiza wrote:
> >
> > > We found this bug before releasing, but it is not a release blocking bug
> > > (the upgrade criteria just cover clean n
> > >
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:39 AM Steven A. Falco wrote:
>
> Thanks for the explanation. Here are the contents of /etc/default/grub. As
> you suspected, there is a GRUB_DEFAULT=saved line in there.
>
> GRUB_TIMEOUT=5
> GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR="$(sed 's, release .*$,,g' /etc/system-release)"
> GRUB_DEFAUL
> > And why below s390x does not have Fedora-Container-Base-*.tar.xz?
>
> Those are things that failed in the final RC2 compose of Fedora30.
>
> Since they were not release blocking, they... didn't block the release.
>
> ...snip...
> >
> > I change my question.
> > Do you know who is creating this
On 5/6/19 2:53 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:39 AM Steven A. Falco wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the explanation. Here are the contents of /etc/default/grub. As
>> you suspected, there is a GRUB_DEFAULT=saved line in there.
>>
>> GRUB_TIMEOUT=5
>> GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR="$(sed 's, rele
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 12:13:16PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 8:47 AM Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> >
> > % dnf --releasever=31 system-upgrade download
> > Before you continue ensure that your system is fully upgraded by running
> > "dnf --refresh upgrade". Do you want to continue
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:04 PM Steven A. Falco wrote:
>
> > # grub2-editenv list
>
> Here is the command output:
>
> saved_entry=2aa6409d5c354eea9cc2e4630c4efda0-5.0.11-300.fc30.x86_64
> boot_success=1
> boot_indeterminate=1
> kernelopts=root=/dev/mapper/fedora-root ro resume=/dev/mapper/fedora-sw
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 12:27 PM Martin Kolman wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 12:09 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > It is completely impractical for QA to, every cycle, do a clean
> > install of each version of Fedora, and upgrade them in sequence to the
> > current pre-release version, and if any
On 5/6/19 4:47 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:04 PM Steven A. Falco wrote:
>>
>>> # grub2-editenv list
>>
>> Here is the command output:
>>
>> saved_entry=2aa6409d5c354eea9cc2e4630c4efda0-5.0.11-300.fc30.x86_64
>> boot_success=1
>> boot_indeterminate=1
>> kernelopts=root=/dev/m
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 12:43:02PM -0700, stan via devel wrote:
> To each their own, of course, but there was a long discussion of
> discourse here a while ago. I tried it out, but it was like a bad
> version of a mailing list. It sent me a mail informing me that there
> were messages to read. T
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 3:15 PM Steven A. Falco wrote:
>
> As I was reading through the documentation, I came across a statement that
> grubenv is unavailable on RAID - please see the second to last sentence here:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub/html_node/Environment-block.html
>
Hi,
I just submitted my first review request on Bugzilla :
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1706548. The packaged
software is called "simple-dnf" and it is meant to be a lightweight (and
fast) GUI for DNF. I did not create it but I found it very quite cool
and effective; as I was i
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 3:51 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> GRUB pre-boot environment can read grubenv from anything GRUB supports
> reading, which is practically anything including mdadm RAID. Your
> grubenv can be read, it just can be changed by GRUB in the pre-boot
^can't
!!
--
Chris Murphy
Tom Hughes wrote:
> Right now that is the only fix I think - there isn't a code fix yet
> so any talk about a Fedora update is premature.
See now why it was an absolutely horrible idea to allow the Fedora Firefox
package to reject extensions not signed by upstream?
I still strongly believe that
Danishka Navin wrote:
> Is it possible to enable caching for livemedia-creator?
> Similar to the --cache option in livecd-creator.
Why not just use livecd-creator? It is still maintained by the community
(mainly Neal Gompa, see https://github.com/livecd-tools/livecd-tools ) and
it supports this
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:47 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> I suggest keeping things as is, with saved_entry set in the grubenv.
> And that's because GRUB and the grub-boot-success.service are able to
> do an automatic fallback to the previous working kernel if boot fails
> following a kernel upgrade.
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190505.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190506.n.1
= SUMMARY =
Added images:9
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 37
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 109
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 21.07 MiB
Size of dropped packages:0
Dear all,
You are kindly invited to the meeting:
Modularity Team (weekly) on 2019-05-07 from 15:00:00 to 16:00:00 UTC
At fedora-meetin...@irc.freenode.net
The meeting will be about:
Meeting of the Modularity Team.
More information available at: [Modularity Team
Docs](https://docs.pagure.o
Missing expected images:
Atomichost qcow2 x86_64
Atomichost raw-xz x86_64
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
3 of 47 required tests failed
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 7/146 (x86_64), 1/2 (arm)
ID: 397012
Le May 6, 2019 4:29:22 PM UTC, Chris Murphy a écrit :
>On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 1:52 AM Nicolas Mailhot
> wrote:
>>
>> Le dimanche 05 mai 2019 à 16:14 -0600, Chris Murphy a écrit :
>> >
>> > Right and that's the same with beta testing, which is how bugs like
>> > this can sometimes not even get fo
52 matches
Mail list logo
