Upgrades to Fedora 34

I want to thank you. You are great! We branched just last week and when I tried the upgrade to Fedora 34 I got just 4 issues. One of them is from RpmFusion and these three remaining are either already fixed or being worked on. I have been a Fedorian for a long time, but I never seen so clean u

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20210217.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210216.n.1 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210217.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 1 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:12 Upgraded packages: 47 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:20.95

Fedora-Cloud-32-20210217.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20210216.0): ID: 780516 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Fedora-Rawhide-20210217.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Xfce raw-xz armhfp Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 8 of 43 required tests failed, 4 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 31/183 (x86_64), 19/124 (aarch64

Fedora Packager Dashboard - Available for wide use to all packagers

Hi, We'd like to announce that the Fedora Packager Dashboard passed the testing period, was properly deployed inside Fedora Infrastructure, got fixes, improvements and feature additions and is now available for widespread use among all Fedora Packagers. For those of you who didn’t hear about the

Fedora-IoT-35-20210217.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Iot dvd aarch64 Iot dvd x86_64 Failed openQA tests: 3/16 (x86_64), 2/15 (aarch64) Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-35-20210216.0): ID: 780541 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso install_default_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/780541 ID: 7

Re: Fedora Packager Dashboard - Available for wide use to all packagers

Thanks for all the great work. The dashboard is fantastic. Iñaki On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 at 12:46, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > > Hi, > > We'd like to announce that the Fedora Packager Dashboard passed the testing > period, was properly deployed inside Fedora Infrastructure, got fixes, > improveme

Re: Fedora Packager Dashboard - Available for wide use to all packagers

Iñaki Ucar writes: > Thanks for all the great work. The dashboard is fantastic. Seconded, thanks for your awesome work here, this has really helped me to keep all the information in one place! Cheers, Dan signature.asc Description: PGP signature _

Re: Please clarify master vs main vs rawhide branches

On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 3:06 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 05/02/21 10:08 -0500, Steven A. Falco wrote: > >I see that the master to main conversion has happened. I'd like to know the > >recommended way to deal with that. > > > >Currently, I'm doing: > > > >git fetch --all > >git remote prune o

Fedora 34 compose report: 20210217.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-34-20210216.n.1 NEW: Fedora-34-20210217.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 0 Dropped packages:0 Upgraded packages: 33 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 0 B Size of dropped packages:0 B Size of

Re: mesa 21.0.0-rc3 making rawhide really unstable?

On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 16:17:12 +1000, David Airlie wrote: Has anyone got a backtrace they could put in a bug? I'm not seeing a crash with X.org here in my test VMs. I have only had problems with wine so far. But I use xfce and lightdm and they seem to work. I filed bug 1924933 for the win

Re: Fedora Packager Dashboard - Available for wide use to all packagers

On 17.02.2021 10:37, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: We'd like to announce that the Fedora Packager Dashboard passed the testing period, was properly deployed inside Fedora Infrastructure, got fixes, improvements and feature additions and is now available for widespread use among all Fedora Packager

Fedora-34-20210217.n.0 compose check report

Missing expected images: Minimal raw-xz armhfp Xfce raw-xz armhfp Failed openQA tests: 23/183 (x86_64), 23/124 (aarch64) New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-34-20210216.n.1): ID: 780641 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_no_user URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/780641 ID

Re: mesa 21.0.0-rc3 making rawhide really unstable?

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 07:35:20 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote: Is their going to be an updated build soon? I tried to build rc4 (which looks to be what was released), but I need to figure out how to get both x86_64 and i686 rpms built when using fedpkg local. If there isn't going to be an u

Summary/Minutes from today's FESCo Meeting (2021-02-17)

= #fedora-meeting-2: FESCO (2021-02-17) = Meeting started by dcantrell at 14:59:38 UTC. The full logs are available at https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2021-02-17/fesco.2021-02-17-14.59.log.html . Meetin

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 10:02:34AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main > > == Summary == > > This Change will move Fedora git repositories to use "main" as the > default git branch instead of "master". Specific repositories will be > manually

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On 17. 02. 21 19:46, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote: On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 10:02:34AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main == Summary == This Change will move Fedora git repositories to use "main" as the default git branch instead of "master". S

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 08:00:49PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 17. 02. 21 19:46, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 10:02:34AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GitRepos-master-to-main > > > > > > == Summary == > > > > > > This Change w

Re: Fedora 34 Change: GitRepos-master-to-main (Self-Contained Change)

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 08:14:47PM +0100, Pierre - Yves Chibon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 08:00:49PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 17. 02. 21 19:46, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 10:02:34AM -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/16/21 9:02 AM, Troy Curtis Jr wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:02 PM Dominique Martinet > wrote: > > Michael Catanzaro wrote on Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 08:46:57PM -0600: > > We removed the fallbacks due to complaints from users who didn't want

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/16/21 9:03 AM, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 16/02/2021 21:37, Steve Dickson wrote: >> >> On 2/15/21 9:16 PM, Dominique Martinet wrote: >>> Steve Dickson wrote on Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 09:04:52PM -0500: > I think if no IP was successfully parsed the fallback ought to kick in, > so it's a sys

Office hours so nice, I hold them twice!

Since just after starting as the Fedora Program Manager (FPgM) in 2018, I've held weekly office hours. But the time (9 AM US/Eastern) isn't convenient for everyone. So starting next week, I've added a second version at the end of my work day in order to give a more convenient option to a larger par

Re: Office hours so nice, I hold them twice!

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:52 PM Ben Cotton wrote: > > Since just after starting as the Fedora Program Manager (FPgM) in > 2018, I've held weekly office hours. But the time (9 AM US/Eastern) > isn't convenient for everyone. So starting next week, I've added a > second version at the end of my work

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 18/02/2021 05:11, Steve Dickson wrote: I agree... ignoring syntax error or parsing error just does not seem like the appropriate thing to do... Error out! Tell me what is broken so I can fix it!! Replace the "," with a " " in the DNS= entry of /etc/systemd/resolved.conf file. And if you did

Re: restic update and src.fedoraproject.org and Self Introduction

Thank you! I'm unsure of what I was doing wrong initially but I appreciate your help in resolving it! - Kevin Anderson On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 9:17 PM James Cassell wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021, at 8:06 PM, Kevin Anderson wrote: > [...] > > The issue is that when I attempt to push over HT

Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2021-02-18 17:00 UTC)

 Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC meeting Thursday at 2021-02-18 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on irc.freenode.net.  Local time information (via. uitime): = Day: Thursday == 2021-02-18 09:00 PST US/Pacific 2021-02-18 1

rpm-ostree v2021.2

## Strengthening the notion of an "updates driver" Distributions like Fedora CoreOS have been making use of external (to rpm-ostree) agents that work as "drivers" for automatic updates. For example, in FCOS, Zincati is the agent that is responsible for communicating with an updates server to ide

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 2/17/21 6:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 18/02/2021 05:11, Steve Dickson wrote: >> I agree... ignoring syntax error or parsing error just does not seem >> like the appropriate thing to do... Error out! Tell me what is broken >> so I can fix it!! > > Replace the "," with a " " in the DNS= entry

Re: Don't update to the latest f33!

On 18/02/2021 09:18, Steve Dickson wrote: On 2/17/21 6:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: On 18/02/2021 05:11, Steve Dickson wrote: I agree... ignoring syntax error or parsing error just does not seem like the appropriate thing to do... Error out! Tell me what is broken so I can fix it!! Replace the ",

Non-responsive maintainer vdolezal

This message is part of non-responsive maintainer procedure for vdolezal, following https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/. Please respond if you are still active in Fedora and want to maintain screen. If anyone else know, how to contact this ma

Fedora-Cloud-33-20210218.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64), 1/7 (aarch64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-33-20210217.0): ID: 781285 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud URL: https://op

Re: Non-responsive maintainer vdolezal

Followup info for exception procedure for non-responsive maintainer policy. vdolezal has left the company last year and become inactive in Fedora environment. Due of he is the single owner of screen package and there is CVE issue, that need to be addressed, I am requesting exception procedure fo