Hi!
After the initial hint [1] describing the very first steps with
tmt let's have a look at the available test execution options.
The following user story was at the very beginning of tmt:
As a tester or developer, I want to easily run tests
in my preferred environment.
Do you want to s
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-33-20210413.0):
ID: 855577 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
Hi folks,
I found this thing and thought it might be useful for testing depended
packages before committing, something similar to the chain scratch
builds in koji, that are not available (to my knowledge).
I didn't realize before we can use module builds for any package set,
that does not ev
Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git
Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development
workflow for Fedora Linux packages using repositories with sources and
upstream history (this is what we call s
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-32-20210413.0):
ID: 855750 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271#How_To_Test
As I think this is not trivial we should add to How_To_Test paragraph :
After:
copr mock-config odubaj/autoconf-2.70 fedora-rawhide-x86_64 >
odubaj-autoconf-2.70_fedora-34-x86_64.cfg
mv odubaj-autoconf-2.70_fedora-34-x86_64.cfg /et
Added, thanks!
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:43 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271#How_To_Test
>
> As I think this is not trivial we should add to How_To_Test paragraph :
>
> After:
> copr mock-config odubaj/autoconf-2.70 fedora-rawhide-x86_64 >
> odubaj-a
On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 11:57, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:43 AM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271#How_To_Test
> >
> > As I think this is not trivial we should add to How_To_Test paragraph :
> >
> > After:
> > copr mock-confi
On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 12:29 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 11:57, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:43 AM Sérgio Basto
> > wrote:
> >
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Autoconf_271#How_To_Test
> > >
> > > As I think this
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20210413.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20210414.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 28
Dropped packages:2
Upgraded packages: 62
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 43.70 MiB
Size of dropped packages
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 9:48 AM Honza Horak wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I found this thing and thought it might be useful for testing depended
> packages before committing, something similar to the chain scratch
> builds in koji, that are not available (to my knowledge).
>
> I didn't realize before w
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:35 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 12:29 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 11:57, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:43 AM Sérgio Basto
> > > wrote:
[snip]
> > It is arguably better to
On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 12:58 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:35 PM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 12:29 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
> > wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 14 April 2021 at 11:57, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:43
* Fabio Valentini:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 9:48 AM Honza Horak wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I found this thing and thought it might be useful for testing depended
>> packages before committing, something similar to the chain scratch
>> builds in koji, that are not available (to my knowledge).
>
On 14.04.2021 10:45, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development
workflow for Fedora Linux packages using repositories with sources and
upstream history (this is what we call source-git), instead of just
distribution files with links to tarballs (dist-git
OLD: Fedora-34-20210413.n.0
NEW: Fedora-34-20210414.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 1
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 0
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> Please head to the SIG wiki page to learn more about our proposed MVP.
> We are looking for maintainers of Fedora Linux packages who'd be
> interested in being early adopters and give us feedback during the
> development process. You
Hi,
I got a "pull request" for one of my packages and wanted to make some
changes to discuss with the submitter and see if we could merge it
back with those changes to the rawhide branch. But somehow I did
something wrong and I am not sure what or how to fix it.
So I saw this webpage with the sug
On 14/04/2021 14:28, Mark Wielaard wrote:
I added the following line to my .git/config at the end of the [remote
"origin"] section to be able to pull it:
fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/*
Then git pulled and checkout pr/4, made the changes, committed them
and pushed them back,
On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 1:52 PM Owen Taylor wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 9:55 AM Michael Catanzaro
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 10 2021 at 08:03:09 AM -0400, Owen Taylor
>> wrote:
>> > Did you notice that it also works for the Fedora Flatpaks (thanks,
>> > Frank!) - basic proof of concept:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git
>
> Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development
> workflow for Fedora Linux packages u
On 4/14/21 3:28 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi,
I got a "pull request" for one of my packages and wanted to make some
changes to discuss with the submitter and see if we could merge it
back with those changes to the rawhide branch. But somehow I did
something wrong and I am not sure what or how to
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:52 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>
> On 14.04.2021 10:45, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> > Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development
> > workflow for Fedora Linux packages using repositories with sources and
> > upstream history (this is what we call s
comments inline
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:09 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:45:23AM +0200, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> > Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git
> >
> > Our main goal i
On 14.04.2021 16:27, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
Could you, please, be more constructive and say what the actual
problems are for you with such repositories?
1. Some upstream repositories (Qt, Chromium, Linux kernel) are very huge
(more than 100 GiB). I don't want to download them from upstream and
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 1/15 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20210413.0):
ID: 856508 Test: aarch64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/856508
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64)
(Tests complet
No missing expected images.
Compose PASSES proposed Rawhide gating check!
All required tests passed
Failed openQA tests: 8/189 (x86_64), 7/127 (aarch64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-Rawhide-20210413.n.0):
ID: 855800 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso modularity_tests
URL: https://open
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 04:53:06PM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> On 14.04.2021 16:27, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> > Could you, please, be more constructive and say what the actual
> > problems are for you with such repositories?
>
> 1. Some upstream repositories (Qt, Chromium, Linux kernel)
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 12:44:42AM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-04-12 at 23:10 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Or in other words: packaging metadata are sources too. If they change
> > (and a version bump constitutes a change) the output might change,
> > and
> > that'
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:30 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 12:44:42AM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote:
> > On Mon, 2021-04-12 at 23:10 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > Or in other words: packaging metadata are sources too. If they change
> > > (and
Hey devel,
Is anyone else getting this issue on Fedora 34 beta when using mock with
the fedora-34-x86_64 chroot? mock -r fedora-33-x86_64 shell works just
fine on Fedora 34 beta. Also mock -r fedora-34-x86_64 shell works on
Fedora 33.
What is the best way to troubleshoot this? I already nuke
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:47:42AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:30 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 12:44:42AM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2021-04-12 at 23:10 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > > Or in oth
Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Failed openQA tests: 8/127 (aarch64), 10/189 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-34-20210413.n.0):
ID: 856266 Test: aarch64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/
I'm sure there are others of you out there like me who are using
Github Actions for continuous integration. Recently, I got tired of
updating my CI workflow definition every time a new Fedora release
branched, so I wrote a reusable Github Action[1] to query Bodhi for
the list of "current" (aka "sta
Dnia Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 01:12:47PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher napisał(a):
> Since I figured it might be useful to others, I have made it available
> publicly. See the Marketplace link[1] for usage examples.
>
> [1] https://github.com/marketplace/actions/get-fedora-releases
#v+
name: Get Fedora
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:38 PM Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>
> Dnia Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 01:12:47PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher napisał(a):
> > Since I figured it might be useful to others, I have made it available
> > publicly. See the Marketplace link[1] for usage examples.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/
On 14.04.21 10:45, Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> Good morning, I'd like to announce the creation of Fedora Source-git SIG:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Source-git
>
> Our main goal in the SIG right now is to establish a development
> workflow for Fedora Linux packages using repositories with so
Due to outstanding blocker bugs[1], we do not have a release candidate
for Fedora Linux 34. Tomorrow's Go/No-Go meeting is cancelled.
The next Fedora Linux 34 Final Go/No-Go meeting[2] will be held at
1700 UTC on Thursday 22 April in #fedora-meeting-1. We will aim for
the "target date #1" mileston
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 04:19:29PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> One example approach to source-git I've used...
>
> Rather than having source-git branch names matching dist-git,
> use a different naming convention that is based off the upstream
> version primarily.
>
> eg if upstream has v1
On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 15:29 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Unfortunately this doesn't work for two important cases:
> - when a binary or shared library has been replaced on disk. E.g.
> it is fairly common for packages to crash on upgrade, and the crash
> could be in the _old_ code
Sorry for not responding to this in my previous reply.
On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 15:29 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I wanted to investigate this, but unfortunately, it's hard to check
> right now, because all builds are non-reproducible (in the sense of
> reproducible-builds.org), becau
Due to a possible change related to GCC, packages like openxr and
luxcorereneder failed to build with these errors:
/tmp/ccHa7xrs.ltrans2.ltrans.o: in function
`RuntimeManifestFile::CreateIfValid(std::__cxx11::basic_stringstd::char_traits, std::allocator > const&,
std::vectorstd::default_delet
Forwarding to the devel@ list since the entire conversation was using
the wrong address (just noticed the mail bouncing).
Best,
Michel
On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 10:17 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:03:46AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > Hi,
> > liburing upstream has
Dne 14. 04. 21 v 17:50 Joe Doss napsal(a):
Hey devel,
Is anyone else getting this issue on Fedora 34 beta when using mock with the fedora-34-x86_64 chroot? mock -r
fedora-33-x86_64 shell works just fine on Fedora 34 beta. Also mock -r fedora-34-x86_64 shell works on Fedora 33.
What is the bes
Dne 12. 04. 21 v 18:32 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
cura-lulzbot orphan, spot 6 weeks ago
fedora-jam-kde-theme jvlomax, orphan 0 weeks ago
gnome-desktop alexl, caolanm, fmuellner, gnome-sig, 0 weeks ago
orphan, rhughes
How this c
Dne 10. 04. 21 v 19:33 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
I have created the missing bodhi updates where the packagers obviously
just forgot to file one, or missed the announcement of the
updates-testing activation point (i.e. builds for f35 and f34 (and
sometimes f33 or even f32) exist, but no bodhi upd
On 2021-04-15 at 06:54 CEST, Miroslav Suchý wrote...
Dne 12. 04. 21 v 18:32 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
cura-lulzbot orphan, spot 6 weeks
ago
fedora-jam-kde-theme jvlomax, orphan 0 weeks ago
gnome-desktop alexl, caolanm, fmuellner, gnome-sig,
0 weeks a
Hey All,
We are running a Fedora Linux 34 Cloud Test Day from Friday, April 16
through Monday, April 19. As a part of this test day[0] we will be
testing the Fedora Cloud Images. You can test the regular base image
using testcloud or if you have an Amazon account, you can test the
AMIs listed on t
48 matches
Mail list logo
