Re: Self-introduction: Ana Sarabia

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:36 PM anna coobs wrote: > > Hello QA team, > > I am very happy to join the QA team and make a contribution, if it is > possible. > > My name is Ana, my first contact with Linux was approximately 5 years ago at > the university, I have used different distros over the yea

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:15:35 -0400 (EDT) "Robert P. J. Day" wrote: > i'm confused ... are you saying there will be no difference between > this release: > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/latest-Fedora-31/compose/Workstation/x86_64/iso/ > > and the final, official release

Re: what are the valid version-to-version upgrades for fedora?

On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 18:03 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > The only problem you might run into here is the 'updates-testing > > disablement trap'. When you install from a Branched pre-release, the > > 'updates-testing' repository is enabled by de

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 1:02 PM David Cantrell wrote: > > On 8/27/19 2:00 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > The Fedora working group's technical specification states Btrfs is to > > be the default. Yet the working group has said it's uncomfortable > > taking action on this decision expressly because the

Re: what are the valid version-to-version upgrades for fedora?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Adam Williamson wrote: > The only problem you might run into here is the 'updates-testing > disablement trap'. When you install from a Branched pre-release, the > 'updates-testing' repository is enabled by default. simple solution ... any problem with just *immediately* dis

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 13:25 -0400, David Cantrell wrote: > > > Josh, to be fair, I can see Neal's point here. In a way you seem to be > > kinda sending him in circles here: "anaconda team doesn't have the > > time/resources to invest in btrfs development, but you can help by > > sending them pull

Re: what are the valid version-to-version upgrades for fedora?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 16:54 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > followup to earlier post but different enough that i'll start a new > > thread: using f30 and f31 as examples, what are the valid > > version-to-version upgrades using "dnf system-upgrade

Re: what are the valid version-to-version upgrades for fedora?

On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 16:54 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > followup to earlier post but different enough that i'll start a new > thread: using f30 and f31 as examples, what are the valid > version-to-version upgrades using "dnf system-upgrade" that will > both: > > 1) do the appropriate upgr

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, stan via test wrote: > On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:26:39 -0400 (EDT) > "Robert P. J. Day" wrote: > > > i mean that if i install this pre-release form of fedora 31, i > > will eventually be able to upgrade to full, official fedora 31. > > isn't that what "dnf system-upgrade" is f

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:26:39 -0400 (EDT) "Robert P. J. Day" wrote: > i mean that if i install this pre-release form of fedora 31, i will > eventually be able to upgrade to full, official fedora 31. isn't that > what "dnf system-upgrade" is for? If you install the pre-release, you are installin

what are the valid version-to-version upgrades for fedora?

followup to earlier post but different enough that i'll start a new thread: using f30 and f31 as examples, what are the valid version-to-version upgrades using "dnf system-upgrade" that will both: 1) do the appropriate upgrade, and 2) allow normal, subsequent "dnf update" operations? i'm p

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On 8/27/19 2:00 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:25 AM David Cantrell wrote: >> >> The installer team rejecting btrfs patches is going to be based on their >> resources to support the functionality. I would say "btrfs in Fedora" >> needs a FESCo decision to set expectations an

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 13:49:38 -0400 (EDT) "Robert P. J. Day" wrote: > status files aside, i would have thought that the most recent ISO > (here) would be the obvious choice: > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/latest-Fedora-31/compose/Workstation/x86_64/iso/ > > as i recall

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

References: FESCo, make Btrfs the default https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-06-08/fesco.2011-06-08-17.30.log.html Workstation working group's technical specification, make btrfs default https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Technical_Specification A point of reference th

Self-introduction: Ana Sarabia

Hello QA team, I am very happy to join the QA team and make a contribution, if it is possible. My name is Ana, my first contact with Linux was approximately 5 years ago at the university, I have used different distros over the years and the last year fedora. If you have any questions about me, pl

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Alessio wrote: > Mmm. Do you mean updating an existing system (running a previous > Fedora version) using the CD/DVD/USB stick? If so, please note that > it is no more possible since a long time. i mean that if i install this pre-release form of fedora 31, i will eventually

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:00 PM Chris Murphy wrote: > The Fedora working group's technical specification states Btrfs is to > be the default. Yet the working group has said it's uncomfortable > taking action on this decision expressly because the Federal kernel > team's official recommendation i

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 7:50 PM Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > status files aside, i would have thought that the most recent ISO > (here) would be the obvious choice: > > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/latest-Fedora-31/compose/Workstation/x86_64/iso/ Yes. As far as the image

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:25 AM David Cantrell wrote: > > The installer team rejecting btrfs patches is going to be based on their > resources to support the functionality. I would say "btrfs in Fedora" > needs a FESCo decision to set expectations and policy for the project. > Is it something th

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Alessio wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 7:26 PM Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >   i checked a number of STATUS files, and all the ones i looked at > said either FINISHED_INCOMPLETE or DOOMED. that does not fill me with > confidence. does that suggest that none of

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 7:26 PM Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > i checked a number of STATUS files, and all the ones i looked at > said either FINISHED_INCOMPLETE or DOOMED. that does not fill me with > confidence. does that suggest that none of those ISOs are usable? > Well, maybe someone more expe

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

> I also think there are other perspectives that might at least > potentially be useful here. Right now we've mainly heard from a couple > of community folks who are very passionate about btrfs, and Red Hat > folks from anaconda/kernel development and RHEL management who > essentially see it as a

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Alessio wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 7:07 PM Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >   what is the *proper* ISO to install that will eventually get me to > fedora 31? thanks. > > > Hello. > I think you should look here: > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On 8/27/19 12:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 08:57 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >>> There *was* a PR submitted. It was even a one-liner because the >>> contributor fixed the underlying problem elsewhere. It's been in limbo >>> for over a year: https://github.com/rhinstaller/an

Re: what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 7:07 PM Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > what is the *proper* ISO to install that will eventually get me to > fedora 31? thanks. > Hello. I think you should look here: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/

what to install to (eventually) be able to upgrade to fedora 31?

building a new dev box, don't care about the rough edges so want to install whatever will eventually allow me to upgrade to fedora 31 ... downloaded Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20190816.n.0.iso and installed only to notice it's pre-release fedora 32, checked the release schedule and,

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:49 AM Samantha Bueno wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 9:17 PM Adam Williamson > wrote: > > So...what should we do? Here are the options as I see 'em: > > > > 1. Keep supporting btrfs > > 2. Just modify the criterion with a btrfs exception, even if it's weird > > 3. Re

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 08:57 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > There *was* a PR submitted. It was even a one-liner because the > > contributor fixed the underlying problem elsewhere. It's been in limbo > > for over a year: https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/pull/1375 > > > > You seem to think th

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:57 AM Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:48 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:30 AM Josh Boyer > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:10 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:41 AM Josh Boyer > > >

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:48 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:30 AM Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:10 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:41 AM Josh Boyer > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:19 AM Neal Gompa wrot

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:30 AM Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:10 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:41 AM Josh Boyer > > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:19 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 5:55 AM wrote: > > > > >

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:10 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:41 AM Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:19 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 5:55 AM wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2019-08-26 at 23:54 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > On

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:41 AM Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:19 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 5:55 AM wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 2019-08-26 at 23:54 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 7:16 AM wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I understand

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20190827.n.0 changes

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20190826.n.0 NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20190827.n.0 = SUMMARY = Added images:0 Dropped images: 0 Added packages: 118 Dropped packages:5 Upgraded packages: 114 Downgraded packages: 0 Size of added packages: 998.36 MiB Size of dropped packages

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 7:19 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 5:55 AM wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2019-08-26 at 23:54 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 7:16 AM wrote: > > > > > > > > I understand them. The point is, for them and even us (the > > > > installer) > >

Re: Discussion: what would not blocking on btrfs look like?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 5:55 AM wrote: > > On Mon, 2019-08-26 at 23:54 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 7:16 AM wrote: > > > > > > I understand them. The point is, for them and even us (the > > > installer) > > > is work on BTRFS not a priority. It's something we can't benefit

Fedora-Rawhide-20190827.n.0 compose check report

No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 22 of 45 required tests failed, 15 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Unsatisfied gating requirements that could not be mapped to openQA tests: MISSING: fedora.W