Missing expected images:
Minimal raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
4 of 43 required tests failed, 1 result missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 17/231 (x86_64), 16/161 (aarch64)
New failures (sam
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20220407.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20220408.n.2
= SUMMARY =
Added images:10
Dropped images: 5
Added packages: 3
Dropped packages:3
Upgraded packages: 179
Downgraded packages: 1
Size of added packages: 32.25 MiB
Size of dropped packages
We are currently targeting the early target date (2022-04-19), which
means we'd want to have blockers fixed by 11 April in order to provide
time for validation testing prior to the Go/No-go meeting on 14 April.
We can do it!
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 10/229 (x86_64), 13/161 (aarch64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-36-20220407.n.0):
ID: 1216641 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1216641
ID: 1216651 Test: x86_6
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 6:05 AM Kamil Paral wrote:
>
> Anyone else, thoughts on listing Flatpak explicitly in [0]?
My interpretation is that Flatpak is already covered implicitly, in
the same way that RPMs are. The careful reader will notice that "rpm"
doesn't appear there except in "rpm-ostree",
OLD: Fedora-36-20220407.n.0
NEW: Fedora-36-20220408.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:0
Upgraded packages: 3
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:0 B
Size of upgraded
Hey!
Helping out here and there when i can over the week :)
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 12:10 PM Sumantro Mukherjee
wrote:
> Hey Fedorans,
>
> As most of you might know, we have Fedora testing events happening where
> you all
> can participate. As of today, we are running 3 events in parallel.
>
> 1
It booted and installed as it should in Virtualbox at least
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 10:42 AM Peter Robinson wrote:
> Hi Luna,
>
> Can you go into detail as to what worked/didn't work exactly, I don't have
> a context as to what that means.
>
> Peter
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 9:26 AM Luna Jernber
Hey Fedorans,
As most of you might know, we have Fedora testing events happening where you all
can participate. As of today, we are running 3 events in parallel.
1. Kernel 5.17 Test Week [0]
2. Fedora 36 CoreOS [1]
3. Fedora Cloud Test Day [2]
These are events that are easy to start off if you a
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 1:57 PM Brandon Nielsen via test <
test@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Based on some discussion at today's blocker review meeting, I thought I
> would take the temperature of the room for making Flatpak support
> explicit in at least some of the criteria?
>
> The biggest
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-34-20220407.0):
ID: 1216505 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
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-35-20220407.0):
ID: 1216489 Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://op
Thanks Lukas, will do.
Ian
On 4/8/22 17:51, Lukas Ruzicka wrote:
Hello Ian,
I do not think it is. With some new additions that had been made
before the Final freeze, the 20220401 is outdated. Please, focus on
the latest composes.
Lukas
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 7:58 AM Ian Laurie wrote:
Hello Ian,
I do not think it is. With some new additions that had been made before the
Final freeze, the 20220401 is outdated. Please, focus on the latest
composes.
Lukas
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 7:58 AM Ian Laurie wrote:
> I was wondering if the 20220401.n.0 compose was still the main focus for
14 matches
Mail list logo
