На 12.05.2016 в 15:32, Phil Sutter написа:
Hi,
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:47:19PM +0300, Alexander Todorov wrote:
# cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-enp1s0f0
Generated by dracut initrd
The line above is supposed to be a comment.
OK, fixed that then I got:
# systemctl status
Hi guys,
I'm having trouble starting a network bridge from a script without restarting
the server.
I am following this doc in order to configure a bridged network on a Fedora 23
Server host:
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Networking_Guide/sec-Ne
Hello everyone,
I'm working on beginner QA and Automation training curricula for a local hack
school in Sofia (https://github.com/atodorov/QA-101). I'm looking for examples
of badly written bug reports which students can read and discuss what
information is missing from them (e.g. why are they
e:
>>>>> On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Todorov wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>>> Btw the URL field in the spec file should be updated to
>>>>>> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/libpciaccess/
>>>>>
>>>>&g
На 27.02.2014 18:14, Christopher Meng написа:
Interesting :
fedora-release-notes
***-fonts
Can someone point me how to test them?
See amiri-fonts, gnu-free-fonts and thai-scalable-fonts. These appear to have
some sort of testing available in the source and all three seem to be different.
На 27.02.2014 16:18, Richard W.M. Jones написа:
Attached is a proposed patch to the spec file. I ran this under
auto-buildrequires to see if it would need any extra BRs, but auto-br
didn't find any.
Richard,
can you point me to what auto-buildrequires is, where it lives and how do I use
it?
На 26.02.2014 17:19, Adam Jackson написа:
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 09:07 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
Except the kernel. Please exclude it from all of this.
Also: xorg-x11-server, xorg-x11-drv-*, libdrm, libpciaccess, mesa. Any
reasonable amount of testing on those is going to require more hardwar
Hi folks,
thanks for your feedback in the last few days. I've created two wiki pages about
packages which don't execute their tests in %check:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Testing_in_check
and another one for packages which don't seem to have test suites at all:
https://fedoraproject.org/w
Hi guys,
I've started working to identify packages with missing upstream test suites or
not running the tests in %check. Having a list of hundreds of packages now I
need to prioritize them somehow. This will help in later steps when spec files
need to be fixed or somebody wants to start working
Looks like reporting missing test suites in Bugzilla is not accepted. I guess
it's just me who prefers Bugzilla compared to other media.
I *will use the Wiki* for this.
On the topic of tests not executed in %check I *will use Bugzilla* but Alexander
Kurtakov brings up another angle - tests ex
На 21.02.2014 16:58, Tom Hughes написа:
On 21/02/14 14:57, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 02:53:55PM +, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 21/02/14 14:51, Alexander Todorov wrote:
I want to track which packages *DO NOT* have any tests and later be able
to focus on creating them (be
На 21.02.2014 16:55, Daniel P. Berrange написа:
If you have code that can fairly reliably detect whether a test suite
exists in the source tar.gz, then I think you would be justified
in filing bugs for spec files which have not enabled the test suite.
At present I'm aware of 11 different loca
На 21.02.2014 16:53, Tom Hughes написа:
Why would you file a bug in the Fedora bug tracker when the package has no test
suite upstream? That makes no sense - if the upstream package has no tests then
the bug belongs upstream not in Fedora.
Same reason you file kernel bugs in Bugzilla.redhat
На 21.02.2014 16:27, Richard W.M. Jones написа:
Is it correct that you're only going to be filing bugs when upstream
tarballs already contain test suites, but they are just not enabled in
the Fedora package?
Hi Richard,
I meant just the opposite. However I will also do what you suggest but this
Hi guys,
(note: devel, packaging and test lists) previously I've done a little experiment
and counted how many packages are likely to have upstream test suites and how
many don't:
http://atodorov.org/blog/2013/12/24/upstream-test-suite-status-of-fedora-20/
In general around 35% do have test su
На 6.01.2014 16:52, Matthew Miller написа:
Hi Fedora test and QA folks! I posted a (kind of long) message on Fedora devel
with some thoughts about the direction of the project in the next year. A
lot of it directly affects -- and is affected by, of course -- Fedora QA,
and the whole third sectio
На 18.12.2013 20:09, Tim Flink написа:
On a side note, it might be interesting to find out what percentage of
packages are running things in %check. I don't know what we would do
with that metric, but I think it would be interesting :)
Hi Tim,
I did a quick measurement and the number of packag
На 18.12.2013 20:09, Tim Flink написа:
On a side note, it might be interesting to find out what percentage of
packages are running things in %check. I don't know what we would do
with that metric, but I think it would be interesting :)
I have something in the works which can be modified to ext
Hi folks,
this message sparked an interest:
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/python-bugzilla/2013-December/000200.html
In addition to that I've inspected around 30 packages which seem to be missing
an upstream test suite (a few have one but it is not automatically executed in
%check sec
На 1.11.2013 21:03, moshe nahmias написа:
I think that some of the problem is that you have to register to file a
bug. There is no reason to register if you just want the developer to know
there is a bug and from then on no interaction unless needed.
How about enabling login(register) via soc
На 1.11.2013 12:12, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" написа:
There is nothing in that area that is not already known or trying to be
addressed.
I'm not aware of how are we trying to address this, can you point me to some
wiki pages, proposals, etc?
--
Alex
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedorap
Hi folks,
recently OpenSource.com published an article of mine explaining why users should
take the extra step to submit a bug:
http://opensource.com/business/13/10/user-guide-bugs-open-source-projects
It is based on real event, which happened to me during Fedora test days last
month. The com
На 11.10.2013 17:03, Adam Williamson написа:
On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 13:42 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
Hmm when was it decided that we should write our own app to replace the
wiki instead of trying to (re)use something other distribution are using?
Such as?
Just for the record:
ht
Folks,
I've participated both in Virtualization and GNOME test days this week and there
is one thing that felt very strange and not easy to use for me.
GNOME test day results were recorded in the wiki, while Virtualization ones in a
web app here:
http://209.132.184.192/testdays/show_event?eve
На 9.10.2013 15:50, Jan Sedlak написа:
Join IRC #fedora-test-day on FreeNode if you get into trouble.
Report all bugs preferably at upstream bugzilla [3] or Red Hat bugzilla [4].
Does this mean all apps will be latest & greatest ?
My experience with GNOME upstream is that if you are not usin
На 24.09.2013 02:44, Jonathan Kamens написа:
2) Most Fedora users are not developers. If they have to jump through hoops to
figure out where to report bugs, then they won't report the bugs. The "one-stop
shop" that Red Hat bugzilla provides as a point of entry for all bugs that users
encounter in
Hi guys,
I'll try to organize a few people locally in Sofia to participate in Fedora 20
test days, currently interested in Virtualization Test Day and Gnome Test Day on
Oct 8th and 10th.
My intention is to bring people together in a room and do some testing. During
what hours in the European
Hi everyone,
I've briefly introduced myself at the Fedora QA meeting today, Repeating here
for those who missed it.
I come from RedHat's Relase Test Team specializing in installation testing. I've
been in QE for 6+ years already. I've been the RTT point person for RHEL 5
almost since 5.0.
I
28 matches
Mail list logo
