cloud September 2017

cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

6 participants
18 discussions

Fedora 27 Beta blocker status mail #1
by Adam Williamson 12 Sep '17

12 Sep '17

Hi folks! Time for an update on the Fedora 27 Beta status. tl;dr action summary ==================== Accepted blockers ----------------- 1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1489164 ACTION: QA to test and karma update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-fee0766883 then check whether backgrounds are fixed for all blocking desktops after compose run with update included. 2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1487867 ACTION: QA to test and karma update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a8b4e05ef3 3. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1487305 ACTION: kernel team to provide a suitable update, ARM QA to test it 4. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475570 ACTION: anaconda and LVM folks to co-ordinate and provide a fix 5. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170803 ACTION: QA to confirm this is fixed already 6. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1483170 ACTION: lvrabec to fix remaining SELinux denials during FreeIPA deployment Proposed blockers ----------------- 1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1490072 ACTION: QA to test and see how commonly encountered, desktop team to fix 2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1489862 ACTION: QA to answer outstanding questions in bug Test coverage ------------- QA to cover several missing tests (see below for details), stand by to test with new validation compose soon. Bug-by-bug detail ================= Accepted blockers ----------------- 1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1489164 - distribution - NEW Fedora 27 Beta backgrounds must be different from Fedora 26 This is kind of a tracker for all the work that's needed to get the backgrounds updated in all blocking desktops. We now have the package reviewed and submitted as an update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-fee0766883 with the desktop-backgrounds changes included, but there may be other changes needed also. So at the least we need karma for that update, then we need to figure out what else needs to change to ensure at least Xfce, GNOME and KDE have the updated backgrounds. 2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1487867 - grub2 - ON_QA Wrong version on legacy variant (e.g. grub2-pc) Obsoletes: This is the bug that causes upgrades to choke on grub2 package dependencies. An update is available and just needs testing and karma - you should be able to test just by verifying that the issues no longer appear if you try upgrading with the updates-testing repo enabled. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a8b4e05ef3 3. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1487305 - kernel - MODIFIED Raspberry Pi 3: run-initial-setup hangs Peter's done a build that ought to fix this, but not yet submitted an update - so we either need a new update created, or the existing update for kernel-4.13.0-1.fc27 edited to include the new build. Ideally we'd prefer a build with just what's in the frozen repos now plus the fix for this, but the 4.13.0-1.fc27 update has been in testing for a while and has +2 karma, so it probably works OK. However, there's another issue: both 4.13.0-1 and 4.13.1-301 were built with debugging enabled, and I think we usually ship Beta with debugging disabled. So we kinda need another build with debugging disabled, I think. 4. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475570 - lvm2 - NEW Rescue mode fails while trying to access LVM volumes from existing install This is a failure of the installer's rescue mode when trying to mount LVM volumes from an existing Fedora install. There's no fix built yet, but there's some suggestion of a 'quick fix' that could be done on the anaconda side in the bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475570#c13 We need someone to take charge of deciding how to fix this, and...fix it. 5. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170803 - python-blivet - ON_QA calls e2fsck on all ext volumes, provides no status indicator, and hangs indefinitely if e2fsck doesn't exit This is almost certainly fixed, we just need someone to test and confirm with a system where the effect is obvious. The fix has actually broken filesystem resizing in most cases, but that technically blocks Final rather than Beta. 6. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1483170 - selinux-policy-targeted - MODIFIED 'map' denial for comm 'ns-slapd' path '/run/dirsrv/slapd-DOMAIN-LOCAL.stats' (breaks FreeIPA deployment) The specific denial initially reported here is fixed, but there are still denials preventing FreeIPA server deployment working with the latest selinux-policy that has reached stable (-280), so we need Lukas to fix those. I have listed the remaining denials in this bug and in #1488404. Proposed blockers ----------------- 1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1490072 - gnome-shell - ASSIGNED Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. #0 0x00007f16279aa68f in _cogl_boxed_value_set_x () ... This is a crash in mutter which seems quite easy to trigger by running VMs in virt-manager and Boxes. There's an Ubuntu bug which reports the same crash triggered by some sort of Ubuntu update tool as well. I have reproduced this on two boxes and there are at least three other reporters across this bug, an upstream GNOME bug and a Launchpad bug, so it seems fairly easy to hit. It would be useful if other folks running GNOME on Wayland in F27 could test launching VMs in Boxes and/or virt-manager and confirm whether doing this sometimes crashes their GNOME session. Of course, we could also do with the GNOME folks figuring out a fix. 2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1489862 - selinux-policy - ON_QA There is FW Raid set, but there is no /dev/md* device There are some questions in the bug that need answering: does this work OK if using a network or DVD install image? Does it work OK if booting a live image with enforcing=0 ? You need an Intel firmware RAID set (that's known to basically work with previous Fedora releases) to test this. Test coverage ------------- Looking at https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/27/ , some things jump out... * The Cloud tests appear never to have been run during this cycle. * Most of the Beta desktop tests have never been run on KDE during this cycle. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_workstation_core_applications has never been run during this cycle. * Our old friend https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_install_to_SAS still isn't sorted out. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_User_Interface_Basic_Vi… has never been run during this cycle. * Neither has https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Kickstart_File_Path_Ks_Cfg . * Many upgrade tests have no results, this is because they constantly fail in openQA, but not necessarily for release blocking reasons; I will look into that and update. * The tests for reporting crashes from anaconda haven't been run at all: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_save_traceback_to_bugzi… * Server test coverage looks bad, but this is mainly because openQA doesn't report failures and FreeIPA has been broken for the entire F27 cycle. With a couple more SELinux fixes most of those tests should show up as passing. We do still need the AD tests run, though. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net

2 1

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Cloud Workgroup
by dusty＠dustymabe.com 11 Sep '17

11 Sep '17

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Fedora Cloud Workgroup on 2017-09-13 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 UTC At fedora-meeting-1(a)irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: Standing meeting for the Fedora Cloud Workgroup Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/1999/

1 0

Request for review of F27 Release Blocking deliverables
by Jan Kurik 11 Sep '17

11 Sep '17

I would like to request review of Release Blocking deliverables for Fedora 27 release. I aware of the fact we are already in Beta Freeze and I apologize for not having the list of deliverables ready in advance. The list is available on usual location [1]. Please let me know in case there is any discrepancy or something is missing. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/27/ReleaseBlocking Thanks, Jan -- Jan Kuřík Platform & Fedora Program Manager Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic

1 0

Fedora Atomic Host Two Week Release Announcement
by noreply＠fedoraproject.org 07 Sep '17

07 Sep '17

A new Fedora Atomic Host update is available via an OSTree commit: Commit: 0b0127864022dd6ffad1a183241fbd5482ef5a1642ff3c8751c2e6cae6070b1a Version: 26.120 Existing systems can be upgraded in place via e.g. `atomic host upgrade` or `atomic host deploy`. Corresponding image media for new installations can be downloaded from: https://getfedora.org/en/atomic/download/ Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Fedora-Atomic-26-201709… https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Fedora-Atomic-26-201709… For direct download, the "latest" targets are always available here: https://getfedora.org/atomic_iso_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_qcow2_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_raw_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_libvirt_latest https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_virtualbox_latest Filename fetching URLs are available here: https://getfedora.org/atomic_iso_latest_filename https://getfedora.org/atomic_qcow2_latest_filename https://getfedora.org/atomic_raw_latest_filename https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_libvirt_latest_filename https://getfedora.org/atomic_vagrant_virtualbox_latest_filename For more information about the latest targets, please reference the Fedora Cloud Wiki space. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud#Quick_Links Do note that it can take some of the mirrors up to 12 hours to "check-in" at their own discretion. Thank you, Fedora Release Engineering

1 0

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Fedora Cloud Workgroup
by dusty＠dustymabe.com 04 Sep '17

04 Sep '17

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Fedora Cloud Workgroup on 2017-09-06 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 UTC At fedora-meeting-1(a)irc.freenode.net The meeting will be about: Standing meeting for the Fedora Cloud Workgroup Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/1999/

1 0

rawhide compoe - error: unlinkat: No such file or directory
by Dusty Mabe 03 Sep '17

03 Sep '17

Have we ever seen this before? Comes today's rawhide compose [1] DEBUG util.py:439: Committing: 100% DEBUG util.py:439: error: unlinkat: No such file or directory DEBUG util.py:439: Traceback (most recent call last): DEBUG util.py:439: File "/usr/bin/pungi-make-ostree", line 15, in <module> DEBUG util.py:439: ostree.main() DEBUG util.py:439: File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pungi/ostree/__init__.py", line 89, in main DEBUG util.py:439: func() DEBUG util.py:439: File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pungi/ostree/tree.py", line 99, in run DEBUG util.py:439: self._make_tree() DEBUG util.py:439: File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pungi/ostree/tree.py", line 46, in _make_tree DEBUG util.py:439: shortcuts.run(cmd, show_cmd=True, stdout=True, logfile=log_file) DEBUG util.py:439: File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/kobo/shortcuts.py", line 335, in run DEBUG util.py:439: raise RuntimeError(err_msg) DEBUG util.py:439: RuntimeError: ERROR running command: rpm-ostree compose tree --repo=/mnt/koji/compose/atomic/rawhide/ --write-commitid-to=/mnt/koji/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-20170622.n.0/logs/x86_64/Atomic/ostree-3/commitid.log --add-metadata-string=version=Rawhide.20170622.n.0 /mnt/koji/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-20170622.n.0/work/ostree-3/config_repo/fedora-atomic-docker-host.json DEBUG util.py:577: Child return code was: 1 DEBUG util.py:188: kill orphans [1] - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20101234

2 4

[fedora-atomic] PR #83: microcode_ctl is x86_64 only
by Dusty Mabe 01 Sep '17

01 Sep '17

dustymabe opened a new pull-request against the project: `fedora-atomic` that you are following: `` microcode_ctl is x86_64 only `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/83

2 1

[fedora-atomic] PR #82: microcode_ctl is x86_64 only
by Dusty Mabe 01 Sep '17

01 Sep '17

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cloud September 2017