On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 3:32 AM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. I think we usually leave debugging off once we branch letting rawhide continue on down the debug route, must have slipped through the cracks, have kicked off a 302 and will submit that as an update on completion. > 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_Video_Driver 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_bugzilla > * 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 _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list -- cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
