Re: kernel-headers downgrade failure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 12:46:41 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:

> 
> 
> Am 03.08.2012 12:38, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:26:43 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> > 
> >> That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
> >> versions of the kernel in case some users need to downgrade and don't
> >> have it in their cache?
> > 
> > IMO, the community would be served better if they tried packages from
> > updates-testing early and more often.
> 
> this does not help anything if there are fatal bugs reported which
> stops boot like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=843826
> and ignored in a way that since yesterday kernel 3.5 is in stable
> repos for F17

1) Ticket history reveals that there has been a very quick response
by davej: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_activity.cgi?id=843826
So, your bug report has not been ignored, albeit reassigned to a
different component without any comment. Hot potatoe...

In retrospect, I cannot tell whether davej should not have submitted
3.5.0-2.fc17 as a test update three days later, knowing that 3.5.0-1.fc17
causes problems. It looks like there is disagreement about the problem
you've reported.

2) You could have left negative karma on the test-update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-11323/kernel-3.5.0-2.fc17
 
3) Nobody claims that the current way Fedora Testing is done, would
be bullet-proof. IMO, it's a known problem that some updates are rushed
out and should spend much more time in testing.

  bodhi - 2012-08-01 18:25:37
  This update has been pushed to testing
  bodhi - 2012-08-01 21:44:56
  This update has reached the stable karma threshold and
  will be pushed to the stable updates repository 

This is ridiculous! One of Fedora's weak spots. :-(

This particular kernel is also an example of a "karma fight" within bodhi,
with several testers ignoring the guidelines, unfortunately:

  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Update_feedback_guidelines#Previously_reported_bugs

They voted +1, compensating previous -1 votes. :-(

-- 
Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.5.0-2.fc17.x86_64
loadavg: 0.22 0.23 0.25
-- 
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org


[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [EPEL Devel]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux