Am 03.08.2012 16:02, schrieb Michael Schwendt: > 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... yes, but xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.20.1-1.fc17.x86_64 works fine with kernels before 3.5 and the hardware i use in the bugreport is not exotic > 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. but the problem is there i have TWO of this machines, both doe snot boot until "nomodeset" as kernel-param with 3.5 which results in something like 800x600 resultion on a 25" LED what makes it impossible for me to do anything after some medical operations on my eyes, even no debug > 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. :-( and this is unacceptable behavior if every koji build would give a link to the karma page it would be easier to give bad carma, but as long this is not easy possible it has to be enough that i test a koji-build long before it reaches updates-testing and report a bug to prevent make it to stable holy hell it is even not possible to give "bad karma" with fedoa-easy-karma in the state i reported the bug _______________________________________ i had installed on both of my machines any kernel-update since F14 partly ones which never did reach stable from koji after that having one which does not bot at atll, report it and become the yum-response below shot time after is a bad joke 3.4 is not EOL proven by the 3.4.7 update for F16 in updates-testing i even rolled out to production machines last night after internal tests because it has a security-flag so the way to go after get a report 3.5.x F17 does not boot on standard intel-hardware the way to go is hold back 3.5 for F167 stable and update F17 to 3.4.7 for now ========================================================================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Größe ========================================================================================================================= Installieren: kernel x86_64 3.5.0-2.fc17 updates 26 M kernel-devel x86_64 3.5.0-2.fc17 updates 7.5 M Aktualisieren: kernel-headers x86_64 3.5.0-2.fc17 updates 846 k Vorgangsübersicht ========================================================================================================================= Installieren 2 Packages Upgrade 1 Package Gesamte Downloadgröße: 34 M Ist dies in Ordnung? [j/N] :n
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 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
