On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Sage Weil <sweil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017, Yuri Weinstein wrote: >> Detailed summary of the QE Validation can be found here >> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17851#note-92 >> >> The following suites were in scope of this point release validation: >> >> rados (subset 35/50 228 jobs) >> rbd >> rgw >> fs >> krbd >> kcephfs >> knfs >> rest >> hadoop >> samba >> ceph-deploy >> ceph-disk >> upgrade/client-upgrade >> upgrade/hammer-x (jewel) >> upgrade/jewel-x/point-to-point-x >> powercycle >> >> (please let me know if any suites are missing from this ^ list) >> >> ============================== >> (overall pretty clean validation cycle, kudos to @Nathan and the >> backporting team !) >> >> Issue http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/18089 resulted in several >> failures, but is infrastructure related. >> >> Issues requiring approval/decision: >> >> rados - one job failed, http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/18089, need Josh approval >> >> krbd - http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17221, need Ilya's approval/fix >> >> samba- http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19101, need John's approval/fix >> >> upgrade/client-upgrade - http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19080, need >> Jason, Nathan approval/and or backport Ignore -- it's not worth the effort to fix the test since we won't be cutting a new Infernalis build. >> upgrade/hammer-x (jewel) - http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/18089, can >> be approved for release, Sage? > > If you mean it's just hte xenial nodes failing on the package install, > yeah, ignore those failures! > > sage -- Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
