On ma, 11 syys 2017, Adam Williamson 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. 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.
So we should actually close this bug and instead have 1490762 as a blocker. https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1062 is the fix, it is one-liner in FreeIPA.
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.
There are few more fixes coming as FreeIPA switched to Python3 and the code drop in Fedora right now does not include all of them yet. We probably should propose these as a blocker too. They all are tested as part of upstream CI on F26+COPR, roughly corresponding to F27 state. -- / Alexander Bokovoy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
