f17alpha-blocker-review-3
LOGS
17:03:25 <tflink> #startmeeting F17alpha-blocker-review-3
17:03:25 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Feb 10 17:03:25 2012 UTC.  The chair is tflink. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:03:25 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:03:26 * pschindl is here and waiting for some fun
17:03:38 <adamw> yo
17:03:38 <tflink> #meetingname F17alpha-blocker-review-3
17:03:38 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f17alpha-blocker-review-3'
17:03:46 <tflink> #topic roll call
17:03:55 * nirik is lurking and happy to help with anything he can
17:04:03 <tflink> who's ready for some blocker review fun time?
17:04:05 * jskladan1 is distracted with the anaconda stuff on #fedora-qa
17:04:14 <tflink> same here
17:06:51 <tflink> ok, it looks like the anaconda testing discussion has died down for the moment
17:07:02 <tflink> and I think we have enough people to get started
17:07:22 <tflink> #topic Introduction
17:07:35 <tflink> #info Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and nice-to-have bugs.
17:07:54 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers
17:07:55 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
17:08:06 <tflink> #info 8 proposed blockers
17:08:07 <tflink> #info 3 accepted blockers
17:08:07 <tflink> #info 1 proposed NTH
17:08:24 <tflink> if there are no objections, let's get started with the proposed blockers
17:08:36 <adamw> go for it
17:08:45 <adamw> note: bcl will be out until I think 10:30 or 11:30
17:08:45 <tflink> #topic (787744) RuntimeError: device is already mapped (F17 Alpha TC1)
17:08:49 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787744
17:08:51 <buggbot> Bug 787744: unspecified, unspecified, ---, anaconda-maint-list, MODIFIED, RuntimeError: device is already mapped (F17 Alpha TC1)
17:08:51 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, MODIFIED
17:08:54 <adamw> er, 1.5hrs from now -> 2.5 hrs from now
17:09:03 <adamw> i asked him to add notes in the bug reports on bugs that concern anaconda
17:10:35 <tflink> I'm thinking +1 blocker on this
17:10:41 <tflink> but it needs to be re-tested
17:11:13 <adamw> yup, should be fixed in tc2
17:11:20 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 787744 - AcceptedBlocker - The installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces
17:11:21 <adamw> brian didn't really answer my question, so i find it hard to vote
17:11:32 <adamw> but going on the safe side, sure
17:11:38 <jskladan1> i'll test it first thing in the morning
17:11:44 <jskladan1> on monday
17:12:06 <jskladan1> and will report to bugzilla
17:12:27 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:12:35 <jskladan1> ack
17:12:43 <pschindl> ack
17:12:52 <tflink> #agreed - 787744 - AcceptedBlocker - The installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces
17:13:01 <tflink> #topic (789181) repoclosure failure on 17-Alpha.TC2 DVDs (gnome-python2-bonobo-2.28.1-8.fc17)
17:13:04 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789181
17:13:06 <buggbot> Bug 789181: unspecified, unspecified, ---, walters, NEW, repoclosure failure on 17-Alpha.TC2 DVDs (gnome-python2-bonobo-2.28.1-8.fc17)
17:13:07 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NEW
17:13:17 <adamw> clear blocker per the criteria
17:13:20 <tflink> oh, anyone willing to play secretary?
17:13:23 <adamw> we need to unravel this particular thicket today
17:13:50 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 789181 - There must be no file conflicts (cases where the files in some packages conflict but the packages have explicit Conflicts: tags are acceptable) or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (DVD) install
17:14:28 <adamw> ack
17:14:29 <jskladan1> ack
17:14:33 * adamw will be secretary if no-one else wants to
17:14:36 <tflink> #agreed - 789181 - There must be no file conflicts (cases where the files in some packages conflict but the packages have explicit Conflicts: tags are acceptable) or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (DVD) install
17:14:53 <tflink> #topic (789180) repoclosure failure on 17-Alpha.TC2 DVDs (libguestfs-1.17.4-7.fc17)
17:14:57 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789180
17:14:58 <buggbot> Bug 789180: unspecified, unspecified, ---, rjones, NEW, repoclosure failure on 17-Alpha.TC2 DVDs (libguestfs-1.17.4-7.fc17)
17:14:59 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NEW
17:15:25 <tflink> similar boat, pretty clear blocker
17:15:42 <adamw> yup
17:15:42 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 789180 - There must be no file conflicts (cases where the files in some packages conflict but the packages have explicit Conflicts: tags are acceptable) or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (DVD) install
17:15:45 <pschindl> ack
17:15:46 <jskladan1> ack
17:15:52 <tflink> #agreed - 789180 - There must be no file conflicts (cases where the files in some packages conflict but the packages have explicit Conflicts: tags are acceptable) or unresolved package dependencies during a media-based (DVD) install
17:16:02 <tflink> #topic (789233) cannot login system with minimal packages
17:16:03 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789233
17:16:03 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NEW
17:16:04 <buggbot> Bug 789233: high, unspecified, ---, bcl, NEW, cannot login system with minimal packages
17:16:28 * tflink wonders what image was used for this
17:17:08 <adamw> yeah, it would help to know
17:17:32 <adamw> we also have https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787838 and my https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788829 as kinda-similar bugs, my spidey senses are tingling
17:17:36 <buggbot> Bug 787838: unspecified, unspecified, ---, mgrepl, CLOSED RAWHIDE, no login for liveuser
17:17:37 <buggbot> Bug 788829: urgent, unspecified, ---, mgrepl, NEW, Cannot log in with SELinux enabled in 2012-02-08 rawhide
17:19:04 * tflink has also seen some problems with SELinux but has been using non-standard media
17:20:08 <tflink> I'm thinking that there is something here but it doesn't seem clear what exactly is going on
17:20:13 <tflink> punt for this week?
17:20:15 <adamw> going by the date i'd guess it's a tc2 test
17:20:36 * tflink can't even get a working TC2 install :)
17:20:36 <adamw> yeah, punt seems reasonable, there's clearly something wiggy going on with selinux imho, i'm going to keep bugging dan about it
17:21:21 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 789233 - We need more information on the image used and what exactly is going on before making a decision on blocker status
17:21:40 <robatino> i saw this on one of the TC2 DVDs (didn't get a working install with the other)
17:21:58 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:22:04 <robatino> so it probably affects both
17:22:15 <jskladan1> ack
17:22:17 <maxamillion> ack
17:22:30 <tflink> #agreed - 789233 - We need more information on the image used and what exactly is going on before making a decision on blocker status
17:22:32 * maxamillion slides into the back of the room quietly
17:22:39 <tflink> #topic (787781) Lorax Templates are deleting required binaries post usrmove
17:22:42 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787781
17:22:44 <buggbot> Bug 787781: urgent, unspecified, ---, wwoods, MODIFIED, Lorax Templates are deleting required binaries post usrmove
17:22:45 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, MODIFIED
17:22:55 <tflink> this was blocking image composition, so I think it's a pretty clear blocker
17:23:08 <adamw> LATE AGAIN, Mr. MAXAMILLION?!
17:23:18 <maxamillion> adamw: I know!!!!! :(
17:23:22 * maxamillion slaps $day_job
17:23:47 <maxamillion> tflink: +1
17:24:15 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 787781 - AcceptedBlocker - Prevents image composition
17:24:24 <pschindl> ack
17:24:29 <adamw> ack
17:24:42 <tflink> on second thought, that criterion isn't quite right
17:24:58 <tflink> #agreed - 787781 - AcceptedBlocker - The installer must boot (if appropriate) and run on all primary architectures, with all system firmware types that are common on those architectures, from default live image, DVD, and boot.iso install media
17:25:08 <maxamillion> ack
17:25:10 <tflink> the image does compose, it just doesn't work :)
17:25:24 <adamw> well, ack
17:25:24 <tflink> this one, on the other hand ...
17:25:27 <tflink> #topic (787787) mkefiboot crashes with --apple option by using old mkfs command
17:25:29 <adamw> although we should just close it, right?
17:25:30 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787787
17:25:32 <buggbot> Bug 787787: high, unspecified, ---, wwoods, MODIFIED, mkefiboot crashes with --apple option by using old mkfs command
17:25:33 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, MODIFIED
17:25:41 <tflink> adamw: probably, yeah. I was waiting to test with TC2 first
17:25:44 <adamw> the newer lorax is built and pushed and tc2 was composed with it
17:25:45 <adamw> okay
17:25:48 <adamw> will set on_qa though
17:25:50 <adamw> then
17:26:02 <tflink> this one can be closed, though. it was crashing pungi
17:26:30 <tflink> so blocker status is pretty much pointless :)
17:27:01 <tflink> proposed #agreed 787787 - AcceptedBlocker - Prevents image composition because pungi was crashing
17:27:17 <tflink> or we can just close it - either is fine with me
17:27:41 * dgilmore pops in from 30,000 feet
17:28:18 <jskladan1> sorry /me got distracte d by phonecall
17:28:54 * tflink glares disapprovingly at jskladan
17:29:00 <tflink> any thoughts?
17:29:21 <tflink> the safest route would be to accept and propose it closed pending testing on an EFI mac
17:29:26 <dgilmore> tflink: doesnt matter either way its fixed
17:29:26 <maxamillion> if its resolved, might as well close it
17:30:29 <jskladan1> maxamillion: +1
17:30:30 <tflink> dgilmore: yep, just waiting for some input rather than unilaterally making a decision :)
17:30:48 <tflink> but it sounds like "close it"
17:30:51 <dgilmore> yeah
17:31:16 <tflink> #agreed - 787787 - Since images build with the new verison, this can be closed
17:31:25 <tflink> #topic (788829) Cannot log in with SELinux enabled in 2012-02-08 rawhide
17:31:28 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788829
17:31:30 <buggbot> Bug 788829: urgent, unspecified, ---, mgrepl, NEW, Cannot log in with SELinux enabled in 2012-02-08 rawhide
17:31:31 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NEW
17:31:34 <tflink> aaand, on to this again :)
17:32:33 <tflink> I'm thinking punt until we have more information since it doesn't sound like this was a F17 install
17:32:43 <tflink> not that there isn't an issue here
17:32:54 <maxamillion> tflink: the TC2 live images appear to have the same issue for me
17:33:23 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 788829 - We need more information on the cause of an requirements to hit this bug, will revisit next week
17:33:27 <maxamillion> (granted I just downloaded so I only have about 20 minutes of testing so far, but I'm seeing an issue that behaves similarly so I assume its the same)
17:33:28 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:33:41 <adamw> sorry, just hit a weird bug where my keyboard stops responding and had to log out
17:33:54 <tflink> maxamillion: it sounds like there are ~ 3 bugs hinging at the same issue, so there's probably a bug here
17:33:55 <adamw> did i miss any bugs before 788829?
17:34:05 <tflink> adamw: just the 2 lorax issues
17:34:25 <adamw> both accepted blockers i guess?
17:34:39 <dgilmore> im +1 for a blocker, something is going on there, but it seems it needs some more testing/triaging
17:34:44 <tflink> adamw: accepted on 787781 and close on 788829
17:34:55 <maxamillion> dgilmore: +1
17:35:25 <adamw> tflink: what on 787787?
17:35:36 <tflink> I'm not saying that there isn't an issue here, but I'm not convinced that this bug hits the alpha criteria
17:35:52 <tflink> adamw: it's fixed so we agreed to just close it
17:36:07 <tflink> this _particular_ bug, rather
17:37:04 <tflink> but then again, code freeze is on tuesday, right?
17:37:57 * tflink is -1 blocker -1 NTH right now because we don't have a cause or proposed fix
17:38:39 <tflink> but it also sounds like I'm in the minority right now
17:38:58 <tflink> any other votes? I'm seeing +2/-1 blocker right now
17:38:59 <dgilmore> tflink: yes code freeze for alpha is tuesday, which means you need to get stuff in Monday
17:39:50 <maxamillion> well, I guess I'm looking at it as a "zomg that's a shitty issue to have off the bat from fresh boot into TC2 live image" but does it actually contend with any criteria for a blocker?
17:39:52 <tflink> adamw: care to weigh in?
17:40:02 <pschindl> I don't think it's blocker. I can't find any criterium for this.
17:40:11 <pschindl> -1 blocker for me
17:40:12 <adamw> we're on my bug here?
17:40:16 <pschindl> yep
17:40:18 <dgilmore> adamw: yes
17:40:20 <adamw> well...as experienced it's clearly a blocker. you can't log into the system.
17:40:44 <adamw> "Following on from the previous criterion, after firstboot is completed and on subsequent boots, a system installed according to any of the above criteria (or the appropriate Beta or Final criteria, when applying this criterion to those releases) must boot to a working graphical environment without unintended user intervention. This includes correctly accessing any encrypted partitions when the correct passphrase is supplied "
17:40:53 <jskladan1> aaa /me got ninja'd
17:40:56 <tflink> adamw: but this wasn't a F17 install, was it?
17:40:56 <adamw> but the question is, what the hell is actually going on, and is it happening to anyone else
17:41:02 <maxamillion> ah, sure enough
17:41:18 <adamw> it's an upgrade, yeah. so the question is does it actually impact fresh installs / anyone else.
17:41:21 <tflink> exactly, I'm not saying that it isn't blocker material. I'm just not comfortable accepting as a blocker until we know more
17:41:24 <dgilmore> adamw: i think it needs more investigation, but as it stands its got blocker on it
17:41:24 <adamw> sure
17:41:27 <adamw> i'm happy with that
17:41:32 <maxamillion> adamw: its happening to me with the TC2 for Desktop Live and XFCE Live ... I'm installing from the XFCE TC2 into a VM right now and I'll verify off that install as well
17:41:33 <adamw> but i was replying to pschindl's 'can't find a criterion'
17:41:46 <tflink> ok, sounds like we're +3/-2 blocker
17:41:50 <maxamillion> adamw: yeah, rgr
17:42:13 <adamw> maxamillion: 'it's happenign to me', as in, same symptoms? can't log in if selinux is enabled, and the contexts appear to be completely out of whack?
17:42:26 <maxamillion> adamw: yes, sorry for lack of clarification
17:42:29 <tflink> adamw: how does that criteria apply? This was on a rawhide system, no?
17:42:43 <adamw> tflink: oh, i see your confusion. at the time i filed, f17 hadn't branched.
17:42:53 <maxamillion> adamw: I'm experiencing similar symptoms and I can log in once I boot with enforcing=0
17:42:54 <jskladan1> tflink: but according to maxamillion, it also hits the TC2
17:43:05 <jskladan1> so if it's the same, then I'm +1 on blocker
17:43:20 <tflink> jskladan1: he also said that he'd been testing for ~20 mins
17:43:21 <adamw> let's put it this way
17:43:22 <maxamillion> I don't know that its the same, but the symptoms are certainly similar
17:43:29 * tflink is writing a proposal, hold your horses
17:43:31 <adamw> is anyone actually running f17 right now and *not* seeing this?
17:43:55 <maxamillion> tflink: boot TC2 Live image and you can't login, boot TC2 Live image with enforcing=0 and login just fine
17:44:03 <tflink> adamw: I'm not running anything right now that I would be comfortable calling F17
17:44:15 <tflink> lots of hacked together installs
17:44:25 <dgilmore> adamw: im planning a f17 upgrade this weekend
17:44:49 <maxamillion> so would we rather defer for more testing/diagnostics?
17:45:05 <adamw> i'm not hugely concerned either way, i'm going to be poking it whichever we pick.
17:45:06 <maxamillion> +traige
17:45:13 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 788829 - AcceptedBlocker - Following on from the previous criterion, after firstboot is completed and on subsequent boots, a system installed according to any of the above criteria (or the appropriate Beta or Final criteria, when applying this criterion to those releases) must boot to a working graphical environment without unintended user intervention. This includes correctly accessing any encrypted partitions when the correct pa
17:45:15 <maxamillion> bleh ... I can't type
17:45:20 <tflink> we need to fix that criterion
17:45:27 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:45:36 <dgilmore> ack
17:45:48 <adamw> tflink: heh
17:45:52 * dgilmore is going to have to drop out soon for a bit
17:45:54 <adamw> mild ack
17:45:57 <maxamillion> ack
17:46:01 <jskladan1> ack here
17:46:15 <tflink> adamw: patch?
17:47:27 <adamw> no patch
17:47:43 <tflink> ok
17:47:48 <adamw> i note in the -85 selinux-policy changelog "- sshd fixes seem to be causing unconfined domains to dyntrans to themselves"
17:47:51 <adamw> i wonder if that's related
17:47:55 <tflink> #agreed - 788829 - AcceptedBlocker - Following on from the previous criterion, after firstboot is completed and on subsequent boots, a system installed according to any of the above criteria (or the appropriate Beta or Final criteria, when applying this criterion to those releases) must boot to a working graphical environment without unintended user intervention. This includes correctly accessing any encrypted partitions when the correct passphrase
17:48:07 <tflink> #topic (789271) firstboot-text prevents system from booting
17:48:07 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789271
17:48:07 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NEW
17:48:10 <buggbot> Bug 789271: unspecified, unspecified, ---, xgl-maint, NEW, firstboot-text prevents system from booting
17:48:26 <tflink> oh yeah, this wasn't actually fixed for F16
17:48:28 <tflink> just disabled
17:48:58 <tflink> nvm, I spoke too soon
17:49:36 * dgilmore is off
17:49:41 * jskladan1 is not at all sure, what the bug actually means
17:50:03 <tflink> I think it's an issue with basic video on reboot after install
17:51:29 <adamw> yeah, we need more info here
17:51:37 <adamw> is it some issue with startup sequence, or does X start fail
17:51:47 <jskladan1> adamw: +1
17:52:07 <adamw> if this was a net install, it may have got the older libpciaccess, so vesa driver was broken
17:52:23 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 789271 - It isn't clear what the actual failure is here, more information and triage is needed before deciding on blocker status
17:52:30 <pschindl> ack
17:53:13 <jskladan1> ack
17:53:27 <tflink> #agreed - 789271 - It isn't clear what the actual failure is here, more information and triage is needed before deciding on blocker status
17:53:35 <tflink> ok, that's all of the approved blockers
17:53:42 <adamw> hi bcl
17:53:44 <tflink> s/approved/proposed
17:54:06 <tflink> we have 1 proposed NTH
17:54:09 <tflink> #topic (785815) virt-install URL install fails with dracut Warning: dracut: FATAL: No or empty root= argument
17:54:12 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785815
17:54:13 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
17:54:14 <buggbot> Bug 785815: unspecified, unspecified, ---, dracut-maint, NEW, virt-install URL install fails with dracut Warning: dracut: FATAL: No or empty root= argument
17:54:16 <bcl> hey folks.
17:54:32 * maxamillion has to run for about 15 minutes
17:54:52 <bcl> ooh, I have an opinion. it is a virt-install issue and not a blocker.
17:55:40 <tflink> bcl: I think the NTH part is that virt-install is used for testing
17:56:48 <tflink> but I'm borderline -1 NTH on this
17:57:09 <adamw> bcl: it's an NTH proposal, not blocker proposal
17:57:27 <bcl> well yes. The issue is that you need to have the rootfs image available, which may not be easy to automate. eg. using --kernel and --initrd instead of --location
17:57:51 <adamw> it does seem like something we might not want to poke in a freeze
17:57:53 <tflink> bcl: so the assertion that this will be fixed when a dracut fix lands isn't tru?
17:58:07 <adamw> i'm not hugely expert so i don't want to cast a very strong vote, though
18:00:31 <bcl> I'm not sure how you'd fix it in dracut.
18:01:16 <bcl> In f16 the rootfs was in the initrd, now it is back to being 'someplace else'. So you have to tell virt-install or dracut where that other place is.
18:01:47 <tflink> it sounds like the current assumption is that the loader changes in dracut will fix this
18:01:51 <bcl> virt-install *should* be able to find it when using location, as long as that points to a tree or mounted iso.
18:02:05 <jskladan1> I do not have strong opinion either way, I know Kamil uses virt-instlall quite extensively for RATS etc, so this si probably more of "pain in the rear" for the test automation
18:02:14 <bcl> I may be missing something, but I don't see how.
18:02:39 <bcl> whoever is using virt-install ought to be able to work around it easily.
18:03:06 <bcl> also, this should just work if you are using an iso.
18:03:07 <adamw> aiui you just have to be a bit more careful when invoking virt-install, right? it's not like it's completely broken.
18:03:15 <bcl> exactly.
18:03:16 <adamw> i'd be worried if this was some kind of insurmountable issue for autoqa.
18:03:59 * tflink isn't familiar enough with the RATS code to know
18:04:20 <tflink> so ... any thought on reject or defer?
18:05:35 <tflink> proposed #agreed - RejectedNTH - There are no criteria around virt-install and it sounds like this problem is workaround-able.
18:05:41 <bcl> I'm -1 blocker +1 NTH but I'd bounce it to virt-install not dracut.
18:06:51 <adamw> i'm weakly -1 nth
18:06:59 <adamw> i don't see the justification for changing this during a freeze
18:07:13 <tflink> I don't see how changing this during code freeze would help anything
18:07:13 <maxamillion> adamw: +1
18:07:37 <tflink> or hurt, as long as the change is in virt-install and not dracut
18:08:07 <bcl> I don't see how it could hurt. and it makes things easier for testers.
18:08:08 <jskladan1> tflink: +1
18:08:44 <tflink> either way, it sounds like an overall ack on the proposal?
18:09:03 <jskladan1> ack
18:10:01 <tflink> #agreed - RejectedNTH - There are no criteria around virt-install and it sounds like this problem is workaround-able.
18:10:01 <adamw> ack
18:10:22 <tflink> and now it's time for the accepted blockers
18:10:30 <tflink> #topic (787261) Fedora 17 Alpha TC1 still has all F16 artwork
18:10:31 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787261
18:10:31 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, NEW
18:10:32 <buggbot> Bug 787261: unspecified, unspecified, ---, tcallawa, NEW, Fedora 17 Alpha TC1 still has all F16 artwork
18:10:47 <tflink> sounds like this still isn't fixed
18:11:13 <tflink> who do we poke about this? I'd really rather not have to respin just to fix the artwork
18:11:38 <adamw> ?
18:11:45 <adamw> i got new artwork with a rawhide upgrade two days ago
18:11:52 <adamw> i was kinda assuming it had made tc2, though i didn't check yet
18:11:56 <tflink> adamw: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787261#c2
18:11:57 <buggbot> Bug 787261: unspecified, unspecified, ---, tcallawa, NEW, Fedora 17 Alpha TC1 still has all F16 artwork
18:12:36 <adamw> oh, looks like there are beefy backgrounds but not an update to fedora-logos yet
18:12:53 * adamw has beefy-miracle-backgrounds-single and beefy-miracle-backgrounds-gnome
18:13:25 <adamw> i think we poke mo and spot
18:13:28 <adamw> i can do that
18:13:34 <tflink> adamw: ok, thanks
18:14:01 <tflink> #info it appears that the artwork does indeed exist but fedora-logos still needs to be updated
18:14:16 <adamw> #action adamw to poke mo and spot about getting this done
18:14:21 <adamw> oh, am i a chair?
18:14:25 <tflink> adamw: you beat me to it
18:14:29 <tflink> #chair adamw
18:14:29 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw tflink
18:14:58 <tflink> #action adamw to poke mo and spot about getting this done
18:15:14 <tflink> #topic (736993) error install bootloader with serial interface install
18:15:17 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736993
18:15:19 <buggbot> Bug 736993: medium, unspecified, ---, pjones, ASSIGNED, error install bootloader with serial interface install
18:15:20 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, ASSIGNED
18:16:05 <tflink> sounds like there hasn't been progress on this
18:16:27 <bcl> hmm, wwoods sent a serial patch, not sure if its related...
18:16:55 <adamw> this isn't an accepted f17 alpha blocker
18:17:06 <adamw> it was accepted as an f16 final blocker, then re-opened and nominated as an f17 alpha blocker
18:17:13 <adamw> the 'acceptedblocker' field should have been cleared
18:17:19 <tflink> adamw: ah, nobody cleared the field
18:17:25 <adamw> bcl: could this be something that got fixed in 16.x and didn't get merged into 17.x?
18:18:17 <bcl> doubtful, pretty much everything goes onto master.
18:18:18 <adamw> so i'm -1 on this as an alpha blocker, i think we *still* haven't decided whether serial install should be a beta/final issue or never block at all, but we've always been pretty clear it doesn't block alpha
18:18:22 <adamw> k
18:18:45 <bcl> -1 alpha here. +1 final though.
18:19:04 <bcl> I think wwood's patch is unrelated.
18:19:15 <maxamillion> it would appear the TC2 KDE image still has the F16 artwork but the XFCE and Gnome images seem to have the beefy miracle fireworks .... just a random side note going back to the previous discussion about art
18:19:26 <tflink> bcl: yeah, sounds like that to me, as well
18:19:36 <adamw> the alpha criterion is "The installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces", which intentionally excludes serial (and cmdline)
18:20:15 <adamw> i think the intent was to broaden it out at beta / final criteria pages, but we so far haven't actually done that.
18:20:24 <adamw> anyway, clearly -1 alpha.
18:20:37 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 736993 - RejectedBlocker - This does not hit any of the alpha release criteria and the serial install criterion hasn't been decided for beta/final
18:20:46 <maxamillion> ack
18:20:47 <adamw> ack
18:20:52 <adamw> re-propose for beta, for now, so it doesn't fall off
18:20:54 <pschindl> ack
18:20:56 <jskladan1> ack
18:21:05 <tflink> #agreed - 736993 - RejectedBlocker - This does not hit any of the alpha release criteria and the serial install criterion hasn't been decided for beta/final, re-propose for beta
18:21:28 <tflink> #topic (785808) dracut Warning: "/dev/disk/by-label/Fedora\x2017-Alpha\x20i386" does not exist
18:21:31 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785808
18:21:34 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, NEW
18:21:34 <buggbot> Bug 785808: unspecified, unspecified, ---, dgilmore, NEW, dracut Warning: "/dev/disk/by-label/Fedora\x2017-Alpha\x20i386" does not exist
18:21:44 <tflink> and it sounds like this has been fixed
18:22:22 <tflink> #info according to c#7, this has been fixed - needs to be closed
18:23:00 <bcl> sounds like not a problem anymore.
18:23:04 <maxamillion> +1 for close
18:23:11 <bcl> ditto
18:23:12 <maxamillion> it doesn't appear to be an issue in TC2 either
18:23:15 <tflink> #action tflink to ask tester to close bug if it is indeed fixed
18:23:33 <adamw> well
18:23:37 <adamw> i'm not so sure this is exactly *fixed*
18:23:52 <tflink> oh?
18:24:05 <adamw> it may be simply that it's broken with the label used for a rats image, works with the label used for a tc
18:24:38 <adamw> or, to make it more general, it's broken with rats composes, works with tc/rc composes
18:24:43 <adamw> in which case it's not a blocker, but it's not *fixed*
18:24:54 <tflink> #undo
18:24:54 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Action object at 0x38cf2450>
18:24:58 <adamw> i don't think we have the information to declare for sure that it's fixed, anyway - too many variables
18:25:27 <tflink> so, request more testing?
18:25:51 <bcl> huh? seems pretty simple. boot, no work.
18:26:23 <bcl> and since it was reported pre-TC1 that would lend weight to it being invalid for current images.
18:26:49 <adamw> my point is that rats images and tc images are somewhat different
18:27:00 <adamw> so just the fact that it works with tc images doesn't mean the underlying bug is actually fixed
18:27:02 <bcl> err, why the hell?
18:27:16 <adamw> it might be the case that if we composed an image right now with the RATS labels / naming it might still not work
18:27:32 <bcl> I don't know what RATS images are. but we ought to be testing the same stuff.
18:28:03 <adamw> if i sound like i'm drooling to everyone, i probably am.
18:28:10 <tflink> RATS -> Rawhide Anaconda Test S____ (can't remember what the S is)
18:28:17 <adamw> automated test suite isn't it?
18:28:30 <tflink> adamw: that would make more sense
18:28:37 * tflink learned something today :)
18:28:43 <bcl> heh.
18:28:47 <robatino> i thought it was Rawhide Acceptance Test Suite?
18:28:53 <adamw> oh, i think you win the prize.
18:29:02 <robatino> couldn't find any good links on it, though, so wasn't sure
18:29:07 <tflink> at least one of us knows what it means
18:29:13 <maxamillion> lol
18:29:15 <adamw> okay, so one more try to explain
18:29:21 <adamw> look at the report: the key error seems to be "dracut Warning: "/dev/disk/by-label/Fedora\x2017-Alpha\x20i386" does not exist"
18:29:37 <adamw> i'm not sure the label for a TC image is actually in the same format
18:29:41 <adamw> if it is, then fine, the bug is fixed
18:30:01 <adamw> if i'm raving, then by all means tell me so, and we can close the bug and move on ;)
18:30:30 <tflink> yeah, that sounds about right to me
18:30:33 * maxamillion fires up another TC2 image to check
18:30:34 <bcl> It is. at least with the dumb hex spaces in there.
18:30:41 <tflink> no longer a blocker, but may not be fixed
18:31:14 <tflink> maxamillion: that won't help since the issue was with the RATS images
18:31:17 <bcl> TC2's label is exactly that, but with x86_64
18:31:30 <bcl> Is RATS blocker worthy? I would hope not.
18:31:51 <maxamillion> tflink: but I thought he needed to know if the TC2 image label was the same format
18:31:55 <tflink> bcl: no but like we said, probably not a blocker anymore but maybe not fixed
18:32:05 <tflink> maxamillion: ah, I misunderstood then
18:32:07 <adamw> bcl: in that case, i'm happy calling it fixed.
18:32:26 <adamw> tflink: bcl says the labels are the same, in which case, my concern doesn't apply.
18:33:01 <adamw> and we can just go ahead and close it.
18:33:14 <adamw> sorry to delay.
18:33:16 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 785808 - Close Bug - The labels from RATS are the same as TC2 and the issue no longer exists - the bug can be closed
18:34:19 <tflink> #agreed - 785808 - Close Bug - The labels from RATS are the same as TC2 and the issue no longer exists - the bug can be closed
18:34:29 <tflink> ok, that should be all the blockers to review
18:34:34 <tflink> #topic open floor
18:34:47 <maxamillion> adamw: it was a valid concern, just not one that most of us were familiar with
18:34:48 <tflink> anything else that needs to be addressed or that I missed?
18:35:23 <tflink> it sounds like we're going to have some test builds of anaconda/dracut soon
18:35:30 <adamw> testing what exactly?
18:35:34 <tflink> but that's less related to blocker review
18:35:44 <tflink> adamw: the new dracut loader stuff
18:36:06 <tflink> wwoods wants to test it a bit instead of just throwing it in for alpha right before the freeze
18:36:41 * tflink sets the fuse for ~ 5 minutes
18:36:51 <tflink> #info Next Blocker Review Meeting: 2012/02/17 @ 17:00 UTC in #fedora-bugzappers
18:37:13 * adamw missed that one entirely.
18:37:30 <tflink> adamw: it was in #fedora-qa right before the blocker meeting
18:37:59 <adamw> feh, i was busy flaming people on devel!
18:38:08 <tflink> yeah, that thread is turning epic
18:38:30 <nirik> adamw: productivity-- :)
18:38:33 <tflink> it's making me think about the new anaconda testing stuff we talked about @ FUDCon, though
18:38:57 <tflink> er, stuff for testing the anaconda changed planned for F18
18:40:41 <tflink> ok, thanks for coming everybody!
18:40:51 * tflink will send out minutes shortly
18:40:54 <tflink> #endmeeting