17:16:09 <roshi> #startmeeting F22-blocker-review
17:16:09 <roshi> #meetingname F22-blocker-review
17:16:09 <roshi> #topic Roll Call
17:16:09 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Mar  2 17:16:09 2015 UTC.  The chair is roshi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:16:09 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:16:09 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f22-blocker-review'
17:16:19 <sgallagh> .hello sgallagh
17:16:19 <roshi> who's around?
17:16:20 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com>
17:16:23 <roshi> .hello roshi
17:16:25 <zodbot> roshi: roshi 'Mike Ruckman' <mruckman@redhat.com>
17:16:44 * pschindl is here
17:17:07 * kparal lurks
17:17:10 * jreznik is still here, will have to leave but will be on phone and then back on his laptop
17:17:20 <danofsatx> .hello dmossor
17:17:21 <zodbot> danofsatx: dmossor 'Dan Mossor' <danofsatx@gmail.com>
17:17:35 * spoore is here
17:17:42 <roshi> #chair danofsatx jreznik kparal pschindl sgallagh adamw
17:17:42 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw danofsatx jreznik kparal pschindl roshi sgallagh
17:17:54 <roshi> good turnout :)
17:17:57 * kinokoio is here
17:18:08 <roshi> welcome kinokoio, spoore :)
17:18:13 <roshi> onto the boilerplate!
17:18:16 <roshi> #topic Introduction
17:18:16 <roshi> Why are we here?
17:18:16 <roshi> #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.
17:18:20 <roshi> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
17:18:23 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
17:18:25 <roshi> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
17:18:28 <roshi> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
17:18:30 <roshi> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
17:18:33 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Alpha_Release_Criteria
17:18:36 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Beta_Release_Criteria
17:18:39 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Final_Release_Criteria
17:18:57 <roshi> for blockers we have 11/4/0 (Alpha/Beta/Final)
17:19:15 <roshi> and for FEs we have: 12/0/0
17:19:32 <roshi> only 27 items to churn through :p
17:19:37 <roshi> onto the first blocker!
17:19:47 <sgallagh> roshi: I'm going to add one to the blocker count momentarily.
17:20:03 <roshi> sounds good, I just did the same thing
17:20:06 <roshi> which milestone?
17:20:13 <sgallagh> Alpha; broken domain-joining
17:20:25 <roshi> kk
17:20:29 <sgallagh> Actually, it's basically the second half of one we're going to review.
17:20:39 <sgallagh> So if we approve that one, can I just clone it and assume that it's also a blocker?
17:20:56 <adamw> just get the new one proposed before we reach the existing one nad it'll be fine
17:20:56 <Corey84> .fas corey84
17:20:57 <zodbot> Corey84: corey84 'Corey84' <sheldon.corey@gmail.com>
17:20:59 <adamw> we'll rubber stamp 'em both.
17:21:01 <sgallagh> ok
17:21:02 <roshi> yeah
17:21:03 <Corey84> came late sorry
17:21:04 <adamw> we have like 9 bugs to get through first
17:21:10 <sgallagh> ack
17:21:12 <roshi> ok, first proposal!
17:21:13 <roshi> #topic (1183807) network spoke listed as not connected despite having assigned IP and hostname
17:21:16 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183807
17:21:18 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:22:05 * danofsatx didn't see that one on the blocker app page
17:22:24 <pwhalen> this is reproducible on all arm development boards (no rtc), highbank seems fine so far.
17:22:39 <adamw> huh, this seems like an odd one
17:23:08 <roshi> spoke updating in text mode has had some issues int he past
17:23:13 <roshi> not surprising to me
17:23:15 <roshi> +1
17:23:22 <Corey84> +1
17:23:22 <jreznik> it's also vnc
17:23:30 <pwhalen> network is connected, verifies the repo, everything configured. in text we have the option to "Apply configuration in installer" and then it works.
17:23:46 <sgallagh> +1
17:23:46 <adamw> roshi: VNC is odder.
17:23:49 <roshi> yeah
17:23:51 <jreznik> pwhalen: is it arm only? or have anybody seen this n intel?
17:23:52 <pwhalen> right
17:23:53 <roshi> that bit is odd to me
17:23:55 <adamw> +1 by the criteria
17:24:02 <pwhalen> i tried on an x86 vm and it was fine
17:24:07 <pschindl> If the installation can be finished after visiting network spoke then shouldn't it be FE instead of blocker?
17:24:11 <adamw> yeah, i've done a VNC test on intel KVM and it worked
17:24:19 <adamw> pschindl: the bug says it can't, in VNC.
17:24:38 <adamw> i'm a bit worried we will need to do some more digging to ensure this gets fixed, though, given it's been sitting there for six weeks
17:24:54 <pschindl> ah, ok. I missed it.
17:24:55 <adamw> and by 'we' i mean 'pwhalen'. :P
17:24:56 <pschindl> +1
17:25:01 <pwhalen> right, i can connect to the vncserver, complete everything. network remains 'not connected'
17:25:10 <adamw> (well, i just found the PSUs for my ARM boxes, so...)
17:25:23 <adamw> pwhalen: are you up for trying to dig a bit deeper into what's going on?
17:25:25 <pwhalen> but software selections are verified when changed
17:25:26 <pwhalen> i am
17:25:49 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1183807 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This but is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: ""
17:25:51 <danofsatx> +1
17:25:53 <roshi> "When using a dedicated installer image, the installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces."
17:25:57 <danofsatx> ack
17:26:00 <pwhalen> ack
17:26:05 <roshi> bah, paste error
17:26:19 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1183807 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This but is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "When using a dedicated installer image, the installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces."
17:26:22 <sgallagh> ack
17:26:23 <roshi> there
17:26:26 <roshi> #agreed - 1183807 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This but is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "When using a dedicated installer image, the installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces."
17:26:27 <jreznik> ack
17:26:28 <pschindl> ack
17:26:35 <roshi> #topic (1197290) realm crash during kickstart
17:26:35 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197290
17:26:35 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, POST
17:26:55 <adamw> +1, this is what the server criterion is meant to cover, kickstart realm joining
17:27:14 <Corey84> +1
17:27:18 * danofsatx missed that one, too
17:27:21 <danofsatx> +1
17:27:22 <jreznik> +1
17:27:23 <roshi> +1
17:27:25 <roshi> clear
17:27:26 <adamw> huh, i thought this bug wasn't coming up till later.
17:27:35 <adamw> sgallagh: did you get the other one filed yet?
17:27:36 <pwhalen> +1
17:27:43 <roshi> I don't think order is perserved on blocker bugs output - but that's a guess
17:27:46 <pschindl> +1
17:27:53 <sgallagh> adamw: Doing it right this second
17:27:54 <sgallagh> 1197838
17:28:05 <adamw> is anyone secretarializing ?
17:28:17 <roshi> that was the next question
17:28:37 <roshi> it's become semi-tradition to do the asking during the 2nd blocker discussion :p
17:28:39 <danofsatx> can't today
17:28:58 <pschindl> adamw: I can do it today.
17:30:10 <adamw> thanks pschindl
17:30:11 <roshi> thanks pschindl
17:30:18 <adamw> jinx!
17:31:43 * jreznik is now moving to phone as jreznik_pp, back in 30 minutes
17:31:43 * roshi notes to get adamw a coke next time they are in the same place IRL
17:31:50 <roshi> what's the criteria for this one?
17:32:00 <adamw> it's cited in the bug isn't it?
17:32:08 <roshi> nvm
17:32:13 <sgallagh> "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install"
17:32:14 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197290 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install, and the system must respect the identity, authentication and access control configuration provided by the domain."
17:32:58 <pschindl> ack
17:32:59 <spoore> I'll add the reference to the criteria to the bug
17:33:01 <sgallagh> +1 for the record and ack
17:33:18 <sgallagh> 1197838 is basically a clone of this to get the other half of the bug fixed in SSSD
17:33:21 <roshi> thanks spoore
17:33:43 <adamw> roshi: shall we do 1197838 next then?
17:33:46 <sgallagh> (The first half was that anaconda isn't calling the realm command right; the second half is that SSSD packaging changed and realmd/authconfig can't call it right)
17:33:51 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197290 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install, and the system must respect the identity, authentication and access control configuration provided by the domain."
17:33:56 <roshi> sure
17:34:03 <roshi> #agreed - 1197290 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install, and the system must respect the identity, authentication and access control configuration provided by the domain."
17:34:14 <jreznik_pp> ack
17:34:21 <roshi> #topic realm crash during kickstart
17:34:28 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197838
17:34:44 <spoore> sgallagh, want me to add not to sssd bug as well?
17:34:53 <roshi> #info Proposed blocker, sssd, NEW
17:34:55 <adamw> same impact as other bug, +1
17:34:59 <sgallagh> spoore: yes, please
17:35:02 <Corey84> +1
17:35:04 <sgallagh> +1
17:35:54 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197838 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install, and the system must respect the identity, authentication and access control configuration provided by the domain."
17:36:12 <danofsatx> ack
17:36:14 <spoore> fyi that bug was just closed as dup of another
17:36:38 <sgallagh> spoore: What was?
17:36:49 <spoore> 1197838
17:37:02 <spoore> dup of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197218
17:37:29 <adamw> which is also proposed as a blocker
17:37:46 <adamw> let's ack 'em all and let god^H^H^Hpschindl sort 'em out
17:38:05 <roshi> works for me
17:38:19 <adamw> proposal: we broadly accept any and all bugs about kickstart-based realm enrolment being broken as blockers and appoint pschindl to sort out the mess. :)
17:38:23 <sgallagh> That shouldn't be a dupe...
17:39:05 <roshi> so, we can handle that bug next
17:39:07 <sgallagh> But maybe we can do it all together.
17:39:09 <sgallagh> /me sighs
17:39:26 <sgallagh> /me will get it sorted out
17:39:33 <roshi> thanks sgallagh
17:40:05 <pschindl> adamw: WHAT? :) OK :(
17:40:10 <adamw> =)
17:40:21 <roshi> ack to that adamw :p
17:40:25 <adamw> those are the sacred duties of a secretarializer!
17:40:34 <adamw> don't you remember the ceremony?
17:40:38 <roshi> we need a badge for that
17:40:56 <roshi> #action roshi to file a ticket for the secretarializor badge
17:41:27 <roshi> ack/nack/patch for this bug 1197838?
17:41:28 <adamw> #action adamw to file a ticket for the secretarializer badge, and fire roshi for spelling it wrong
17:41:31 <adamw> ack
17:41:46 <jreznik_pp> ack
17:41:50 <roshi> everything is cooler when it ends in "-zor"
17:42:00 <adamw> heh
17:42:09 <pschindl> ack
17:42:24 <roshi> #agreed - 1197838 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install, and the system must respect the identity, authentication and access control configuration provided by the domain."
17:42:26 * adamw notices that despite his and roshi's nicks having the same number of characters his is much wider
17:42:48 <roshi> not in my terminal
17:43:04 <roshi> and I can't believe you'd call me fat in such a public forum :p
17:43:07 <danofsatx> ack late
17:43:21 <roshi> onto the one this was marked a dupe for?
17:43:45 <sgallagh> ok
17:43:46 <roshi> or keep marching through the list?
17:44:01 <adamw> roshi: didn't i call myself fat?
17:44:22 * roshi reads again
17:44:37 <roshi> I guess you can read it that way, if you keep with the 3rd person perspective
17:44:41 <jreznik_pp> /me did not want to say that adamw
17:45:04 <adamw> the w really likes to spread out and get comfortable
17:45:08 <adamw> roshi: sure, next freeipa bug!
17:45:46 <roshi> #topic (1197218) - Add missing dependencies into freeipa packages
17:45:54 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197218
17:46:08 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, freeipa, ASSIGNED
17:46:39 <sgallagh> Yet another +1 with the same criteria
17:46:40 <roshi> +1 since these are all the same basic thing breaking
17:46:53 <adamw> as long as this is part of the installer not being able to do realm joins, sure
17:47:01 <adamw> (i.e. the package needed isn't in the installer env, right?)
17:47:02 <sgallagh> (we've got a *far* more entertaining FreeIPA bug coming up later :-P)
17:47:05 <roshi> we're like a real business, stacking our metrics before the big report!
17:47:27 <danofsatx> +1
17:47:36 <sgallagh> adamw: It's all fallout of the python2/python3 packaging changes.
17:47:45 <sgallagh> So the same set of fixes will apply.
17:47:55 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197218 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install, and the system must respect the identity, authentication and access control configuration provided by the domain."
17:48:01 <sgallagh> But right now, nothing works correctly out of the box
17:48:15 <pschindl> ack
17:48:45 <sgallagh> ack
17:48:51 <roshi> #agreed - 1197218 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "It must be possible to join the system to a FreeIPA or Active Directory domain at install time and post-install, and the system must respect the identity, authentication and access control configuration provided by the domain."
17:48:57 <roshi> #topic (1194682) Qt plugins fail to load or crash when built with gcc5
17:48:57 <adamw> ack
17:48:59 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194682
17:49:02 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gcc, MODIFIED
17:50:13 <roshi> so, it looks like most of this is fixed already
17:50:23 <kinokoio> is that a cflags problem?
17:50:48 <jreznik_pp> +1
17:51:17 <jreznik_pp> I'm a bit afraid about that whole kf5/plasma stack rebuild
17:51:18 <adamw> the blocker justification seems a bit thin
17:51:23 <sgallagh> Looks like there might need to be a bigger FE around the pre-emptive rebuilds fo the rest of the stack
17:51:25 <adamw> i could probably go +1 FE, but yeah, it seems like a big change
17:51:40 <adamw> shall we see if we can find rdieter?
17:51:55 <roshi> the criteria I'd use is: A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility
17:52:04 <roshi> if it crashes still, it's a clear blocker IMO
17:52:20 <jreznik_pp> Yep
17:52:28 <adamw> the justification said 'lots of crashiness' and the bug is about using kmix after you're at the desktop
17:52:38 <jreznik_pp> It may lead to no Plasma at all
17:52:40 <adamw> didn't seem entirely to me like it's 'stop you reaching a desktop' stuff
17:53:06 <jreznik_pp> I saw one report about Plasma not starting as it was missing pieces on IRC
17:53:23 <jreznik_pp> With pointer to this bug
17:53:29 <adamw> hum, ok
17:53:30 <roshi> looking at the steps to repro, I read it as "login, it crashes"
17:53:31 <jreznik_pp> But rdieter should know more
17:53:41 <roshi> though kaccess was the deamon for getting you logged in
17:53:46 <roshi> but I don't know kde that well
17:53:50 <adamw> roshi: i read it as 'login, see some crash notifications'
17:53:56 <adamw> roshi: i think it's actually a11y stuff, but imbw
17:54:05 <jreznik_pp> There were more gcc issues, so maybe I'm wrong here
17:54:19 <roshi> danofsatx: have you seen this or know what it's talking about?
17:54:39 <adamw> i think satellit did some KDE live testing...
17:56:35 <roshi> so, punt or wait for more infomation?
17:56:42 <adamw> i guess i'm ok with a +1 if it's really badly breaking KDE, just a bit concerned about a wholesale rebuild of stuff at this point
17:56:46 <kinokoio> adamw: just blackscreen, no way to recover the display manager
17:57:02 <sgallagh> Why don't we punt this to the end of the blocker section and see if rdieter turns up in the meantime
17:57:14 <roshi> same here - but I don't know the scope of the breakage....
17:57:19 <roshi> works for me sgallagh
17:57:26 <adamw> seems reasonable
17:57:28 * adamw boots tc7 kde
17:57:43 <roshi> onto the next then
17:57:50 <danofsatx> +1 punt. not enough infor.
17:57:53 <roshi> #info punting this to the end of blocker discussion
17:57:54 <roshi> #topic (1195485) cannot start user session (gdm returns back to the login page)
17:57:57 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1195485
17:58:00 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gdm, NEW
17:58:29 <adamw> i haven't seen this particular bug in any testing
17:58:35 <adamw> looks like it might be tied to his particular config
17:58:37 <Corey84> have seen this on xfce build of tc6 not on 7 tho
17:58:45 <adamw> Corey84: xfce build doesn't use gdm.
17:58:59 <adamw> we've had lots of *other* gdm bugs, but has anyone else seen this particular one?
17:59:18 <roshi> my last pass at install tests didn't show this in a VM or baremetal
17:59:34 <sgallagh> I haven't seen this issue on any of my systems either
17:59:34 <adamw> hum, he says it may only occur when not connected to a network
17:59:46 <Corey84> i know adamw  but was merely mentioning may not be gdm centric
17:59:54 <roshi> hrm
18:00:02 <roshi> let me fire up a VM with no networking
18:00:07 <adamw> Corey84: hum, i guess so, in this case i'd suspect they'd be different issue though
18:00:24 <sgallagh> I've been running with wifi only for a while (because of a bug in wired networking on my hardware)
18:00:34 <sgallagh> That wouldn't be connected at startup...
18:00:51 <sgallagh> Not until getting into my session to retrieve the keys, right?
18:01:05 <roshi> bah, don't have TC7 workstation downloaded
18:01:20 * roshi begins download
18:02:15 <adamw> hum, TC7 kde boot black screens for me with "Failed to find command for session: "kde-plasma.desktop"" in sddm.log
18:02:25 <adamw> sgallagh: depends on how you have the connection configured
18:02:30 <Kevin_Kofler> That one I already fixed in spin-kickstarts.
18:02:37 <Kevin_Kofler> Unfortunately, it missed TC7.
18:02:38 <adamw> sgallagh: you can set wifi connections to be systemwide (in which case the password is stored somewhere or other)
18:02:42 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: ah, k
18:02:50 <Kevin_Kofler> I fixed it after the issue was reported for TC6, but you were already spinning TC7.
18:02:55 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: yeah, it's been hectic
18:03:01 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: TC8 will come today
18:03:10 <roshi> whee!
18:03:16 <Kevin_Kofler> There's another problem that plasma-desktop is missing in comps, there's only plasma-workspace which does not contain any actual workspace, plasma-desktop is the specific workspace.
18:03:23 <roshi> are we still doing delta-isos and I've just forgotten where they are?
18:03:24 <Kevin_Kofler> I think rdieter was fixing that.
18:03:28 <Kevin_Kofler> Not sure whether it's already fixed.
18:03:46 <Kevin_Kofler> And then there may or may not be GCC5-related issues, rdieter must know more there.
18:03:58 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: we punted on the GCC5 bug waiting for rdieter to give us a better idea of the scope
18:04:18 <adamw> roshi: deltas are robatino territory
18:04:27 * roshi will ask him
18:04:29 <adamw> roshi: i think only the DVD image is really delta-susceptible
18:04:36 <adamw> so only Server 'DVD' now
18:04:50 <adamw> we never did live deltaISOs iirc
18:04:57 <roshi> kk
18:05:22 <roshi> I don't see enough verification of this bug to vote +1, atm
18:05:40 <adamw> yeah i'm just going to try and do a quick test
18:05:46 <adamw> but i incline -1 or punt atm
18:06:35 <roshi> well, we got another 2 hours slotted for this meeting, so test on my friend, test on
18:06:51 <Kevin_Kofler> FYI, the KDE comps issue is also already fixed: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/comps.git/commit/?id=056ff84f58d7340f74666488b264510c7c7c4443
18:07:07 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: thanks, that should make TC8 then
18:07:18 <sgallagh> Shall we move on then/
18:07:24 <adamw> sgallagh: we're not on the KDE bug atm
18:07:32 <adamw> sgallagh: we're on the GDM bug. :) the kde discussion is a sidetrack.
18:07:37 <adamw> i'm just trying a quick test on the gdm bug
18:07:40 <roshi> waiting on a test from adamw et al for the gdm bug
18:07:44 <roshi> what he said
18:07:53 <sgallagh> Right, but I figured that could happen in parallel
18:08:01 <sgallagh> /me is trying to bring up a VM as well
18:08:04 * adamw just set ONBOOT=no in a 22 Alpha TC7 VM and logged in fine
18:08:09 <roshi> it's hard to keep track of the minutes that way
18:08:11 <adamw> so, for now i'm -1 on this
18:08:23 <roshi> what if you get rid of the nic?
18:08:32 <adamw> that doesn't seem to be what the user was testing
18:08:35 <adamw> but i can try that too, sure
18:08:59 <roshi> -1 anyhows for this
18:09:01 <sgallagh> adamw: I'm already testing that, one moment
18:09:47 <adamw> also works fine without a NIC.
18:09:52 <sgallagh> -1
18:09:53 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1195485 - RejectedBlocker Alpha - This bug doesn't seem to be reproducible. If more information comes to the surface, please repropose with steps to reproduce.
18:09:59 <sgallagh> Ack
18:10:08 <pschindl> ack
18:10:16 <danofsatx> ack
18:11:15 <roshi> #agreed - 1195485 - RejectedBlocker Alpha - This bug doesn't seem to be reproducible. If more information comes to the surface, please repropose with steps to reproduce.
18:11:25 <roshi> #topic (1197224) System sometimes gets stuck during gdm init when autologin is enabled (e.g. live images)
18:11:28 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197224
18:11:30 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gdm, ON_QA
18:12:09 <adamw> this is why workstation live boots sometimes get stuck when GNOME should start up
18:12:12 <adamw> the fix looks good in my tests
18:12:15 <adamw> +1
18:12:22 <roshi> +1
18:12:42 <sgallagh> Is it really a blocker if it is intermittent? I'm definitely +1 FE, but I'm not clear on whether it's worth blocker status.
18:12:58 <pschindl> +1
18:12:59 <sgallagh> Given that a reboot will often "fix" it
18:13:02 <danofsatx> +1
18:13:08 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197224 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a conditional violation of the following alpha criterion: "Release-blocking live images must boot to the expected boot menu, and then to a desktop or to a login prompt where it is clear how to log in to a desktop."
18:13:12 <kinokoio> +1
18:13:23 <sgallagh> At the moment, I'm -1 blocker
18:13:25 <roshi> it happens enough times that several people reported it
18:13:26 <adamw> sgallagh: it happens often enough that i'd call it +1
18:13:29 <adamw> but it's a judgment call
18:13:33 <sgallagh> /me nods
18:13:45 <adamw> srsly what black magic do you work on /me
18:13:45 <sgallagh> OK, if it's really frequent, fine.
18:13:51 <sgallagh> ?
18:13:58 <adamw> same thing we noticed before, your /me's don't work
18:14:12 <adamw> it just bugs me that i've never been able to figure out why not :)
18:14:14 <sgallagh> They look right to me
18:14:18 <adamw> <sgallagh> /me nods
18:14:21 <roshi> it's frequent enough that I knew it was an issue w/o having tested it myself
18:14:24 <sgallagh> I believe you
18:14:30 <roshi> your /me's don't show up for me either
18:14:31 <sgallagh> OK +1
18:14:38 <roshi> ack/nack/patch?
18:14:48 * rdieter waves hi
18:14:48 <sgallagh> ack
18:15:06 * jreznik is back on laptop
18:15:12 <roshi> hey rdieter - we'll switch to the bug we wanted you for after we close this one out
18:15:54 <pschindl> ack
18:15:55 <adamw> ack
18:16:18 <roshi> #agreed - 1197224 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a conditional violation of the following alpha criterion: "Release-blocking live images must boot to the expected boot menu, and then to a desktop or to a login prompt where it is clear how to log in to a desktop."
18:16:21 <roshi> onto the qt bug
18:16:22 <roshi> #topic (1194682) Qt plugins fail to load or crash when built with gcc5
18:16:26 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194682
18:16:28 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gcc, MODIFIED
18:16:36 <roshi> rdieter: where does this crash occur?
18:16:48 <adamw> so i did some testing async
18:16:50 <roshi> does it let you log in and then you get crash notifications? or does it not let you log in at all
18:17:08 <adamw> when i work around the xsession bug the KDE session does not load successfully
18:17:24 <adamw> so assuming that's caused by this bug, i'm +1; i'd still like to make sure the change set isn't too large though
18:17:41 <roshi> what's "too large?"
18:18:00 <adamw> roshi: well, no bigger than necessary to make KDE live basically work OK to the alpha criteria
18:18:09 <adamw> (run a terminal and update to a package set that works better)
18:18:16 <roshi> I just didn't know if you had a package count
18:18:24 <adamw> no, i don't know the details of kde builds enough
18:18:40 <Kevin_Kofler> <adamw> when i work around the xsession bug the KDE session does not load successfully
18:18:47 <Kevin_Kofler> Did you also install plasma-desktop and kwin?
18:18:51 <Kevin_Kofler> (see the comps fix)
18:18:51 <adamw> oh, right.
18:18:54 <adamw> let me do it again
18:18:55 <Kevin_Kofler> (that also missed TC7)
18:19:27 <rdieter> ok, so I haven't done any testing or witnessed it myself.. but
18:19:46 <rdieter> from my understanding, crash occurs very early in session startup
18:20:05 <rdieter> (for those reporting the problem at least)
18:20:14 * kinokoio rebooting
18:20:22 <rdieter> makes things largely unusable
18:20:44 <rdieter> many qt5/kf5 applications outside of Plasma do run properly either
18:20:52 <jreznik> yep, that's my understanding from reports I expressed here earlier
18:21:16 <rdieter> so it's been suggested by jakub that we rebuild everything against the fixed gcc and retset
18:21:19 <rdieter> retest... that is
18:21:27 <adamw> ok, so i see a kmixctrl crash right on kde start, but the desktop does come up behind
18:21:37 <adamw> rdieter: it's just a worryingly large change three days before go/no-go
18:21:38 <rdieter> i've the first batch done
18:21:41 <adamw> especially if it affects apps outside of kde
18:22:05 <rdieter> I don't disagree, this gcc5 thing has been more than mildly annoying
18:22:22 <adamw> i can run a console, i can run apper
18:22:38 <roshi> browser?
18:22:45 <rdieter> ok, it seems to affect anything that needs plugin loading
18:23:07 <rdieter> or at least things that do not interact with plugins are largely unaffected
18:23:20 <sgallagh> adamw: We don't have an RC yet either; Go/No-Go is unlikely this week :(
18:23:20 <adamw> konq loads OK
18:23:30 <adamw> can load google
18:23:34 <rdieter> it could be limited only to certain plugins too
18:23:52 <adamw> sgallagh: eh, i'm not totally sure, but it's a risk
18:24:12 <adamw> wow, anaconda looks a bit janky
18:24:19 <sgallagh> adamw: Looking at the open blocker list, I'm not real confident
18:24:42 <adamw> but seems to be running
18:24:43 <rdieter> adamw: true, since oxygen-gtk3 doesn't work.  still todo to remove that.
18:24:52 <jreznik> and this can come later again... as the whole kde is about plugins loading
18:25:17 <adamw> as things stand I'm +1 FE -1 blocker, i think, it doesn't seem to really break any of the blocker things. so i'm OK with a minimal level of rebuilding if you folks really think it's the best thing to do, but...we really don't want too much churn
18:25:32 * adamw waits for install to finish
18:25:35 <roshi> makes sense to me
18:26:02 <adamw> unless something might need to load plugins depending on hw config or something?
18:26:07 <jreznik> the good question is if kf5/plasma has to be really rebuilt or not
18:26:27 <rdieter> jreznik: apparently not, not for basic stuff at least
18:26:39 <rdieter> long-term definitely want that
18:26:42 <adamw> got a kcminit crash notification halfway through install, but install's still running and kde still seems to be basically working
18:26:45 <jreznik> ok, that makes it less scary
18:26:47 <adamw> rdieter: it's totally fine as an update
18:26:56 <rdieter> <nod>, as long as updater works :-/
18:26:59 <adamw> heh :)
18:27:02 <jreznik> than +1 FE, -1 blocker
18:27:05 <adamw> i'll test that after install
18:27:15 <rdieter> or rather, apper should be safe'ish, it's still a kde4 app
18:27:35 <adamw> pschindl: i guess include a note to please be conservative and keep rebuilds to the minimum to ensure an image that works reasonably OK for initial deployment and update
18:28:10 <roshi> -1/+1
18:28:23 <sgallagh> -1 Blocker, +1 FE
18:28:41 <adamw> install's at 82%, i'll give a heads-up if it breaks later
18:28:44 <Kevin_Kofler> Maybe that's just me, but I feel more confident with everything rebuilt with a GCC not known to be buggy!
18:29:19 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1194682 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This bug doesn't break enough of the KDE environment to be considered blocker for Alpha, and can be fixed with updates. Accepted as a Freeze Exception.
18:29:29 <rdieter> Kevin_Kofler: with freeze exception, we'll get in at least qt5
18:29:46 <rdieter> possibly more, depending on how fast we get other stuff tested
18:30:18 <jreznik> that gcc 5 decision was not a good one from the beginning...
18:31:05 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: i'd feel more confident with that too...last week...
18:31:17 <adamw> one of those cases where all the choices suck, i love 'em
18:32:03 <adamw> ack
18:32:08 <sgallagh> ack
18:32:08 <adamw> well
18:32:09 <adamw> patch
18:32:09 <jreznik> ack
18:32:13 <adamw> as that doesn't explain why it's an FE
18:32:15 <roshi> go for it
18:32:23 <roshi> or I can
18:32:37 <Kevin_Kofler> Sometimes we just have to slip, FESCo's decision to force such a tight schedule was insane to begin with considering the GCC 5 change.
18:32:57 <roshi> there were plenty of changes to choose from Kevin_Kofler :p
18:33:08 <adamw> proposed #agreed - 1194682 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This bug doesn't break enough of the KDE environment to be considered blocker for Alpha, but it does lead to many KDE/Qt components crashing and so we accept that it's a reasonable risk/benefit tradeoff to rebuild the core components with fixed GCC. Accepted as a Freeze Exception. Less vital rebuilds can be done as updates.
18:33:19 <roshi> imagine if we hadn't rolled back on the py2->py3 change :)
18:33:22 <Kevin_Kofler> Well, either a less tight schedule or punting GCC 5 to F23 would have made sense.
18:33:29 <sgallagh> Kevin_Kofler: Well, I recommended disallowing GCC 5 in F22, but I was overruled.
18:33:35 <roshi> ack
18:33:42 <sgallagh> ack
18:33:50 <danofsatx> ack
18:34:03 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: the agreement does leave you folks a bit of discretion about what to include in the update, just please try not to abuse it :P
18:34:25 <adamw> rebuild what you think makes sense for the alpha, if we/releng have concerns when it comes time to roll whichever compose it goes into, we'll discuss it
18:34:50 <roshi> adamw: you want to do the agreed?
18:34:56 <adamw> i don't think i'm chaired am i?>
18:35:04 <roshi> you are
18:35:36 <roshi> I chaired you at the beginng during roll call
18:35:51 <adamw> ah k
18:35:53 <roshi> multiline copy paste in irssi is a bit janky iirc
18:35:57 <adamw> #agreed - 1194682 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This bug doesn't break enough of the KDE environment to be considered blocker for Alpha, but it does lead to many KDE/Qt components crashing and so we accept that it's a reasonable risk/benefit tradeoff to rebuild the core components with fixed GCC. Accepted as a Freeze Exception. Less vital rebuilds can be done as updates.
18:35:59 <roshi> #topic (1195905) X crashes on Fedora 22 32-bit live images with "stack smashing detected" and a libinput-related backtrace
18:36:02 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1195905
18:36:04 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, libinput, ON_QA
18:36:18 <adamw> this one was pretty clear-cut, +1
18:36:21 <adamw> fix looks good
18:36:28 <roshi> +1
18:36:31 <pschindl> +1
18:37:09 <sgallagh> In 2015, the number of ****s I give about 32-bit grows to ever harder-to-detect levels, but I suppose it's still criteria. +1
18:37:21 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1195905 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "Release-blocking live images must boot to the expected boot menu, and then to a desktop or to a login prompt where it is clear how to log in to a desktop."
18:37:46 <roshi> sgallagh: I might agree if I didn't have several 32bit only machines laying round and used them frequently
18:37:50 * danofsatx abstains from this vote.
18:38:23 * kinokoio thinks it would be good if you can test faster in 64-bit
18:38:28 <pschindl> ack
18:38:30 <sgallagh> roshi: Your masochism is your own business ;-)
18:38:33 * roshi also thinks about all the older computer labs in schools and around the world before getting rid of 32 bit support
18:39:06 <roshi> less masochism and more lack of funds to update h/w all the time - use it til it actually lets the magic smoke out, I say
18:39:13 <kinokoio> damn non VT-x cpu I can't replace
18:39:26 <roshi> any more acks?
18:39:40 <pschindl> one more ack from me :)
18:39:50 <kinokoio> ack
18:39:53 <sgallagh> ack
18:39:57 * roshi has an implicit ack, since he wrote it
18:40:05 <roshi> #agreed - 1195905 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the Alpha criterion: "Release-blocking live images must boot to the expected boot menu, and then to a desktop or to a login prompt where it is clear how to log in to a desktop."
18:40:18 <roshi> #topic (1193127) dhclient is started by NetworkManager at disconnection instead of at connection time
18:40:21 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193127
18:40:23 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, NetworkManager, NEW
18:40:46 <adamw> this is another one i haven't seen
18:40:46 <sgallagh> This is maddeningly painful to anyone running affected hardware
18:40:49 <sgallagh> (Of which I am one)
18:40:52 <adamw> oh, hardware dependent? fun
18:40:57 <roshi> I can see it being maddening
18:41:25 <adamw> is there a workaround?
18:41:27 <sgallagh> adamw: Yeah, so far I've only seen it on certain newer (popular) Lenovo models
18:41:29 <adamw> it seems a bit of an RH-special
18:41:32 <sgallagh> adamw: Don't use wired network
18:41:45 <adamw> i always feel slightly awkward blocking on things that disproportionately affect RH :P but it's possible
18:41:47 <sgallagh> (which is what I'm doing at this very moment)
18:41:57 <adamw> hum, nothing to make wired work? that's pretty bad then
18:42:12 <roshi> +1, from the info in the bug
18:42:55 * danofsatx voted in bug, +1
18:43:00 * roshi concurs with danofsatx on the criteria, since we don't have a "wired has to work" criteria that I recall
18:43:04 <sgallagh> Sometimes it will work for up to 30 minutes after a boot, but then the stars align wrong and the dhcp issue starts dropping and reconnecting, then it screws the routing table and it's all over
18:43:06 <adamw> with the info that there's literally no workaround for wired i'm a bit more comfortable with +1, but it'd still be a bit of an awkward last blocker
18:43:10 <adamw> do we actually have a fix coming?
18:43:12 <roshi> though, I could see the argument that it works with wifi
18:43:14 <sgallagh> (At that point, the wireless won't work either)
18:43:27 <roshi> ah
18:43:31 <adamw> roshi: the update criterion is intended to work as a 'network must basically work' proxy, yeah
18:43:56 <roshi> makes sense
18:43:58 <pschindl> +1
18:44:36 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1193127 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug violates the Alpha criterion: "The installed system must be able to download and install updates with the default console package manager."
18:44:58 <pschindl> ack
18:45:22 <jreznik> ack
18:45:23 <sgallagh> ack
18:45:26 <roshi> #agreed - 1193127 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug violates the Alpha criterion: "The installed system must be able to download and install updates with the default console package manager."
18:45:33 <roshi> #topic (1196347) Review Request: f22-backgrounds – Fedora 22 default desktop background
18:45:36 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196347
18:45:39 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, Package Review, ON_QA
18:46:21 <sgallagh> What criteria does this violate?
18:46:24 <adamw> don't think this is a blocker, but it can be FE
18:46:31 <adamw> it would be a *final* blocker
18:46:39 <roshi> -1/ +1
18:46:53 <adamw> oh, no, jreznik is right
18:46:55 <adamw> "The default desktop background must be different from that of the two previous stable releases."
18:47:02 <sgallagh> tHAT
18:47:03 <adamw> that was a 'make sure people don't get confused' thing iirc
18:47:07 <sgallagh> That's an Alpha criterion?
18:47:12 <roshi> I thought that was final
18:47:17 <adamw> yeah, we actually had people who got confused iirc.
18:47:28 <adamw> final is 'the actual intended final artwork must be included in the images'
18:47:50 <adamw> the alpha criterion can be satisfed by a lolcat so long as it's not hte same as the last stable release and it doesn't specify a wrong version number
18:47:52 <sgallagh> I have a real hard time justifying this as a blocker, criterion-be-damned
18:47:57 <jreznik> the idea was to make it clear it's a new version you test as far as I remember it
18:48:04 <roshi> "Any component which prominently identifies a Fedora release version number, code name or milestone (Alpha, Beta, Final) must do so correctly. "
18:48:05 <adamw> i think the idea was actually  that we'd have a generic 'THIS IS A PRE-RELEASE' wallpaper we'd always use for pre-releases
18:48:17 <sgallagh> If this was the last blocker on the list, I'd be slapping people
18:48:19 <roshi> perhaps?
18:48:27 <adamw> roshi: no, not that one, because the wallpaper doesn't.,
18:48:27 <roshi> nvm
18:48:30 * roshi can read
18:48:34 <adamw> (some used to, i think.)
18:48:43 <roshi> +1
18:48:46 <adamw> anyhow, we have the new wallpaper, so let's not waste time on it
18:48:48 <roshi> per the criterion
18:48:49 <jreznik> well, design guys were awesome and they created this placeholder for now... it's probably not going to be final wp although I like it
18:49:01 <adamw> sgallagh: it was also a bigger issue when the wallpapers were a bit more obviously different and identifiable from release to release
18:49:02 <jreznik> adamw: still some pieces on kde side missing :(
18:49:07 <sgallagh> I'm -1/+1
18:49:11 <adamw> and not just 'slightly different subtle variation on fedora blue'
18:49:20 <sgallagh> (exercising my Juror Prerogative)
18:49:29 <adamw> we don't have one of those. :P
18:49:37 <adamw> +1 per the criteria, if anyone wants to revise the criterion, go for it.
18:49:37 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1196347 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clearcut violation of the Alpha criterion: "The default desktop background must be different from that of the two previous stable releases."
18:49:40 <adamw> (that is, propose it.)
18:49:42 <adamw> ack
18:49:52 <sgallagh> Ack, I guess
18:50:01 <jreznik> so let's make sure all pieces are in the update and picked up to compose
18:50:07 <roshi> #agreed - 1196347 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clearcut violation of the Alpha criterion: "The default desktop background must be different from that of the two previous stable releases."
18:50:10 <adamw> jreznik: sure, please get it amended as appropriate
18:50:16 <roshi> #topic (1195811) PKI fails to install, missing support for Tomcat 8.0
18:50:19 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1195811
18:50:22 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, pki-core, NEW
18:50:27 <adamw> jreznik: i won't stress about it much for TC8, but i'll check in with you/art folks/whoever for RC1
18:50:40 <adamw> ooh, the fun one
18:50:49 * adamw pings a few people
18:51:08 <sgallagh> So this one is a mess
18:51:19 <sgallagh> I've asked FESCo to declare that Tomcat 8 needs to be backed out
18:51:45 <sgallagh> Landing a backwards-incompatible major version change six days before Alpha Freeze was... unwelcome
18:52:20 <ab> adamw: I'm here
18:52:41 <jreznik> sgallagh: indeed
18:52:56 <sgallagh> Without so much as a Change Proposal either
18:53:04 * jreznik was about to say that
18:53:25 <ab> from FreeIPA/Dogtag teams we are willing to work on supporting Tomcat8 in addition to Tomcat7 but for F23, not earlier.
18:53:28 <adamw> i think ab and simo say the same, but ab was a bit concerned that we don't come down on the tomcat maintainers too hard as we don't want to lose them?
18:53:50 <ab> adamw: this was hinted to me by Eclipse maintainer
18:53:52 <adamw> if ab+simo+sgallagh+jreznik all say 'we need to revert', i'm gonna trust that
18:53:54 <sgallagh> adamw: I've been trying to reach them
18:54:08 <sgallagh> I've only been able to get ahold of a *former* maintainer, unfortunately
18:54:25 <adamw> sgallagh: afaics the 8.x bump was done by the guy who's been maintaining it for years, ivan
18:54:27 <sgallagh> Who, to his credit, tried to help us get things in order, but it's too much change, to soon
18:54:40 <sgallagh> adamw: Yeah, but he hasn't replied to my emails
18:54:42 <adamw> ah k
18:54:55 <adamw> we can emphasize the message that it can go into rawhide and people will be happy to work on getting it supported there i guess
18:56:02 <jreznik> yes
18:56:04 <roshi> +1 per the criterion
18:56:15 <sgallagh> In any case, for the purposes od this meeting, we need to just agree that the current state violates criteria
18:56:16 <adamw> yeah, first order of business, clearly looks like +1
18:56:17 <sgallagh> I'm +1
18:56:36 <adamw> sgallagh: right, meeting seemed a good place to try and work out a plan if folks from tomcat would be present, but it seems not :(
18:56:40 <adamw> i did mail ivan to invite him, for the record
18:56:46 <sgallagh> adamw: Thanks
18:57:18 <sgallagh> I also raised this with FESCo this morning
18:57:20 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1195811 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the criterion: "The core functional requirements for all Featured Server Roles must be met, but it is acceptable if moderate workarounds are necessary to achieve this."
18:57:32 <roshi> should I put a plea for the downgrade in there?
18:57:47 <roshi> would lighten the testing/dev load for F22
18:58:02 <sgallagh> /me defers to the QA folks for that
18:58:09 <ab> roshi: downgrade is the only solution right now
18:58:21 <ab> roshi: dogtag doesn't even build against Tomcat8
18:58:22 <adamw> hey simo
18:58:25 <simo> hola
18:58:42 <ab> roshi: as they did so many incompatible changes of their API
18:59:06 <simo> yeah dogtag doesn't install (nor build) which means FreeIPA doesn't install and the Domain controller feature is broken
18:59:09 <roshi> I guess I see this meeting as a very singular function - but QA can speak up at the fesco meeting
18:59:09 <adamw> does someone want to take responsibility as the point person for making sure this gets fixed, i.e. making sure the downgrade happens? sgallagh?
18:59:20 <sgallagh> adamw: I'm already doing that, so sure
18:59:26 <simo> the changes needed to support tomcat8 are invasive and will require quite some time
18:59:39 <adamw> roshi: well, we also review accepted blockers to ensure they're getting fixed
18:59:42 <sgallagh> I meant I defer to the QA folks if they want to make the statement, rather than whether we should do it.
18:59:45 <adamw> roshi: so let's say we're reviewing the blocker we just accepted. :P
18:59:49 <sgallagh> I think we absolutely have to downgrade :)
18:59:54 <adamw> sgallagh: rgr
19:00:03 * adamw brb, call of nature
19:00:27 <kinokoio> +1
19:00:35 <roshi> makes sense adamw
19:01:17 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1195811 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the criterion: "The core functional requirements for all Featured Server Roles must be met, but it is acceptable if moderate workarounds are necessary to achieve this." The QA recommendation for the fix is to downgrade the version of Tomcat included in F22, as the development and testing required to make it work for F22 is high.
19:02:12 <pschindl> ack
19:02:56 <jreznik> ack
19:03:01 <kinokoio> ack
19:03:34 <sgallagh> ack
19:03:41 <danofsatx> patch
19:04:09 <roshi> go for it danofsatx
19:04:15 <danofsatx> "as the development and testing required for the current version to work in F22 is high."
19:04:26 <danofsatx> or s/current/new
19:05:28 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1195811 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the criterion: "The core functional requirements for all Featured Server Roles must be met, but it is acceptable if moderate workarounds are necessary to achieve this." The QA recommendation for the fix is to downgrade the version of Tomcat included in F22, as the development and testing required for the current version to work for F22 is high.
19:05:33 <adamw> ack
19:05:35 <sgallagh> ack
19:05:38 <danofsatx> ack
19:05:40 <roshi> #agreed - 1195811 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the criterion: "The core functional requirements for all Featured Server Roles must be met, but it is acceptable if moderate workarounds are necessary to achieve this." The QA recommendation for the fix is to downgrade the version of Tomcat included in F22, as the development and testing required for the current version to work for F22 is high.
19:05:48 <pschindl> so current or new?
19:06:09 <roshi> current - since the current one is causing the issues
19:06:13 <adamw> pschindl: it's 'current' as the package was upated
19:06:16 <adamw> but either way
19:06:19 <pschindl> ok, thanks
19:06:21 <roshi> #topic (1196417) During live image boot, systemd decides run-initramfs-squashfs.mount 'is bound to an inactive unit' and tries to stop it, sometimes triggering a kernel crash
19:06:25 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196417
19:06:27 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, systemd, ON_QA
19:07:05 <kinokoio> was that for TC7?
19:07:10 <adamw> this was fixed in TC7
19:07:16 <adamw> (maybe TC6, i forget which compose had which fixes)
19:07:37 <adamw> +1, this is the other 'live boot sometimes fails' bug, affected all lives
19:07:46 <sgallagh> +1
19:07:46 <pschindl> +1
19:07:49 <danofsatx> +1
19:07:50 <kinokoio> +1
19:07:56 <roshi> +1
19:07:57 <sgallagh> Pick whichever criteria you want, I guess :)
19:08:26 <jreznik> +1
19:08:29 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1196417 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "All release-blocking images must boot in their supported configurations."
19:08:38 <jreznik> ack
19:08:41 <sgallagh> ack
19:08:43 <adamw> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/diff/?id=628c89cc68ab96fce2de7ebba5933725d147aecc looks like it might be the 'final' upstream fix for this, we should test that but i think stick with the reversion for alpha
19:08:43 <adamw> ack
19:08:47 <danofsatx> ack
19:08:48 <pschindl> ack
19:08:58 <roshi> #agreed - 1196417 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "All release-blocking images must boot in their supported configurations."
19:09:02 <roshi> #topic (1196676) X fails to start when booting x86_64 netinst on basic graphic mode (nomodeset)
19:09:05 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196676
19:09:08 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, xorg-x11-drv-vesa, NEW
19:10:24 <sgallagh> Is 'nomodeset' a supported configuration?
19:10:39 * danofsatx voted +1 in bug
19:11:18 <adamw> basic graphics mode is required to work somewhere
19:11:22 * adamw finds the criterion
19:11:28 <pschindl> nomodeset used to be in criteria, but I can
19:11:35 <pschindl> I can't find it anymore
19:11:54 <roshi> under the Boot menu contents
19:12:02 <roshi> it says the generic driver needs to work
19:12:18 <roshi> +1
19:12:33 <pschindl> +1
19:12:48 <adamw> +1 then
19:13:37 <jreznik> +1
19:13:40 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1196676 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "Release-blocking dedicated installer images must boot to the expected boot menu, and then after a reasonable timeout to the installer."
19:14:11 * roshi could add a note about basic drivers, if that'd be better
19:14:15 <sgallagh> roshi: Please do
19:14:49 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1196676 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "Release-blocking dedicated installer images must boot to the expected boot menu, and then after a reasonable timeout to the installer." Basic graphics is required to work under this criterion, as stated in the "Boot menu contents" clarification.
19:15:08 <pschindl> ack
19:15:16 <satellit_ex> Ack
19:15:22 <danofsatx> ack
19:15:24 <roshi> #agreed - 1196676 - AcceptedBlocker Alpha - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "Release-blocking dedicated installer images must boot to the expected boot menu, and then after a reasonable timeout to the installer." Basic graphics is required to work under this criterion, as stated in the "Boot menu contents" clarification.
19:15:43 <roshi> onto the beta blockers
19:16:11 <sgallagh> hmm, blockerbugs appears to be timing out for me
19:16:37 <roshi> yeah, waiting on it here as well
19:16:58 <danofsatx> finally came up
19:17:00 <roshi> if it fails out, I can manually munge things together
19:17:06 <danofsatx> just slow
19:17:20 <roshi> it's missing one, that I proposed earlier this morning
19:17:24 <roshi> will work it in at the end
19:18:02 <roshi> hrm, irc format lists the beta proposals, but reads "Milestone: Fedora 22 Alpha" at the top
19:18:06 <roshi> #topic (1194682) Qt plugins fail to load or crash when built with gcc5
19:18:09 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194682
19:18:11 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gcc, MODIFIED
19:18:44 <roshi> hrm, this one we already did...
19:18:53 * danofsatx doesn't see that one
19:19:14 <roshi> actually, all four of these we already did
19:19:18 <roshi> oh?
19:19:56 <danofsatx> I see 1197412, 1196654, 1197821, and 1197289 - what do you see?
19:20:14 <roshi> I see: 1194682, 1195811, 1196417, and 1196676
19:20:43 * danofsatx is bewildered
19:20:48 <roshi> hrm
19:20:54 <roshi> ok, something odd going on
19:20:59 <roshi> got the right list now though
19:21:03 <roshi> #undo
19:21:03 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: INFO by roshi at 19:18:11 : Proposed Blocker, gcc, MODIFIED
19:21:09 <roshi> #undo
19:21:09 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x54054fd0>
19:21:12 <roshi> #undo
19:21:12 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x54054e90>
19:21:19 <roshi> #topic (1197412) Cockpit fails QA:Testcase_Server_cockpit_basic
19:21:19 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197412
19:21:20 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, cockpit, NEW
19:22:41 <sgallagh> I'm trying to verify right now, but this was working for me last week
19:22:48 <danofsatx> same but different symptoms as 1185136
19:23:10 <roshi> looks like a dupe to me
19:23:17 <roshi> going on symptoms
19:23:21 <danofsatx> cmurf gets blank screen, whereas boblfoot appears to get something, just not all
19:24:02 <adamw> sounds like a dupe as described
19:24:06 * adamw didn't manage to tes this yet :/
19:24:40 <roshi> proposal: mark it as a dupe and move on?
19:25:34 <danofsatx> +1
19:26:13 <sgallagh> just a moment
19:26:38 <roshi> k
19:26:42 <sgallagh> OK, I'm not experiencing this bug
19:26:55 <sgallagh> (I just installed Cockpit on my workstation)
19:27:06 <adamw> clean install might be a better test
19:27:09 <adamw> maybe there's some kinda dep issue
19:27:10 <sgallagh> yeah
19:27:14 <sgallagh> That's what I was just about to say
19:27:23 <sgallagh> OK, mark it as a dupe for now
19:27:28 <sgallagh> If it's not, it'll get reopened
19:28:07 <roshi> #agreed mark 1197412 as a duplicate of 1185136
19:28:16 <roshi> #topic (1196654) Default package set in Workstation netinst is wrong.
19:28:19 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196654
19:28:22 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, distribution, NEW
19:28:51 <roshi> +1 for this
19:28:58 <roshi> textmode could use some love, it seems
19:29:00 * danofsatx voted +1 in bug
19:29:19 <sgallagh> This one *should* be fixed in TC7. Has anyone confirmed?
19:29:33 * roshi hasn't
19:30:10 <pschindl> I haven't tried it yet with TC7.
19:30:15 <sgallagh> Let me see if I can try it real quick
19:30:24 <roshi> kk
19:31:30 <sgallagh> ... slow network day
19:31:32 <adamw> yeah, it ought to be
19:32:46 * kinokoio is going to ckeck it
19:33:39 <sgallagh> Well, +1 anyway
19:34:49 <adamw> yeah, +1
19:34:50 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1196654 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta criterion: "When installing with a dedicated installer image for a specific Fedora flavor, the default package set must be the correct set for that flavor."
19:35:11 <adamw> ack
19:35:25 <danofsatx> ack
19:35:35 <kinokoio> ack
19:35:36 <roshi> #agreed - 1196654 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta criterion: "When installing with a dedicated installer image for a specific Fedora flavor, the default package set must be the correct set for that flavor."
19:35:44 <roshi> #topic (1197821) Direct kernel boot of cloud images fails to find /dev/vda
19:35:47 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197821
19:35:49 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, distribution, NEW
19:36:42 * roshi is a +1, since he filed it :)
19:37:35 <sgallagh> Yeah, +1 as well (I agree, the spirit is violated)
19:37:36 <kinokoio> +1
19:37:55 <pschindl> +1
19:38:11 <roshi> the criteria might be happy with some clarification/clean-up, but it works for our purposes atm
19:38:31 <roshi> dgilmore didn't think direct kernel boot was supported by us
19:38:50 <roshi> if I can paraphrase a discussion we had in #fedora-cloud over the weekend
19:39:44 <roshi> dgilmore: any comments?
19:41:18 <adamw> direct kernel boot is supported for PXE purposes
19:41:22 * roshi waits a minute before doing the proposed #agreed
19:41:24 <adamw> for cloud i dunno?
19:41:33 <roshi> it's a common use case for cloud images
19:42:33 <roshi> and a cloud-init supported feature
19:42:37 <adamw> +1 by your justification
19:43:09 * roshi tries to pull in cloud folks for feedback
19:43:54 <sgallagh> FYI, my test about the default environment passed. So it's fixed in TC7
19:44:03 <roshi> hey number80
19:44:05 <sgallagh> (RE: 1185136)
19:44:18 <sgallagh> umm 1196654 sorry
19:44:42 <number80> sgallagh: so the ticket was fixed in TC7 ?
19:44:49 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197821 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a conditional violation of several Beta criteria and breaks the supported cloud-init feature set.
19:44:55 <adamw> ack
19:45:17 <number80> because if it's not 1197821 is indeed a blocker
19:45:33 <sgallagh> number80: Sorry, that was a delayed answer from the previous topic
19:45:33 <adamw> number80: we were discussing two different things there, sorry for confusion.
19:45:44 <number80> sorry
19:46:32 * dustymabe joins in out of context
19:46:46 <dustymabe> roshi: seems like a blocker to me
19:46:57 <dustymabe> ^^ 1197821
19:47:05 <roshi> thanks dustymabe and number80
19:47:14 * roshi wanted other input from cloud aside from his own
19:47:23 <roshi> ack, nack, patchs?
19:47:28 <adamw> hum, so on the KDE bug, after live install, KDE does indeed fail to start :/...so i'm revising to +1 blocker on that if we can revisit it later
19:47:34 <adamw> ack (again)
19:47:35 <dustymabe> roshi: I may do my own investigation later and add info to the bug if I find it relevant
19:48:05 <roshi> that'd be great dustymabe
19:48:12 <roshi> #agreed - 1197821 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a conditional violation of several Beta criteria and breaks the supported cloud-init feature set.
19:48:22 <roshi> #topic (1197289) unable to select (then assign, modify or delete) some partitions, LVs, subvolumes due to lack of scrolling
19:48:25 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197289
19:48:26 <kinokoio> adamw: My Fedora TC7 Workstation Netinstall ISO points to Fedora Workstation since boot
19:48:28 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gtk3, NEW
19:49:18 <sgallagh> kinokoio: Yup, that agrees with my test also
19:50:04 * adamw would like some anaconda team input on this one
19:50:06 <adamw> lemme ping them
19:51:06 <dgilmore> roshi: sorry was doing other things
19:51:41 <roshi> dgilmore: we were looking at the direct kernel boot failure for cloud images
19:51:53 <kinokoio> 20min left
19:51:56 <roshi> no worries, we can discuss elsewhere or come back to it
19:52:34 <dgilmore> roshi: okay. it really should work. but i do not think its a supported use case in any blocker bugs process
19:53:01 <adamw> <davidshea>  Component:  gtk3
19:53:01 <adamw> it would be really nice if scrolling worked again, yes
19:53:01 <adamw> I haven't tried mclasen's solution but I did confirm the original assessment that scrolling is busted all to hell and I think that is kind important
19:53:58 <sgallagh> +1
19:54:01 * dgilmore hates the overlay scroll bars
19:54:14 <sgallagh> For anything besides a trivial storage setup, this is going to get hit.
19:54:26 <danofsatx> or small screens
19:54:35 <dgilmore> very much seems a blocker
19:54:50 <roshi> +1 for this one
19:54:57 * danofsatx voted +1 in bug
19:55:08 <kinokoio> +1
19:55:12 <adamw> if this is going to hit other cases where anaconda deals with limited real estate by adding scrollbars, i'm definitely +1
19:55:22 <adamw> we're always running into cases of that with small screens and german and stuff
19:55:44 <sgallagh> OK, so I just tested on TC7
19:55:53 <sgallagh> The bar is there, but is completely invisible most of the time
19:56:06 <adamw> david also says " in disk selection, I couldn't scroll past disk #5 or so"
19:56:15 <adamw> so sounds like it doesn't work even if you manage to use it
19:56:17 <sgallagh> I can't get it to appear when I move to the edge unless I scroll with mouse wheel
19:56:43 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197289 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta criterion: "Correctly interpret, and modify as described below, any disk with a valid ms-dos or gpt disk label and partition table containing ext4 partitions, LVM and/or btrfs volumes..." and might have impact on other parts of the GUI of anaconda.
19:57:02 <sgallagh> The lack of a visual clue that the window is scrollable bothers me
19:57:35 <pschindl> ack
19:57:38 <kinokoio> ack
19:57:42 <sgallagh> (For the record, my simple testing was this: I created 10 100MB partitions in the manual partitioning)
19:57:51 <sgallagh> ack
19:59:10 <sgallagh> /me needs to depart
19:59:12 <roshi> #agreed - 1197289 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta criterion: "Correctly interpret, and modify as described below, any disk with a valid ms-dos or gpt disk label and partition table containing ext4 partitions, LVM and/or btrfs volumes..." and might have impact on other parts of the GUI of anaconda.
19:59:23 <roshi> take it easy sgallagh - thanks for coming
19:59:26 <adamw> thanks sgallagh
19:59:32 <sgallagh> You're welcome
19:59:42 <roshi> that's all the proposed blockers, and we've used out 3 hour block
19:59:59 <roshi> continue to the FE's or schedule a FE meeting for wednesday?
20:00:14 <roshi> (as was the plan if we needed more time going through all the proposals instead of just milestones)
20:00:15 <pschindl> +1 for Wednesday
20:00:30 <kinokoio> +1
20:01:08 * roshi is fine either way
20:01:30 <danofsatx> +1
20:02:19 <roshi> #topic Open Floor
20:02:34 <kinokoio> we are like 40 in the channel and only <10 participated...
20:02:42 <roshi> anybody have something for open floor?
20:02:52 <roshi> it happens most of the time kinokoio - people lurk
20:02:54 <roshi> :)
20:03:09 <adamw> i'd like to do FEs
20:03:09 <danofsatx> nothing here
20:03:18 <kinokoio> just a question, will TC8 be available for today or for tomorrow?
20:03:18 <adamw> we really need to do them to know what to pull into TCs/RCs now
20:03:20 <adamw> since we're frozen
20:03:48 * roshi can stick around for FEs
20:03:51 <adamw> *at least* the FEs we have fixes for, and double triple *at least* the ones i already pulled in fixes for (naughty me) :P
20:03:57 <roshi> anyone else?
20:03:57 * sharkcz would like to see if the gcc update could be accepted, ideally to -18
20:04:07 <roshi> just need to make sure we have quorum
20:04:20 <adamw> kinokoio: i'll file the request today once we're done with this meeting
20:04:32 <adamw> whether it's avaialble 'today' depends on your timezone, kinda :)
20:04:34 <satellit_e> is KDE live fixed?
20:04:35 <adamw> also depends on releng
20:04:49 <adamw> satellit: not in TC7. no. it will be fixed in TC8. well, two bugs will be fixed. the gcc stuff may not be.
20:04:56 <satellit_e> k
20:05:03 <adamw> roshi: just go ahead with the FEs and we'll see if enough people vote
20:05:07 <danofsatx> I can stick around for a bit, but I can't gaurantee I'll be paying attention.
20:05:08 <roshi> ok
20:05:13 <adamw> roshi: can you do the productimg ones first? as i already puleld in the fixes for those
20:05:28 <roshi> sure
20:05:54 <adamw> they can still be dropped if we -1 them, but...let's not :)
20:06:42 <roshi> #topic (1170800) Please stop overwriting anaconda's stylesheet
20:06:43 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170800
20:06:43 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, fedora-productimg-server, ON_QA
20:08:26 <roshi> +1 FE
20:08:38 <adamw> +1
20:09:53 <adamw> anyone else?
20:10:02 <roshi> was just going to ask that
20:10:03 <adamw> sharkcz: if you want yours approved you gotta help us out, man ;)
20:10:03 <pschindl> +1
20:10:11 <adamw> pschindl: thanks for sticking around'
20:10:21 * jreznik_2nd is still partially here but on call
20:10:54 <pschindl> adamw: It can't kill me to be up a bit later. At least I hope so.
20:11:02 * kinokoio has to go
20:11:02 <adamw> pschindl: hope you've got a fivebeer handy
20:11:14 <kinokoio> see you all
20:11:59 <sharkcz> adamw: like vote?
20:12:08 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1170800 - AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This fix has been approved for FE status. Please get the fix in quickly for the next compose.
20:12:25 <adamw> sharkcz: yeah
20:12:26 <adamw> ack
20:12:35 <sharkcz> ok, will try :-)
20:12:51 <pschindl> ack
20:13:12 <roshi> #agreed - 1170800 - AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This fix has been approved for FE status. Please get the fix in quickly for the next compose.
20:13:33 <roshi> #topic (1196504) Install class is installed to the wrong location, because package does not BuildRequire python2-devel
20:13:36 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196504
20:13:39 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, fedora-productimg-server, ON_QA
20:14:30 <adamw> +1
20:14:44 <sharkcz> +1
20:14:52 <adamw> this is the fix for 'wrong default package set for workstation entinst', for e.g.
20:15:28 <pschindl> +1
20:16:13 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1196504 - AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This has been approved for FE status. Please apply the fix ASAP so it can land in the next compose to get tested.
20:16:25 <adamw> ack
20:16:38 <pschindl> ack
20:16:38 <sharkcz> ack
20:16:47 <roshi> #agreed - 1196504 - AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This has been approved for FE status. Please apply the fix ASAP so it can land in the next compose to get tested.
20:16:59 <roshi> that's all the product-img stuff, afaict
20:17:23 <adamw> yep
20:17:28 <adamw> be good to hit the other ON_QAs
20:17:34 <adamw> i guess start with gcc as it's been requested :)
20:17:42 <roshi> will do
20:17:48 <sharkcz> oh, thanks :-)
20:17:51 <roshi> #topic (1191053) Django18
20:17:51 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191053
20:17:51 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, Changes Tracking, ON_QA
20:18:47 <pschindl> +1
20:19:21 <roshi> eh, not sure this needs an FE
20:19:26 <adamw> -1
20:19:36 <roshi> it can wait until beta
20:19:37 <adamw> unless this is needed for any OOTB webapps (i.e. cockpit)
20:19:41 <adamw> it can go fine as an update
20:19:50 <roshi> that was my thought
20:20:15 <pschindl> ok, then -1
20:20:18 <pschindl> :)
20:20:20 <sharkcz> if I see correctly then without FE there won't be django 1.8 in alpha
20:20:23 <adamw> i think sometimes people don't understand that their packages will be available right away from the repos even when they're just in u-t...
20:20:37 <adamw> sharkcz: if you install alpha and then do 'yum install django' or whatever, you'll get 1.8 alpha.
20:20:37 <roshi> yeah
20:20:44 <sharkcz> correct
20:20:46 <adamw> the blocker/FE process *only* affects what gets built into the release media.
20:20:54 <adamw> er, i mean, you'll get 1.8.
20:21:05 <adamw> i dunno if django is even on the server DVD...
20:21:26 <adamw> doesn't seem to be.
20:21:40 <adamw> so, no point. still -1.
20:21:40 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1191053 - RejectedFreezeException Alpha - This package doesn't come included on any release media and can be fixed with an update at a later date. No need for FE status.
20:22:08 <sharkcz> +1
20:22:31 <pschindl> ack
20:23:34 <adamw> ack
20:23:57 <roshi> #agreed - 1191053 - RejectedFreezeException Alpha - This package doesn't come included on any release media and can be fixed with an update at a later date. No need for FE status.
20:24:13 <roshi> #topic (1194704) tests fail on big endians
20:24:13 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194704
20:24:14 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, gcc, ON_QA
20:24:52 * adamw reads
20:25:48 <adamw> it's kind of squishy whether it's necessary/desirable to update gcc without rebuilding things...what exactly is the proposed update here?
20:25:52 <adamw> update of gcc and e2fsprogs?
20:25:59 <sharkcz> only gcc, gcc produces bad machine code for endian conversion C code
20:26:17 <adamw> ah
20:26:22 <adamw> so this will actually fix a runtime issue?
20:26:59 <sharkcz> the new gcc needs to be in buildroots
20:27:11 * adamw just a bit scared about pulling in an updated gcc and finding it screws over blocker fix rebuilds or something, but...
20:27:18 <sharkcz> otherwise possibly crashing apps are built
20:27:19 <adamw> ok, +1
20:27:36 <roshi> +.5 since I'm not sure what the impact would/could be
20:27:40 <adamw> sharkcz: well my point is that the actual packages that go into alpha are, at present, frozen
20:27:46 <adamw> sharkcz: so just updating the compiler doesn't fix 'em
20:27:57 <adamw> sharkcz: so if we just pull the fixed compiler but no rebuilt packages into alpha, what have we actually fixed?
20:28:31 <sharkcz> the alpha gcc won't produce know bad binaries
20:28:38 <sharkcz> known
20:28:57 <adamw> oh, and this affects secondary arches
20:29:02 <sharkcz> yes
20:29:09 <adamw> so you can pull in rebuilds of the affected packages to the secondary arches separately from this process
20:29:11 <adamw> i guess?
20:29:34 * adamw still a bit unsure, but leaning towards taking it
20:29:37 <sharkcz> yes, the workaround is to use buildroot overrides, but FE seems as proper solution
20:29:57 * roshi isn't 100% what this entails, but will defer to adamw for his vote
20:30:19 <adamw> sharkcz: my concern is that what we're pulling is a GCC with *these* bugs tested to be fixed, but not a lot of guarantees it doesn't introduce other exciting new and possibly even worse bugs :P
20:31:05 <sharkcz> adamw: you never know :-) but they add test cases with each new fix
20:31:53 <adamw> and therefore GCC 5.0 should have been perfect and not in any way worse than 4.-oh.
20:31:54 <adamw> :P
20:32:16 <adamw> i might check in with sgallagh and dgilmore and pfrields and stuff before we actually pull this through the freeze
20:32:22 <adamw> but for now let's call it a provisional +1
20:32:42 <roshi> wfm
20:33:22 <sharkcz> np, if I understood pbrobinson the -18 build (one build newer) fixes some TB/FF build issues, so they should probably go in
20:33:35 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1194704 - Provisional AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This is provisionally granted FE status pending input from releng regarding potential impacts.
20:33:41 <adamw> ack
20:33:46 <sharkcz> ack
20:33:52 <roshi> #agreed - 1194704 - Provisional AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This is provisionally granted FE status pending input from releng regarding potential impacts.
20:34:07 <roshi> #topic (1194469) Microsoft mouse not recognized on GNOME with Wayland
20:34:09 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194469
20:34:12 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, libinput, ON_QA
20:34:27 <adamw> this one i should probably check in with who-t on
20:34:32 <roshi> this doesn't need an FE - use a FOSS mouse!
20:34:32 <adamw> i caught it going by some list or other
20:34:34 <adamw> heh
20:36:04 <adamw> doesn't look like who-t's around
20:37:03 <adamw> the fix for f21 was abackport of a git commit dated 21 jan 2015...
20:37:18 <roshi> so it's one kind of mouse?
20:37:51 <adamw> looks like it'd be in 0.11.0 so f22 should have the fix already
20:38:01 <adamw> fix landed upstream between 0.8.0 and 0.9.0
20:38:06 <adamw> roshi: probably quite a lot of microsoft ones i'd guess
20:38:15 <adamw> seems academic though, i withdraw the fe nomination
20:38:36 <roshi> works for me
20:38:46 <roshi> #info nomination for this bug was withdrawn
20:38:52 <sharkcz> ack
20:39:00 <roshi> #topic (1197274) CVE-2015-0295 QT: BMP image handler crash [fedora-all]
20:39:04 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197274
20:39:06 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, qt, ON_QA
20:40:36 <adamw> low impact, but if it's a simple fix and we're rebuilding half of KDE anyway...meh, +1
20:41:01 <pschindl> +1
20:41:05 <sharkcz> +1
20:42:28 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197274 - AcceptedFreezeException - This bug has been granted FE status. Please get the fix applied soon so it can be tested with the next compose.
20:42:49 <sharkcz> ack
20:43:15 <adamw> ack
20:43:19 <pschindl> ack
20:44:47 <roshi> #agreed - 1197274 - AcceptedFreezeException - This bug has been granted FE status. Please get the fix applied soon so it can be tested with the next compose.
20:45:00 <roshi> #topic (1014594) sssd: Support Python 3
20:45:00 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014594
20:45:00 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, sssd, ON_QA
20:45:23 <adamw> this seems a bit late, now
20:45:29 <adamw> (though that's our fault for not reviewing it last week :<)
20:45:33 <roshi> yeah
20:45:33 <adamw> i feel bad about that, but still
20:45:38 <Corey84> still going goodness :)
20:45:39 <adamw> sgallagh: wdyt?
20:47:02 <sgallagh> Looking
20:47:36 <sgallagh> So what happened is that part of it landed already; that's what broke stuff
20:47:50 <sgallagh> So this is going to end up getting sorted out as we fix the realm joining problem in any case.
20:48:16 <sgallagh> (Basically, some stuff that depends on SSSD moved to python 3 and some stayed on python 2 after all)
20:48:35 <sgallagh> This bug is actually poorly named: it should be "Support both Python 2 and Python 3"
20:48:47 <sgallagh> The version that landed only allowed it to provide one or the other.
20:49:11 <sgallagh> And because authconfig and ipa-client-install didn't end up moving to Python 3, stuff broke
20:49:23 <adamw> ok
20:49:42 <adamw> so if this isn't actually a wholesale move to py3 and is actually needed to fix the bits we already have frozen, +1 (or even +1 blocker)
20:50:28 <roshi> yeah
20:50:36 <roshi> +1
20:50:42 <sharkcz> +1
20:51:10 <sgallagh> Well, strictly speaking, everything at the moment *can* be fixed by supporting only Python 2, but since we have the patches to do both, it seems stupid not to.
20:51:30 <sgallagh> Particularly if any other dependent package made the move and we aren't aware
20:51:48 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1014594 - AcceptedFreezeException - This bug has been granted FE status. Please apply the patch so it can be tested with the next compose.
20:52:01 <sgallagh> ack
20:52:02 <pschindl> ack
20:52:24 <adamw> ack
20:52:32 <roshi> #agreed - 1014594 - AcceptedFreezeException - This bug has been granted FE status. Please apply the patch so it can be tested with the next compose.
20:52:46 <roshi> #topic (1177137) Apper Err:SearchGroups not supported by backend
20:52:46 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177137
20:52:46 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, apper, NEW
20:54:11 <adamw> was that all the ON_QAs?
20:54:16 <roshi> yeah
20:54:30 <roshi> we're to NEW now
20:54:40 <roshi> there's 5 of them
20:55:04 <adamw> kk
20:55:14 <roshi> keep going?
20:56:20 <adamw> sure
20:56:25 <adamw> i'm not sure this bug is serving any purpose.
20:57:02 * satellit is there a fix?  (apper)
20:57:13 <adamw> well, if applying updates on KDE in F22 *still* somehow requires the package group support it'd be doing something'
20:57:20 <adamw> but it doesn't look like anyone's checked that since december
20:57:25 <adamw> i'd want more current data to ack this
20:57:50 <satellit> I have to use yum or dnf now
20:58:42 * satellit whe I get plasma to run in f22
20:58:48 <satellit> when*
20:59:55 <adamw> satellit: but does it fail with *this* error still?
21:00:07 <adamw> graphical updates failing on KDE would technically be a blocker, not FE
21:00:25 <adamw> maybe we need to check in after all the other KDE changes land...
21:00:27 <satellit> Not sure for certain when I tried it
21:00:52 <satellit> plasma is quite unstable   I can test it later...
21:00:55 <roshi> yeah, if updates are broke for KDE, it's blocker
21:01:05 <roshi> punt for this and test after the kde updates land?
21:01:22 <adamw> sounds reasonable
21:02:19 <pschindl> +1 for punting this
21:02:24 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1177137 - Punt - This bug is currently in flux with old data and we want to wait for some KDE fixes to land before making a determination.
21:02:29 <satellit> +1 punt
21:02:41 <adamw> hi again kev
21:02:46 <sharkcz> ack
21:03:01 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: we're looking at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177137 - it seems fairly old, do you know if graphical updates from KDE are busted atm?
21:06:58 <adamw> well, let's go with that call then
21:07:34 * satellit_e will test ....and report later
21:07:42 <roshi> #agreed - 1177137 - Punt - This bug is currently in flux with old data and we want to wait for some KDE fixes to land before making a determination.
21:07:56 <roshi> #topic (1183835) Bad choice of provider for ambiguous "mvn(org.fusesource.hawtjni:hawtjni-runtime)" requirement: picks older package with far more deps
21:07:59 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183835
21:08:01 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, dnf, NEW
21:08:30 <adamw> there is an upstream change that addresses this, but it's probably too late to land it now
21:08:36 <adamw> i was envisaging something early last week, not now
21:10:09 <adamw> so, -1
21:10:16 <roshi> -1 then
21:11:19 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1183835 - RejectedFreezeException - We didn't get to this bug in time for it to be approved for Alpha FE status. Please submit before Beta freeze.
21:12:55 <roshi> any other votes?
21:12:57 <roshi> we need 3
21:13:06 <roshi> and then ack/nack/patch if anyone is around
21:13:10 <roshi> sharkcz: ?
21:13:13 <roshi> pschindl: ?
21:13:24 <adamw> roshi: we can get by with 2 for pretty obvious ones
21:13:30 <danofsatx> chown-1
21:13:31 <pschindl> ack
21:13:32 <adamw> especially rejections
21:13:36 <danofsatx> ack
21:13:46 <roshi> wfm
21:13:46 * satellit not knowlegable on this
21:13:58 <roshi> #agreed - 1183835 - RejectedFreezeException - We didn't get to this bug in time for it to be approved for Alpha FE status. Please submit before Beta freeze.
21:14:10 <roshi> #topic (1197135) f22 TC6 live KDE x86_64 installs openbox, sddm defaults to openbox as a session on first boot
21:14:13 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197135
21:14:15 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, LiveCD - KDE, NEW
21:15:23 <adamw> what's the actual impact of this?
21:15:29 <adamw> does it break anything or does it just look a bit odd?
21:15:31 <satellit> This need to be fixed  enlightenment does setup  at this time
21:16:56 <satellit> from boot.iso install
21:17:38 <adamw> the window manager i-s uses isn't very important if it does its job
21:17:52 <adamw> but i can't udnerstand from the report whether you're saying i-s actually doesn't work, or it just looks funny
21:18:06 <adamw> or whether it means once you get past i-s, sddm launches openbox instead of kde
21:18:07 <adamw> or what?
21:19:14 <satellit> on reboot after enligtenment setup and rboot sddm sarts KDE but is is very buugy and crashes....
21:20:01 <adamw> i don't think kde crashing has anything to do with this
21:20:15 <satellit> I may not be the best one to answer this...hard totest in this condition
21:20:21 <satellit> to test
21:20:26 <adamw> understood
21:20:31 <adamw> how about we punt and i'll check in with the kde folks
21:20:47 <Kevin_Kofler> So the issue is just the initial selection of default session.
21:21:00 <Kevin_Kofler> It picks the first alphabetically, and for some reason openbox gets installed.
21:21:04 <roshi> works for me
21:21:05 <Kevin_Kofler> There's dependency bloat there.
21:21:15 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: but it doesn't actually cause anything to not work?
21:21:17 <Kevin_Kofler> There should not be anything requiring openbox in KDE.
21:21:33 <adamw> Kevin_Kofler: it's probably another case of dnf's questionable handling of ambiguous deps
21:21:43 * satellit have to leave  bye
21:21:50 <Kevin_Kofler> Yeah, if it's dragging in all providers, it's clearly broken.
21:21:53 <roshi> I call it the "kitchen-sink" dep heuristic
21:22:15 <Kevin_Kofler> The workaround is easy in any case (select the correct session).
21:22:24 <Kevin_Kofler> It also bloats the spin sizes though.
21:22:35 <roshi> -1 FE
21:22:38 <adamw> it's not that it pulls in all providers exactly, it's just that it doesn't do a very good job of picking one
21:22:43 <adamw> anyhoo
21:22:49 <roshi> can be fixed with an update and doesn't break anything
21:22:56 <adamw> yeah
21:23:06 <Kevin_Kofler> As for the Apper thing you asked me about earlier, I don't know if the error still happens.
21:23:18 <adamw> OK, we'll check in on that
21:23:53 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1197135 - RejectedFreezeException Alpha - This bug can easily be fixed with an update at a later date and doesn't actually *break* anything. Rejected as a Freeze Exception.
21:24:34 <adamw> ack
21:24:44 <adamw> rex's fix attached to the bug wouldn't actually change the dependency situation anyway i don't think
21:25:03 <pschindl> ack
21:25:34 <roshi> #agreed - 1197135 - RejectedFreezeException Alpha - This bug can easily be fixed with an update at a later date and doesn't actually *break* anything. Rejected as a Freeze Exception.
21:25:47 <roshi> #topic (1180815) anaconda 22.14-1 back button does not work in "select disks" with USB mouse
21:25:50 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180815
21:25:52 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, oxygen-gtk3, NEW
21:28:25 <adamw> if we take this as a bug to cover 'anaconda looks really messy in kde' i can be +1
21:28:27 <adamw> needs doing soon though
21:28:44 <adamw> the buttons *worked* for me, but they look completely flat and don't visibly react to clicks
21:28:59 <adamw> all sorts of other stuff was visually wacky too
21:30:05 <roshi> +1 I think
21:30:09 <roshi> haven't seen this one though
21:30:26 <adamw> just grab the TC7 KDE live and try an install (you'll have to futz about a bit to get into X)
21:30:31 <pschindl> +2
21:30:41 <pschindl> ehm -1
21:30:50 <pschindl> That's +1 in total :)
21:31:46 <roshi> haha
21:32:23 <satellit> alt ctrl f2 sartx may work with livee
21:32:41 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1180815 - AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This bug has been granted FE status. If a fix exists, please get it in before the next compose for testing.
21:33:12 <satellit> +1
21:33:24 <pschindl> ack
21:33:53 <adamw> ack
21:33:55 <roshi> #agreed - 1180815 - AcceptedFreezeException Alpha - This bug has been granted FE status. If a fix exists, please get it in before the next compose for testing.
21:34:09 <roshi> last one
21:34:13 <roshi> #topic (1195998) ldconfig.service runs on live boot, slowing down the boot substantially
21:34:15 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1195998
21:34:18 <roshi> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, systemd, NEW
21:35:03 <adamw> i think we could still change this if the damn systemd devs would get *back* to me
21:35:06 <adamw> maybe i have to go poke them
21:35:13 <adamw> (or get reading some ldconfig man pages)
21:35:23 <roshi> +1 either way though
21:36:10 <pschindl> +1
21:36:57 <adamw> that was a +1 in case it wasn't obcious :)
21:37:06 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1195998 - AcceptedFreezeException - This bug has been granted FE status. Please apply a fix before the next compose for testing.
21:37:58 <pschindl> ack
21:38:29 <adamw> ack
21:38:54 <roshi> #agreed - 1195998 - AcceptedFreezeException - This bug has been granted FE status. Please apply a fix before the next compose for testing.
21:39:14 <roshi> #topic Open Floor
21:39:30 * roshi sets the fuse
21:40:07 <roshi> 3...
21:40:14 <adamw> yes please let us be done :P
21:40:16 <roshi> thanks for coming folks!
21:40:22 <roshi> thanks for staying up pschindl !
21:40:22 <adamw> i'll set up the tc8 request and stable push requests next
21:40:36 <roshi> sweet
21:40:38 <roshi> 2...
21:40:58 <pschindl> you are welcome. It fun, really.
21:41:02 <roshi> :D
21:41:05 <roshi> 1...
21:41:34 <roshi> #endmeeting