Just a couple of smallish things after upgrading (via dnf) from F23 to
F24 a couple of months ago:
1. deja-dup gui:
one has to deselect then reselect the Overview option in order
to be offered the "Backup Now" option.
The details option in the progress dialog will only display two
or three lines, is not resizeable, and does not follow resizing the
The progress dialog does not wait to be dismissed at the end,
causing any messages about problems (like failure to backup a particular
file) to not be seen
2. fingerprint identification:
The laptop has a fingerprint reader and it works fine. However
I prefer not to use it. The user set up specifies that fingerprint login
However whenever I am asked for a password the fingerprint
reader blinks until I swipe a finger over it (even after using a
No fingerprint is registered.
This is different than F23 where it never blinked.
3. Scrolling issues:
This, edge and natural scrolling via the touchpad, was covered
nicely in a previous thread.
Solutions offered there work well but should be better
integrated as I am sure they will be.
Desktop is: gnome-desktop3-3.20.2-1.fc24.x86_64
laptop is Thinkpad X240 (Intel graphics)
Not to be a pita, just trying to help
I really like Fedora & the Gnome desktop
Roger Wells, P.E.
221 Third St
Newport, RI 02840
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Josh Berkus <jberkus(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 09/30/2016 02:01 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> 16:44:56 <kushal> Cloud base image is the only blocking deliverable.
>> 16:44:59 <kushal> Atomic is not.
>> I realize this WG is in the middle of rebooting itself, but to have
>> clearly conflicting information from the WG members is a bit
> Based on my attendence at the Cloud WG meetings, I had the understanding
> that Atomic was becoming our main deliverable. If that's not true, then
> I need to pull a whole bunch of changes and put them on ice until Fedora 26.
What also matters is the understanding of others who needed to
understand this. To me it sounds like a baton was dropped. But moving
What does release blocking mean? There are a bunch of QA criteria and
test cases that help make sure those criteria are met. There are no
atomic host specific criteria or test cases that I'm aware of. I
expect QA probably can't provide significant assistance in QAing the
atomic qcow2 image for this release. How big of a problem is that? Is
there a Fedora policy that requires a default download product to be
QA'd somehow, or to be release blocking? Can Cloud WG take the lead
QA'ing the atomic qcow2 image? What are the releng implications of it
not being release blocking?
For example, during the Fedora 24 cycle there was a neat bug in the
compose process that caused some images to fail. It wasn't possible to
just do another compose and cherry pick the working ISOs from two
different composes (I forget why). Is there anything like that here,
or is there sufficiently good isolation between ostree images and
other images? What happens if release is a go for everything else, but
atomic qcow2 is not working? What I've heard is "fix the problem and
remake the image" similar to the current two week cycle. Does releng
agree, and will there be time between a Thursday "go" and Tuesday
(whatever day it is) "release" to get an atomic qcow2 built and on
getfedora? What if there isn't? What if it's a week after release
before there's a working one?
If the liabilities there can be sorted out satisfactorily I'd say
proceed with Atomic on getfedora.
Next issue is Cloud Base images. Cloud WG needs to decide if these are
going to be created and if so how they're going to get linked to and
from where. Is there a designed landing page for these already? If
not, my thought is have a side bar link to a basic directory listing
for them, rather than the fancy landing page that currently exists for
Fedora 24 Cloud Base images. And demote the Cloud Base images to
non-release blocking. And then whatever contingency for that side bar
link if the Cloud Base images aren't available for release day.