#6219: Need updated cloud images for Fedora 22
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: kushal | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 22 Final | Component: other
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
Hi,
I have tested the following tree with the formal tests. Please do a
release of the updated cloud images from this tree.
http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/22-20150720/Cloud-
Images/x86_64/Images/
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6219>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6252: please create a rawhide and f23 side tag for llvm updates
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: airlied | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 23 Final | Component: git
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
Hi guys,
I want to update llvm to 3.7 in rawhide and f23, but I'd like to build all
the deps in a side tag first to make sure.
Can you create two tags?
Dave.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6252>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6344: Strange issue on php-JsonSchema-1.6.1-1.fc22
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: remi | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 24 Alpha | Component: koji
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
Yesterday, I received a bodhi notification:
php-JsonSchema-1.6.1-1.fc22 ejected from the push because u"Cannot find
relevant tag for php-JsonSchema-1.6.1-1.fc22. None of ['f22-updates-
testing', 'f22-updates-testing-pending'] are in [u'epel7-testing-
candidate', u'dist-6E-epel-testing-candidate', u'dist-5E-epel-testing-
candidate', u'f22-updates-candidate', u'f23-updates-candidate', u'f21
-updates-candidate']."
According to http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=713713
Pakage is tag f22-updates-testing
According to
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-59f94c4aea
Update is "locked" and pending.
Can you please check ?
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6344>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6184: suitesparse can't be installed in ppc64 el6 buildroots
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: rmattes | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 23 Final | Component: epel
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
I'm running into trouble building GeographicLib in epel6. GeographicLib
requires octave, which in turn requires suitesparse. It looks like
suitesparse was in epel for a while, but got absorbed into rhel at some
point and blocked from the buildroots. Since centos doesn't provide ppc64
packages, the ppc64 octave package in epel now has missing dependencies on
suitesparse libraries and can't be installed in koji.
What's the best way forward for this issue? Is it to:
- Unblock the epel6 suitesparse and make it exclusivearch ppc64?
- Rebuild all of the dependencies of suitesparse to excludearch ppc64?
- Make octave-GeographicLib excludearch ppc64 and ignore the issue
entirely?
Please advise.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6184>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6313: atomic host: reorienting ostree commits to match 2 week cadence
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: walters | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 23 Final | Component: other
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
Current as I understand it, we have a "two week" process for images
(cloud, ISO etc.), but the OSTree commits are made at the default Fedora
at-most-once-a-day cadence.
I would like to propose doing only one released OSTree commit matching the
two week release. Meaning `atomic host upgrade` would exactly what the
images give. The advantage of this is predictability.
NOTE: we need an exception for critical async security errata.
The /testing/ ref though would continue at its current rate - and ideally
go even faster. I would be a lot happier if we skipped the manual
once-a-day RPM signing and did direct Koji -> /testing/.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6313>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6195: Signed commits for ostree / Project Atomic
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 23 Alpha | Component: other
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
As Atomic moves from experimental to something users will actually depend
on, we need to get this right. It's my understanding that the current
workflow doesn't make it easy (the signing needs to happen in a place
different from what we're used to).
I don't know the specifics, but as Dennis says, "we should figure
something out. I just do not know what a good answer is".
The same thing might let us also sign RPM repo metadata.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6195>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6267: sign ostree commits
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: walters | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 23 Final | Component: koji
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
This has been discussed several times. AIUI it is blocked on a Fedora
policy of not doing detached signatures.
As downstream Red Hat Enterprise Linux and its associated PST are OK with
detached signatures, I think Fedora should as well.
The GPG signature would have helped mitigate
https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/spin-
kickstarts.git/commit/?id=1e408e111008f539c89212a9ca9bb955e2c4f823
for example.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6267>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6304: ability to test spin-kickstars by doing throw away image builds in koji
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: dustymabe | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 23 Final | Component: koji
Keywords: | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
It would be nice to be able to create image builds in koji that are throw
away builds that are purely used for testing of changes to kickstart files
etc.. The idea is that we would use these as a way to test our changes
before officially commiting them to the spin-kickstarts repo.
Having this ability would mean it is much easier for contributors to test
changes and thus more likely to submit fixes and or suggestions back. We
can currently do an image build on our own machines but it does take some
setup and it is not the same environment as the one in koji. So, while we
can test on our own machines, is it a valid test? Not really.
I would love this functionality. I know it might not technically be
possible right now to do, but we shouldn't ignore its value and should
perhaps take steps to get there.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6304>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project
#6200: Cannot mirror Fedora drpms using OpenAFS
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: tc01 | Owner: rel-eng@…
Type: task | Status: new
Milestone: Fedora 22 Final | Component: other
Keywords: meeting | Blocked By:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------+------------------------
I had (mistakenly) filed this against infrastructure:
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4798
To summarize: we'd like to run a Fedora mirror in an OpenAFS cell, but the
drpms/ directory is far larger than the 64K slot limit in OpenAFS and, as
a result, cannot mirror them.
We are currently just excluding the drpms, which works, but I'd like to be
able to mirror them if possible.
A couple of possible fixes are mentioned in the discussion on that ticket;
keeping fewer drpms, or organizing the drpms into alphabetical
subdirectories instead of one giant drpms/ directory.
How does rel-eng feel about this? Is this something that could be fixed in
some way or should we merely continue to exclude the drpms?
Thanks in advance.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6200>
Fedora Release Engineering <http://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng>
Release Engineering for the Fedora Project