[Fedora QA] #261: Revise upgrade test case set
by fedora-badges
#261: Revise upgrade test case set
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
Reporter: adamwill | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 17
Component: Proventester Mentor Request | Version:
Keywords: |
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
Our present upgrade test cases are probably a sub-optimal set. We exercise
various rarely-used choices - bootloader action, and text upgrade path -
but don't exercise more common variations, like installed package sets,
install media, and disk layouts. While we can't commit to supporting
absolutely any upgrade, we should cover at least some _more_ cases in
order to catch major fails.
Based on the experience in F16 and the recommendations in the
retrospective, I'd suggest we could consider dropping or downgrading the
importance of some tests, perhaps:
* QA:Testcase_Anaconda_Upgrade_Skip_Bootloader
* QA:Testcase_Anaconda_Upgrade_Skip_Bootloader_Text_Mode
* QA:Testcase_Anaconda_Upgrade_Update_Bootloader_Text_Mode
and add test cases for all or some of the following scenarios (please add
any other suggestions as comments):
* upgrade from image written to USB stick (livecd-iso-to-disk)
* upgrade with KDE (and possibly Xfce and LXDE as 'optional' test cases)
* upgrade an EFI install (see also https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-
qa/ticket/256 for organizational issues here)
* upgrade with bootloader on first partition (not MBR)
* upgrade with separate /usr , /home and /var partitions
* upgrade a RAID install
This should be completed ideally by Fedora 17 Alpha phase, and definitely
by Beta phase (when upgrade issues become blockers).
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/261>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
9 years, 2 months
[Fedora QA] #221: Reduce Blocker Bug Review Meeting Length
by fedora-badges
#221: Reduce Blocker Bug Review Meeting Length
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Reporter: tflink | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 16
Component: Trac | Version:
Keywords: |
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
== Description ==
While the [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
blocker bug review meetings] are very much a necessary thing, they have a
tendency to be long, tedious and not a whole lot of fun for those
involved.
During the Fedora 15 retrospective, there was a request to streamline the
process in order to distribute the workload and avoid more 4+ hour
meetings.
Any proposals on how to reduce the length of the meetings while
maintaining their utility would be much appreciated.
== Proposals ==
Pending discussion in comments and email
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/221>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
9 years, 2 months
[Fedora QA] #152: Test Cases Management
by fedora-badges
#152: Test Cases Management
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Reporter: rhe | Owner: rhe
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 15
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: retrospective |
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
= problem =
We've been using mediawiki to manage tests and record results, though it's
easy to approach, it has limitations such as managing, tracking and
querying cases+results. So is it time for us to consider another solution
such as TCMS?
= analysis =
Here I quoted the suggestion from Victer Chen:
some advantages of TCMS:
* Better to record, track and query test results,
* Allow user focus on test contents instead of document maintenance.
* Share test cases
However, it couldn't be flexible as wiki. I think the most important
things need balance are below:
- Barriers
Fedora should provide very low barriers. TCMS could be configured to
allow anonymous user login and limit it's permission. Also, we can
consider using fedora account to login TCMS.
- Safety
Wiki provides the ability to rollback content easily, while TCMS
couldn't. What TCMS can do is recording all the history and allow user
recovery it manually. But if we configure the permission well, it should
not be a big problem.
= enhancement recommendation =
Work with TCMS team and package it to Fedora. Set up the system and use it
in a small scale first. If it turns out good, enlarger the scale.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/152>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
9 years, 2 months
[Fedora QA] #81: Add i18n release criteria
by fedora-badges
#81: Add i18n release criteria
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Reporter: jlaska | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Fedora 14
Component: Wiki | Version:
Keywords: retrospective |
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
= problem =
See [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=571900
RHBZ#571900 - Keyboard mapping not correct (USA instead of Belgium) when
first login after install Fedora 13 Alpha]
= analysis =
* Currently we don't have i18n installation cases, so local language
install is not tested as a demand. Untranslated pages are still existing
after RC test. Such cases needed be added in test as well as release
criteria.
* Does the Fedora i18n team have any release criteria to propose?
* RHBZ #571900 pointed out the need for a better understanding of how the
language and keymap installer selections impact the installed system.
= enhancement recommendation =
Recommend reviewing the release criteria to ensure expectations are
captured around propagating language and keymap settings from install to
desktop login (/etc/sysconfig/i18n, image:Package-x-generic-16.pnggdm
etc...). It may also be advised to coordinate with the installer team so
that bugs can be filed for any missing functionality.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/81>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
9 years, 2 months
[Fedora QA] #46: Write Test cases for LXDE components.
by fedora-badges
#46: Write Test cases for LXDE components.
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
Reporter: johannbg | Owner: johannbg
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: Test Day | Version:
Keywords: |
----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------
An ticket to keep track on LXDE components that need test cases and how to
debug pages
* PCManFM: File manager, provides desktop icons
* LXPanel: Feature-rich desktop panel
* LXSession: Standard-compliant X11 session manager with
shutdown/reboot/suspend support via HAL ( FEI
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/HalRemoval )
* LXSession-edit: GUI to configure what’s automatically started in
LXDE
* lxde-settings-daemon: XSettings Daemon
* LXInput: Keyboard and mouse settings dialog
* LXRandR: Configuration tool for monitors and external projectors
* LXAppearance: Feature-rich GTK+ theme switcher able to change GTK+
themes, icon themes, and fonts
* LXTask: Lightweight task manager derived from xfce4 task manager
* LXTerminal: Desktop-independent VTE-based terminal emulator
* LXLauncher: Open source replacement for the Asus Launcher on the
EeePC
* LXShortcut: Small utility to edit application shortcuts, used by
lxpanel and lxlauncher
* LXNM (still under development): Lightweight network manager for LXDE
supporting wireless connections (not yet in Fedora )
* LXRandR (still under development): Monitor configuring tool
* Openbox: Lightweight, standard-compliant, and highly-configurable
window manager.
* GPicView: A very simple, fast, and lightweight image viewer
featuring immediate startup
* Leafpad: Lightweight and simple text editor
* XArchiver: Lightweight, fast, and desktop-independent gtk+-based
file archiver
* LXDM: Display manager
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/46>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance
9 years, 2 months
mount -t nfs delayed
by Felix Miata
For several weeks, maybe several months, most of my Rawhide installations
generate an error trying to mount noauto nfs items in fstab:
Job for rpc-statd.service failed. See 'systemctl status rpc-statd.service'
and 'journalctl -xn' for details.
Output from those:
[start]rpc-statd.service - NFS status monitor for NFSv2/3 locking.
Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/rpc-statd.service; enabled)
Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Thu 2014-05-29 00:41:00 EDT;
3min 12s ago
Process: 691 ExecStart=/usr/sbin/rpc.statd --no-notify $STATDARGS
(code=exited, status=1/FAILURE)
May 29 00:40:00 g5eas systemd[1]: Starting NFS status monitor for NFSv2/3
locking....
May 29 00:40:00 g5eas rpc.statd[692]: Version 1.3.0 starting
May 29 00:40:00 g5eas rpc.statd[692]: Flags: TI-RPC
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas rpc.statd[692]: failed to create RPC listeners, exiting
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas systemd[1]: rpc-statd.service: control process exited,
code=exited status=1
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas systemd[1]: Failed to start NFS status monitor for
NFSv2/3 locking..
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas systemd[1]: Unit rpc-statd.service entered failed state.
-- Logs begin at Sat 2014-03-22 18:49:34 EDT, end at Thu 2014-05-29 00:41:00
EDT. --
May 29 00:40:00 g5eas rpcbind[693]: cannot create socket for tcp6
May 29 00:40:00 g5eas systemd[1]: Started RPC bind service.
-- Subject: Unit rpcbind.service has finished start-up
-- Defined-By: systemd
-- Support: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
--
-- Unit rpcbind.service has finished starting up.
--
-- The start-up result is done.
May 29 00:40:07 g5eas systemd[1]: Starting Stop Read-Ahead Data Collection...
-- Subject: Unit systemd-readahead-done.service has begun with start-up
-- Defined-By: systemd
-- Support: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
--
-- Unit systemd-readahead-done.service has begun starting up.
May 29 00:40:07 g5eas systemd[1]: Started Stop Read-Ahead Data Collection.
-- Subject: Unit systemd-readahead-done.service has finished start-up
-- Defined-By: systemd
-- Support: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
--
-- Unit systemd-readahead-done.service has finished starting up.
--
-- The start-up result is done.
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas rpc.statd[692]: failed to create RPC listeners, exiting
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas systemd[1]: rpc-statd.service: control process exited,
code=exited status=1
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas systemd[1]: Failed to start NFS status monitor for
NFSv2/3 locking..
-- Subject: Unit rpc-statd.service has failed
-- Defined-By: systemd
-- Support: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
--
-- Unit rpc-statd.service has failed.
--
-- The result is failed.
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas systemd[1]: Unit rpc-statd.service entered failed state.
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas rpc.statd[709]: Version 1.3.0 starting
May 29 00:41:00 g5eas rpc.statd[709]: Flags: TI-RPC
[end]
I see no similar problem in Factory or Cauldron using identical fstab entries
and mount syntax. What needs to be done to eliminate this delay?
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
9 years, 5 months
NM controlled bridge turns on netfilter
by Paul Knox-Kennedy
I have a host recently updated to f20, with virtual machines using
bridged networking. When I switch to NetworkManager controlled
networking, the virtual machines' DHCP requests failed.
After much messing around, I have found that when NM is on, by the time
the system has booted, bridge-nf-call-iptables,
bridge-nf-call-ip6-tables and bridge-nf-call-arptables have all been set
to 1, so something has overriden the setting from
/usr/lib/sysctl.d/00-system.conf.
Is there some setting I am missing here?
Thanks
Paul
NOTICE & DISCLAIMER
This email including attachments (this "Document") is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you have received this Document in error please notify the sender immediately and delete this Document from your system without using, copying, disclosing or disseminating it or placing any reliance upon its contents. We cannot accept liability for any breaches of confidence arising through use of this Document.
The information contained in this Document is provided solely for information purposes on an "as is" basis without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including without limitation any implied warranty of satisfactory or merchantable quality, fitness for a particular purpose or freedom from error or infringement. The user relies on the information contained herein, and its accuracy or otherwise, entirely at their own risk.
Any opinions expressed in this Document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Telsis. We will not accept responsibility for any commitments made by our employees outside the scope of our business.
9 years, 6 months
Criterion revision proposal: KDE default applications
by Adam Williamson
It was clear at the Go/No-Go meeting today that KDE SIG does not
consider this release criterion applicable/desired:
"All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical
mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of
that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality
test."
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_a...
jreznik says they consider the live image their 'polished product' where
everything must work, while the DVD install is more of a grab-bag - they
install a whole bunch of stuff, and don't think it's the end of the
world if one or two bits are broken.
Given that, I propose re-wording as follows:
"All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical
mechanism of a release-blocking live image after an installation of that
image must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test."
So, that doesn't just apply to KDE. True, but I actually think it's a
reasonable revision for GNOME as well. It makes sense to see the live
images as defining what our 'polished core desktops' consist of, and the
DVD as more of a grab-bag of packages. The lives will (should) always
contain the bits the desktop SIGs think are absolutely key pieces of the
desktop. And I think we could generally do with a bit of criteria
watering-down; we're starting to do a lot of fudges and waives, which
indicates the criteria are currently too tight for us to realistically
enforce. Things are better when we can stand solidly behind the criteria
without fudging stuff.
CCing KDE and desktop lists. If folks feel that we should restrict this
change to KDE only, please do yell, but I'm kinda liking the simple
version.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
9 years, 7 months