Last known Good for Rawhide (Server Edition) -- Not Good
by Onyeibo Oku
Good Morning,
I'd like to bring something to attention. I just downloaded Server
Boot Media (Netinstall) from:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-2022120...
I made a USB boot disk out of that and it failed to boot.
Here is what I get after choosing to install at the GRUB Menu:
error: ../../grub-core/fs/fshelp.c:257:file '/images/pxeboot/vmlinuz'
not found
error: ../../grub-core/loader/i386/efi/linux.c:258:you need to load the
kernel first.
Press any key to continue ...
The ISO was registered as "last known good". This can't be good.
Which one really works?
3 weeks, 5 days
Possible new test day
by pmkellly＠frontier.com
This morning when I saw the call for test days e'mail I had an idea that
I want to get some feedback on before I propose it as a test day.
I manage multiple systems and for each new release of Fedora
Workstation, I do installs (clean storage) rather that updates. This
gets rid of the trash in the system space and users get a chance to
clean the trash out of their home directory before it's copied to their
new home directory. The automation (script) I use for configuring these
systems after the base Anaconda install not only installs and removes
software packages, but also does setting of desktop preferences, service
settings, and user setting such as groups. I start using the script with
what I call As Deployed Testing which typically starts a little before
branching of the new version. This happens for pre-release drops as
testing is called for or for other drops as something peaks my interest.
Good things can be discovered about the readiness of the new release for
deployment with this as deployed configuration. For instance:
Unreported bugs can sometimes show up. Besides reporting the bug I can
understand the impact of the bug and plan for a workaround or other
measure given that the bug may not be a priority. An application may be
retired or have a new version that is delayed. Such situations can lead
to the deployment being delayed or working with users to decide if we
might need to be tolerant of a bug or picking a new application.
A Gnome setting (gsettings) may work differently or no longer be
available. Their may be new settings available
I would guess that most folks that deploy new Fedora Workstation
releases for a group of users do something similar. So why then have a
test day for this? I see the following benefits:
On the test day results pages each tester can report the number of users
they support and list by number any new bugs or issues they found that
were seen after their as deployed configuration, but not with with the
base anaconda installed configuration. This provides an indication of
the impact of the bugzilla bugs and Gnome issues that were found.
They can be encouraged to post on Fedora Discussion about any new or
different gsettings or service configurations they found. This will
raise visibility of new, changed, and removed settings. They can tell
about replacement application(s) they are using in place of ones that
are retired or otherwise not available.
1 month, 1 week
[Fedora 38] Call for Test Days
by Sumantro Mukherjee
Hi Fedora users, developers, and friends!
It's time to start thinking about Test Days for Fedora 38.
For anyone who isn't aware, a Test Day is an event usually focused
around IRC for interaction and a Wiki page for instructions and results,
with the aim being to get a bunch of interested users and developers
together to test a specific feature or area of the distribution. You can
run a Test Day on just about anything for which it would be useful to do
some fairly focused testing in 'real time' with a group of testers; it
doesn't have to be code, for instance, we often run Test Days for
l10n/i18n topics. For more information on Test Days, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days .
Anyone who wants to can host their own Test Day, or you can request that
the QA group helps you out with organization or any combination of the
two. To propose a Test Day, just file a ticket in fedora-qa pagure - here's
an example https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/issue/624 . For
instructions on hosting a Test Day, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Test_Day_management .
You can see the schedule at https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/issues?tags=test+days .
There are many slots open right now. Consider the development
schedule, though, in deciding when you want to run your Test Day - for
some topics you may want to avoid
the time before the Beta release or the time after the feature freeze
or the Final Freeze.
We normally aim to schedule Test Days on Thursdays; however, if you want
to run a series of related Test Days, it's often a good idea to do
something like Tuesday / Wednesday / Thursday of the same week (this is
how we usually run the X Test Week, for instance). If all the Thursday
slots fill up but more people want to run Test Days, we will open up
Tuesday slots as overflows. And finally, if you really want to run a
Test Day in a specific time frame due to the development schedule, but
the Thursday slot for that week is full, we can add a slot on another
day. We're flexible! Just put in your ticket the date or time frame you'd
like, and we'll figure it out from there.
If you don't want to run your own Test Day, but you are willing to
help with another, feel free to join one or more of already accepted
Test Days:
GNOME Test Day*
i18n Test Day*
Kernel Test Week(s)*
Upgrade Test Day*
IoT Test Week*
Cloud Test Day*
Fedora CoreOS Test Week*
And don't be afraid, there are a lot of more slots available for your
own Test Day!
[*] These are the test days we run generally to make sure everything
is working fine, the dates get announced as we move into the release
cycle.
If you have any questions about the Test Day process, please don't
hesitate to contact me or any member of the Fedora QA team on test at
lists.fedoraproject.org or in #fedora-qa on IRC. Thanks!
--
//sumantro
Fedora QE
TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED
1 month, 1 week
Rawhide ~ I cannot boot any version of a 6.2 kernel in a VirtualBox
VM
by Ian Laurie
I've got 4 Rawhide VMs across 2 different hosts, and none of them will
boot with any 6.2 kernel. Last working bootable kernel for me is
kernel-6.1.0-65.fc38.
I'm guessing at this point this is a VirtualBox issue only?
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
1 month, 1 week
testing sources of information
by Bill Cunningham
I am considering considering testing. The only sources of info I can
find is doc.fedoraproject.org . Can fedpkg be used for this testing?
Where are the sources of packages and such that new testing. Are there
specific tools needed?
B
1 month, 2 weeks
Troubleshooting live boot on an Intel DH87RL
by Brandon Nielsen
Finally got a chance to install Fedora 37 on most of the machines I have
around here. Interestingly I cannot get Fedora 37 Workstation Live to
boot in UEFI mode on a desktop with an Intel DH87RL motherboard. What
happens is I select the USB drive from the boot selection menu, the
screen goes blank for a few seconds, and then I get dumped back at the
boot device selection menu.
The same USB stick works perfectly on multiple other UEFI and BIOS
systems. Media tests pass.
Legacy (BIOS) boot works fine. Secure Boot enabled / disabled does not
change anything.
I also tested a 20221221 Workstation compose[0] and it does not boot either.
I suspect this is related BIOS ISO w/ GRUB2 change[1], but I don't know
that for sure.
I am at a loss for next troubleshooting steps, or even what component to
file a bug against. Suggestions welcome!
[0] -
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-2022122...
[1] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BIOSBootISOWithGrub2
1 month, 2 weeks
Unable to install 3rd party rpm with current Rawhide DNF
by Ian Laurie
In testing and playing with Rawhide 20221217.n.0 I found I was unable to
install the 3rd party program bcompare (Beyond Compare) for which I am
licensed.
With their repo installed "sudo dnf install bcompare" produces the error:
Error: GPG check FAILED
However, if I use "sudo dnf install bcompare --nogpgcheck" I get a
different error:
Error: Transaction test error:
package bcompare-4.4.4-27058.x86_64 does not verify: Header V4
DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 7f8840ce: BAD
Is this because DNF no longer will accept SHA1?
Interestingly, on another Rawhide VM with bcompare already installed and
working, "rpm -q bcompare" produces:
error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 3507
Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 7f8840ce: BAD
Header SHA256 digest: OK
Header SHA1 digest: OK
package bcompare is not installed
This output is clearly wrong, because bcompare is installed and working.
Is there a way to get around this problem and force the install?
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
1 month, 2 weeks
