Rawhide Acceptance Test for F16 summary
jlaska at redhat.com
Tue Jul 19 18:32:33 UTC 2011
----- Original Message -----
> On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 06:05 -0400, Tao Wu wrote:
> > Greetings folks,
> > Just wanted to summarize how testing held up for the rawhide
> > acceptance test run of Fedora 16. Thanks for your attention. It is
> > unfortunately that the rawhide installation version has not passed
> > the major test, please refer to the bug 723144. Let's expect the
> > exciting coming out of next version!
> > If you have spare time and want to contribute by verify this
> > version, the test cases and results can be found on the following
> > URL:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_16_Rawhide_Acceptance_Test_1#Test_Matrix
> > Thanks a lot!
> Thanks Tao! I don't have anything to add to your results since I don't
> yet have a rawhide/F16 system to test with. I'm seeing the same bug
> (bug#723144) you reported on a baremetal system. Please consider
> escalating this issue as a F16 Alpha release blocker since I suspect
> this impacts the following Alpha release criteria  ...
> The installer must be able to complete an installation using the
> entire disk, existing free space, or existing Linux partitions
> methods, with or without encryption enabled
> If anyone is already running rawhide, there are a few post-install
> linked on the above test matrix that could use some feedback.
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Alpha_Release_Criteria
I'm trying other ways of installing while working around the problem you found, and I uncovered another issue. In classic form, Chris Lumens fixed it in anaconda.git . Until a newer anaconda is available, I have an updates.img  that works with anaconda-16.12-1. The updates.img does not yet resolve bug#723144, but it seems that installing *without* LVM allows the install to proceed and workaround the bug you found. This should allow some test coverage on remaining test cases.
If anyone is interested, the process for creating installer updates.img is pretty painless, thanks to some clever documentation+script support. 
More information about the test