[Bug 727814] F16 Alpha TC1 installer crash | LUKSError: luks device not configured

[Tim Flink]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 02:27:15 -0400 (EDT)
Kamil Paral <kparal at redhat.com> wrote:

> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727814
> > 
> > --- Comment #8 from Tim Flink <tflink at redhat.com> 2011-09-01
> > 13:18:54 EDT --- Discussed in the 2011-08-26 blocker review
> > meeting. Rejected as a Fedora 16 beta blocker because it doesn't
> > violate any of the beta release criteria [1].
> > 
> > Accepted as NTH because it's annoying and a fix is ready.
> > 
> > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Beta_Release_Criteria
> 
> I don't think we should mark any installer crashes as non-blockers
> when there is a good chance users would hit it. I believe this
> particular bug should have been an Alpha blocker:
> 
> "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 or LVM enabled"
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Alpha_Release_Criteria
> 
> Whether I do or don't provide the password to my existing encrypted
> partitions doesn't really matter, both ways are very probable, both
> ways should work. At least in my opinion.

True, both ways should work but it doesn't really seem that common of a
use case since (we thought) most people would be either ignoring all of
their encrypted partitions or using them. As I read it, you have to
enter a password for some but not all of your encrypted partitions.

The question comes down to - would this bug be worth holding up the
entire alpha release until it was fixed? If it was final, maybe but
not alpha, in my opinion. 

Looking at the logs from the blocker review meeting when we decided to
make it NTH instead of blocker - it's the same thing but since a fix is
available, we didn't deliberate on it too much since that would be more
academic than anything. It's reported to be fixed in anaconda 16.15-1
and should be fixed. Are you still hitting it?

As a side note, you don't have to actually be at the blocker bug review
meeting to vote. You can go through the blocker bugs and put your vote
and concerns in the bug comments - we're trying to do that more anyways.

Thanks,

Tim
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20110902/7bbcd704/attachment.bin