16:01:04 <tflink> #startmeeting f19final-blocker-review-5
16:01:04 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jun 12 16:01:04 2013 UTC.  The chair is tflink. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:04 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:01:04 <tflink> #meetingname f19final-blocker-review-5
16:01:04 <tflink> #topic Roll Call
16:01:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f19final-blocker-review-5'
16:01:11 <tflink> #chair adamw kparal
16:01:11 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw kparal tflink
16:01:56 * jreznik is here
16:02:21 <adamw> ahoyhoy
16:03:57 * kparal here
16:04:46 <jreznik> kparal, we should correct adamw's way how he writes ahoy :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahoy_%28greeting%29#Czech_and_Slovak
16:06:00 <kparal> right, adamw, practice: ahoj :-)
16:06:40 * kparal should practise words practice and practise
16:07:06 <adamw> jreznik: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahoy_%28greeting%29
16:07:10 <adamw> and more specifically:
16:07:20 <adamw> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ahoy-hoy
16:07:24 <kparal> tflink: is having connection issues
16:07:36 <adamw> give him a few mins, if it doesn't sort out I'll take over
16:08:19 <tflink> that was fun
16:09:38 <jreznik> adamw: yeah, saw that - for some reason I took a wikipedia lesson on the etymology of ahoj a few days ago :)
16:10:36 <tflink> do we have enough people to get started?
16:10:42 * tflink thinks so
16:11:31 <tflink> #topic Introduction
16:11:38 <tflink> Why are we here?
16:11:38 <tflink> #info Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and freeze exception bugs.
16:12:01 <tflink> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
16:12:01 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
16:12:06 <tflink> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
16:12:07 <tflink> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
16:12:14 <tflink> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
16:12:15 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_19_Final_Release_Criteria
16:12:17 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_19_Beta_Release_Criteria
16:12:21 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_19_Alpha_Release_Criteria
16:12:23 <tflink> #info Up for review today, we have:
16:12:27 <tflink> #info 7 Proposed Blockers
16:12:27 <tflink> #info 14 Accepted Blockers
16:12:27 <tflink> #info 11 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
16:12:27 <tflink> #info 22 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
16:12:44 <tflink> any volunteers for secretarialization?
16:14:05 * tflink can do it post-meeting otherwise
16:14:18 <tflink> if there are no objections, I'll start with the proposed blockers
16:14:42 <tflink> #topic (972959) Anaconda F19-TC-2 is unable to regain focus of the network configuration box if it loses it
16:14:45 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972959
16:14:48 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
16:16:02 <tflink> this does sound kinda icky but not so sure about blocker
16:16:35 <tflink> is anyone +1 blocker on this?
16:17:16 <kparal> do you have to start over, if you unfocus the dialog?
16:17:22 <kparal> meaning reboot into installer again?
16:17:50 <kparal> a screenshot would help, btw
16:18:11 <tflink> it sounds like you'd have to reboot, yeah
16:18:28 <jreznik> there's proposed "solution"
16:18:57 <jreznik> this could be annoying, would be great to fix it but not sure it's really blocker, more not
16:19:52 * kparal playing with it
16:20:24 <kparal> -1/+1
16:20:35 <kparal> if this was the last blocker proposal, I wouldn't block release
16:20:53 <jreznik> yep, -1/+1
16:20:54 <kparal> or 0/+1, however you want to put it
16:20:55 <tflink> yeah, +1 FE ... probably -1 blocker
16:21:54 <tflink> proposed #agreed 972959 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException - While unfortunate, this bug doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria and is thus rejected as a blocker for F19 final. However, a tested fix would be considered past freeze.
16:22:11 <kparal> ack
16:22:34 <adamw> at least FE
16:22:37 <adamw> ack
16:22:48 <adamw> might re-propose as a blocker if it doesn't get fixed, but there's a patch...
16:23:06 <jreznik> ack
16:23:28 <tflink> #agreed 972959 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException - While unfortunate, this bug doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria and is thus rejected as a blocker for F19 final. However, a tested fix would be considered past freeze.
16:23:37 <tflink> #topic (966761) storage configuration failed: Not enough free space on disks for automatic partitioning
16:23:40 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966761
16:23:43 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
16:25:16 <tflink> probably coulda skipped this one, not much new since monday
16:25:33 <jreznik> yeah, skip it today
16:25:45 <kparal> can be a dupe, but we really need the already accepted blocker first
16:25:47 <kparal> to rule it out
16:25:50 <kparal> or confirm it
16:26:06 <kparal> *need to fix
16:26:22 <tflink> #info no significant movement since we last discussed this bug on monday, skipping for today
16:26:32 <tflink> #topic (973542) gnome-shell-3.8.3 fails to show login screen
16:26:33 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973542
16:26:33 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-shell, MODIFIED
16:26:44 <adamw> well, that sounds bad.
16:27:13 <tflink> I like the reporter's steps to reproduce
16:27:23 <tflink> 3. weep for mummy
16:27:30 <adamw> sounds like my day
16:27:31 <adamw> +1
16:27:54 <kparal> multiple people confirmed and can test, +1
16:28:11 <jreznik> +1 but we would be the first distro to "support" gnome on wayland ig not fixed :)
16:28:12 <tflink> +1 sounds like a mistake in the current build that's causing problems
16:28:13 <kparal> ask James to test the packages
16:29:10 <tflink> proposed #agreed 973542 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F19 alpha release criterion: "After firstboot is completed and on subsequent boots, a graphical install must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop as the user created during firstboot."
16:29:19 <kparal> ack
16:29:32 <adamw> ackity ack
16:29:45 <jreznik> 3ack
16:29:52 <adamw> jreznik: i hear that someone would wear a buinny suit on a tv program or something...
16:29:56 <tflink> #agreed 973542 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F19 alpha release criterion: "After firstboot is completed and on subsequent boots, a graphical install must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop as the user created during firstboot."
16:30:28 <tflink> #topic (973068) DBusException: org.freedesktop.NetworkManager.AgentManager.SessionNotFound: Session not found
16:30:31 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973068
16:30:34 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NetworkManager, NEW
16:31:02 <tflink> anaconda secret agent patch?
16:31:34 <adamw> the 007 module
16:32:32 <adamw> no, it's so you can do WEP/WPA wireless
16:32:37 <adamw> see commit d45dbcc6424cb9d925f8f48536332c2e8dae7b55
16:32:39 <tflink> I suppose that would fit, 007 has a history of leaving a path of destruction in his wake
16:32:43 <adamw> heh
16:33:05 <adamw> Fedora 20 '007 Edition': you can never tell if James Bond is alive or dead either
16:33:06 <tflink> +1
16:33:31 <adamw> +1, this is basically a 100% showstopper - we need to get NM fixed, but we may temporarily revert the anaconda patch to get a tc3
16:33:40 <kparal> +1
16:34:45 <tflink> proposed #agreed 973068 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F19 final release criterion: " The installer must be able to complete an installation using all supported interfaces"
16:34:59 <adamw> ack
16:35:16 <kparal> ack
16:35:18 <jreznik> ack
16:35:37 <tflink> #agreed 973068 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F19 final release criterion: " The installer must be able to complete an installation using all supported interfaces"
16:37:03 <tflink> #topic (964006) cloud-init hostname service failing on initial boot
16:37:06 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964006
16:37:09 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, selinux-policy, ASSIGNED
16:38:48 <tflink> it sounds like this is a bit more severe than we thought
16:40:14 <adamw> yeah
16:41:00 <adamw> the way to take this would be to stretch "The release must boot successfully as Xen DomU with releases providing a functional, supported Xen Dom0 and widely used cloud providers utilizing Xen. This does not include any issues limited to the release functioning as Xen Dom0 " a bit to fit, I think
16:41:11 <nirik> would be nice to fix this one.
16:41:15 <tflink> I don't think it's much of a stretch
16:41:20 <adamw> yeah, only a bit
16:41:23 <adamw> i'm ok with +1 on that
16:41:31 <tflink> this effectivly blocks some of the most common cloud use cases
16:41:34 <tflink> +1
16:41:35 * nirik would like fast booting cloud instances. ;)
16:41:38 <nirik> +1
16:41:58 <jreznik> nirik: it's not only about speed but also some functionality
16:41:59 <jreznik> +1
16:42:04 <nirik> side note, it should be pretty easy now to test composes in the infra private cloud.
16:42:06 <tflink> it would only be proper if our cloud release criterion was a bit nebulous
16:42:08 <nirik> yeah, that too
16:42:09 * tflink ducks
16:43:22 <tflink> proposed #agreed 964006 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F19 final release criterion in the sense that many of the important use cases are effectively blocked: "The release must boot successfully as Xen DomU with releases providing a functional, supported Xen Dom0 and widely used cloud providers utilizing Xen. This does not include any issues limited to the release functioning as Xen Dom0"
16:43:43 <jreznik> ack
16:46:05 <adamw> ack
16:46:52 <tflink> any other ack/nack/patch?
16:47:06 <kparal> ack
16:47:17 <tflink> #agreed 964006 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F19 final release criterion in the sense that many of the important use cases are effectively blocked: "The release must boot successfully as Xen DomU with releases providing a functional, supported Xen Dom0 and widely used cloud providers utilizing Xen. This does not include any issues limited to the release functioning as Xen Dom0"
16:47:32 <tflink> #topic (973374) qemu screenshots broken for F19 Beta guests
16:47:33 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=973374
16:47:33 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, spice, NEW
16:48:38 <adamw> this doesn't really quite meet the blocker smell test for me, but fe
16:48:39 <jreznik> -1/+1 - cosmetic bug, and from the comment #2 seems to be fixable in updates even
16:48:51 <adamw> oh, and yeah
16:49:13 <adamw> if that's the case, i'm not i'm even +1 fe really. running a live image as a virt host is a pretty minority occupation.
16:49:21 <tflink> unless we consider boxes working to be a release blocking issue
16:49:29 <tflink> which I'm pretty sure wouldn't fly
16:49:30 <jreznik> tflink: boxes are working
16:49:40 <tflink> define working
16:49:49 <tflink> I'm -1/+1 either way, though
16:49:54 <kparal> was there decided whether this is a guest or host issue?
16:49:56 <kparal> I don't see it
16:50:04 <tflink> kparal: sounds like it's a host issue
16:50:09 <adamw> tflink: there is "All applications listed under the Applications menu or category must withstand a basic functionality test and not crash after a few minutes of normal use."
16:50:12 * nirik is -1/+1. If the fix is anoying/invasive make it 0 day
16:50:16 <jreznik> tflink: there's screenshot garbage https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=79464
16:50:21 <adamw> is having a screenshot of the guest a 'basic function'? eh. maybe.
16:50:46 <tflink> adamw: I was referring to boxes' display of the running vm
16:50:52 <jreznik> adamw: it does not crash, there's also a screenshot just with some garbage...
16:51:18 <jreznik> tflink: display of running vm is ok if I understand it correctly, it just icon for vm
16:51:32 <tflink> jreznik: yep, that's my understanding as well
16:51:40 <kparal> but the icon is quite big, I think
16:51:54 <kparal> in the overview mode
16:51:56 <adamw> the example screenshot isn't terrible
16:52:04 <adamw> so it sounds like this won't just be total garbage in all cases
16:52:10 <kparal> -1/+1 here
16:52:23 <jreznik> and not talking about boxes being garbage completely outside gnome :)
16:52:31 <adamw> def -1 blocker, i'm really not sure about fe
16:52:33 <kparal> if it's guest issue. if it's host issue, make it 0-day update
16:52:44 <adamw> kparal: it seems pretty established it's a host issue
16:52:54 <adamw> airlied wrote "totally a spice server bug."
16:52:58 <jreznik> so we are now more -1/-1?
16:53:12 <tflink> proposed #agreed 973374 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException - While this looks bad, it doesn't keep boxes from functioning and doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria. However, a tested fix would be considered past freeze.
16:53:13 <adamw> the planned fix involves adding new stuff to libvirt which sets off my 'squee' alarms
16:53:16 <adamw> nack
16:53:29 <adamw> so i'm starting to be more -1/-1
16:53:29 <kparal> in that case -1 FE sounds reasonable
16:53:44 <tflink> yeah, I was just wanting to get it out since I was done typing
16:54:02 <adamw> heh
16:55:38 <tflink> proposed #agreed 973374 - RejectedBlocker RejectedFreezeException - While this looks bad, it doesn't keep boxes from functioning and doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria. The fix sounds invasive and potentially risky with changing libvirt. Since it could be fixed with a post-release update on the host and thus, this is also rejected as a freeze exception for F19 final.
16:55:45 <adamw> ack
16:55:46 <kparal> ack
16:55:51 <jreznik> ack
16:56:03 <adamw> well, C- for grammar ;)
16:56:14 <tflink> eh? what'd I mess up?
16:56:21 <adamw> "Since it could be fixed with a post-release update on the host and thus, this is also rejected"
16:56:30 <tflink> oh, whoops
16:56:41 <tflink> changed part of it and forgot to change the rest
16:57:17 * kparal sees no grammar issues :)
16:57:30 <tflink> #agreed 973374 - RejectedBlocker RejectedFreezeException - While this looks bad, it doesn't keep boxes from functioning and doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria. The fix sounds invasive and potentially risky with changing libvirt. Since the bug could be fixed with a post-release update on the host, also rejected as a freeze exception for F19 final.
16:57:36 <tflink> bedtter?
16:57:55 <tflink> from grammar to spelling ...
16:58:30 <tflink> #topic (885151) [BUG] kickstart repo --name cannot have spaces or the repo will not be added
16:58:32 * jreznik would say it's bettr - move on
16:58:33 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885151
16:58:36 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, yum, NEW
16:59:46 <tflink> it'd be nice if the docs were fixed, but I don't see how this is a blocker
16:59:49 <tflink> -1
16:59:50 <tflink> -1/-1
17:00:02 <jreznik> -1/-1
17:00:17 <kparal> well if it really is a regression, it can cause troubles to some administrators
17:00:22 <kparal> that's probably the reason to propose it
17:00:24 <nirik> -1
17:00:41 <tflink> it behaved like this in 18 as well, I think
17:00:56 <jreznik> kparal: it's regressed in f18 already
17:01:01 <kparal> "The following kickstart directive used to work with Fedora17, but fails now with 18."
17:01:02 <jreznik> sorry "it"
17:01:03 <kparal> I see now
17:01:17 <kparal> -1 blocker in that case
17:01:36 <jreznik> and the question is if it's really regression or just docs issue
17:01:56 * kparal notes that anaconda docs would really deserve more love
17:02:07 <tflink> proposed #agreed 885151 - RejectedBlocker RejectedFreezeException - While unforutnate, this doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria and seems to be as much of a documentation issue as anything. Rejected as a blocker and freezeException for F19 final.
17:02:27 <jreznik> ack
17:02:39 <adamw> ack
17:02:46 <jreznik> just freezeException
17:02:58 <jreznik> minor cosmetic issue :)
17:03:04 <tflink> ?
17:03:17 <kparal> unforutnate,
17:03:20 <kparal> ack
17:03:21 <jreznik> tflink: camel case in "Rejected as a blocker and freezeException for F19 final."
17:03:28 <tflink> oh
17:04:13 <tflink> #agreed 885151 - RejectedBlocker RejectedFreezeException - While unforutnate, this doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria and seems to be as much of a documentation issue as anything. Rejected as a blocker and freeze exception for F19 final.
17:04:17 <adamw> um
17:04:29 <adamw> sorry, that went by a bit fast
17:04:39 <tflink> undo time?
17:04:43 <adamw> it does seem like there's stuff that could be done anaconda-side about this
17:04:43 <jreznik> yeah
17:05:04 <adamw> make it pass a repo ID with underlines if the user specifies a name with spaces, or reject with a more useful error, or something
17:05:21 <adamw> i wouldn't mind a +1 FE if anaconda wanted to make a change like that at this point (remember anaconda is 'frozen')
17:05:36 <tflink> so -1 only?
17:05:43 <tflink> or -1/+1
17:06:08 * jreznik would be ok with -1/+1
17:06:49 <adamw> -1/+1 for now-or-early-freeze change if anaconda team wants to do one
17:07:13 <tflink> #undo
17:07:13 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Agreed object at 0xd319d10>
17:07:41 <jreznik> and fix unforutnate as kparal pointed out :)
17:08:48 <tflink> proposed #agreed 885151 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException - While unfortunate, this doesn't vilate any of the F19 release criteria. However, there are potential improvements in the handling of repo names in kickstart files and a tested fix would be considered after freeze.
17:09:06 <tflink> ... apparently, I work with a buch of spelling and grammar freaks
17:09:16 * tflink thought it was just adamw
17:09:55 <adamw> =)
17:10:03 <adamw> 'vilate'
17:10:09 <adamw> .fire tflink three English strikes
17:10:09 <zodbot> adamw fires tflink three English strikes
17:10:53 <tflink> proposed #agreed 885151 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException - While unfortunate, this doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria. However, there are potential improvements in the handling of repo names in kickstart files and a tested fix would be considered after freeze.
17:11:06 <jreznik> ack
17:11:46 <adamw> ack
17:12:10 <kparal> ack
17:12:16 <tflink> #agreed 885151 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException - While unfortunate, this doesn't violate any of the F19 release criteria. However, there are potential improvements in the handling of repo names in kickstart files and a tested fix would be considered after freeze.
17:12:43 <tflink> OK, that's all of the proposed blockers on my list
17:12:44 * kparal iz no grammer phreak
17:12:59 <tflink> kparal: nor spelling, apparently :-P
17:14:00 <tflink> on a side note, I'm really NOT a fan of this anaconda FE stuff, our list of accepted FEs is getting rather long
17:14:37 * tflink moves on to the proposed anaconda FEs
17:14:43 <tflink> #topic (951879) [en_AU] Australian locale missing from anaconda
17:14:43 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951879
17:14:43 <tflink> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, anaconda, ASSIGNED
17:16:00 <adamw> -1, there isn't a clean and simple change here
17:16:12 <adamw> any way to fix this would be a somewhat major revision to how we do locales
17:16:21 <nirik> yeah, -1
17:16:23 <jreznik> -1
17:16:25 <tflink> -1
17:16:45 <jreznik> vratislav plans revamp for f20
17:18:06 <tflink> proposed #agreed 951879 - RejectedFreezeException - This needs a rather large fix in anaconda and could be fixed post-install by the user. Thus, this bug isn't appropriate for a FE and is rejected as a freeze exception for F19 final.
17:18:15 <jreznik> ack
17:18:24 <adamw> ack
17:18:33 <kparal> the major reason is that anaconda devs don't want to do it
17:18:41 <kparal> that beats all other reasons
17:18:42 <kparal> ack
17:18:46 <tflink> #agreed 951879 - RejectedFreezeException - This needs a rather large fix in anaconda and could be fixed post-install by the user. Thus, this bug isn't appropriate for a FE and is rejected as a freeze exception for F19 final.
17:19:02 <tflink> topic (972547) Anaconda hangs and crashes on graphical netinstall on a system with 512MB of RAM allocated
17:19:05 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972547
17:19:07 <tflink> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, anaconda, NEW
17:19:44 <adamw> kparal: which makes this process a bit silly, as tflink says, but ah well
17:20:14 <adamw> well, we're kinda playing counter-factuals here. i'd be +1 FE to some kind of magic fix which made anaconda safely use less memory in a graphical net install, I guess.
17:21:01 <jreznik> adamw: even if the fix would be to remove half of anaconda code (to save memory?)
17:21:24 <nirik> if there's some easyfix, I'd be +1 FE...
17:21:29 <nirik> but I kinda doubt there is.
17:21:39 <adamw> jreznik: see 'magic fix'
17:21:43 <adamw> let me ask bcl
17:22:06 <kparal> ask anaconda devs if they want to do something about it. if they don't, don't waste time on this
17:22:18 * nirik is with kparal
17:22:45 <kparal> but I think we already discussed that anaconda FEs should always have a short summary from some anaconda dev saying that they want to implement it and what the fix would include
17:23:35 <jreznik> waiting means wasting time I'd say - and yeah, there seems to be no interest from anaconda guys to do anything with that
17:24:01 <kparal> s/no interest/no response
17:24:09 <adamw> i'm okay with punt or reject
17:24:21 <adamw> brb call of nature, count me as 'ack' to either of those
17:24:46 <kparal> "Please re-propose if anaconda devs say that they intend to fix this somehow"
17:25:03 * jreznik would say -1 with what kparal sentence
17:25:38 <kparal> I sentence... FE process without justification to death :-)
17:26:01 <tflink> proposed #agreed 951879 - RejectedFreezeException - Text based installs do work from the netinstall media with the minimum 512M ram and thus, this is rejected as a freeze exception for F19 final. Please re-propose as FE if a fix shows up reasonably soon.
17:26:18 <kparal> ack
17:26:32 <jreznik> ack
17:27:36 <jreznik> add adamw's ack too
17:27:41 <nirik> ack
17:27:46 <tflink> oh, missed that
17:27:55 <tflink> #agreed 951879 - RejectedFreezeException - Text based installs do work from the netinstall media with the minimum 512M ram and thus, this is rejected as a freeze exception for F19 final. Please re-propose as FE if a fix shows up reasonably soon.
17:28:15 <tflink> OK, that's all of the "extra special" proposed FEs for today
17:28:25 <tflink> moving on to the accepted blockers
17:28:37 <jreznik> ok
17:28:44 <tflink> note that I'm planning to skip anything that's ON_QA or VERIFIED
17:28:53 <tflink> #topic (971191) DVD install option unavailable in TUI
17:28:53 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971191
17:28:53 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:29:38 * tflink should probably skip the blockers we accepted on monday, as well
17:29:55 <tflink> #info not much to say here, just accepted two days ago
17:30:13 <jreznik> samantha is not online, so na way to get more updates
17:30:42 <tflink> #topic (964586) Anaconda does not isntall ntfs tools to allow OS-Prober to find windows partition and therefore creates no grub.cfg entry
17:30:45 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964586
17:30:47 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, ASSIGNED
17:31:12 <tflink> no real updates on this one recently
17:32:31 * jreznik is pinging dlehman
17:33:47 <tflink> #info sounds like progress is being made
17:33:50 <tflink> #undo
17:33:50 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0xe149c50>
17:33:53 <jreznik> yep
17:33:56 <tflink> #info sounds like progress is being made and a patch was just sent out
17:34:24 <tflink> #topic (969327) race condition in kickstart partitioning
17:34:25 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969327
17:34:25 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, ASSIGNED
17:36:10 <jreznik> seems like comment #16 was correct from what kparal said in #18
17:36:16 <tflink> last update from dev was almost a week ago
17:36:49 <tflink> is using text mode an acceptable workaround?
17:37:23 <kparal> I don't think so
17:37:41 <kparal> sometimes you don't want to have the whole installation kickstarted
17:37:54 <kparal> but pre-populate just a few fields and left the rest to be configured interactively
17:38:13 <kparal> true, I'm not sure how much pre-configured disk layout fits in here
17:38:26 <adamw> doesn't seem too far-fetched
17:38:34 <adamw> especially when kickstart disk config can do stuff interactive can't
17:38:42 <adamw> and people often seem attached to very specific partition layouts
17:39:58 <kparal> good point
17:40:12 <tflink> I see jreznik pinged bcl, no response yet
17:40:58 <tflink> #info it sounds like this is related to something in  graphical mode as text mode doesn't seem to show the same behavior
17:42:52 <tflink> #info will ask for update in bug
17:42:55 <adamw> well, if it's race-y, could just be that text works faster. anyhoo.
17:43:13 <tflink> any objections to moving on
17:43:31 * tflink assumes not
17:43:34 <tflink> #topic (968951) g-i-s created user's accounts and settings are copied to new users created after g-i-s completes but before a reboot
17:43:37 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=968951
17:43:40 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, gnome-initial-setup, NEW
17:44:30 <tflink> has this already been fixed?
17:44:41 <jreznik> there are patches submitted looking on upstream bug
17:44:58 <tflink> it's been closed upstream already
17:45:37 <adamw> yeah, just needs to come back downstream
17:45:41 <jreznik> but looking on git, it's not in 0.11 release
17:45:43 <adamw> i'd best check in with desktop team
17:46:04 <tflink> yeah, there's been no update in fedora since the bug was closed
17:46:23 <tflink> #action adamw to follow up with the desktop team on the status of this fix
17:46:39 <tflink> #info it sounds like there are patches available upstream but they aren't in Fedora yet
17:46:55 <tflink> anything else on this one?
17:47:22 <adamw> naw
17:47:23 <jreznik> move on, we just need 0.12 release
17:47:51 <tflink> #topic (969852) Software Update fails to update
17:47:51 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969852
17:47:51 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, gnome-packagekit, ASSIGNED
17:48:12 <tflink> sounds like this is still broken, more people are starting to report it
17:48:22 <adamw> yeah
17:48:31 <adamw> hughsie has been looking at them
17:48:37 <adamw> (this and the offline updates one)
17:48:57 <tflink> ok, there have been no updates in bug
17:49:12 <tflink> sounds like there's nothing for us to do here ATM, though?
17:49:35 <jreznik> yep, time to ping hughsie, /me will try to do so
17:50:52 <tflink> #action jreznik to follow up with hughsie about this issue
17:51:16 <tflink> #info not much info in bug report, not much for us to do at the moment
17:51:52 <tflink> #topic (958426) 19 Final TC1 x86_64 Desktop Live is oversized (larger than 1 GB)
17:51:55 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958426
17:51:58 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, LiveCD, NEW
17:52:04 <tflink> #info devs are aware of the issue and are working on it
17:52:23 <tflink> #topic (969182) DeviceCreateError: ('Could not commit to disk /dev/mapper/mpatha, (py_ped_disk_commit)', 'mpatha3')
17:52:26 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969182
17:52:28 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, python-blivet, NEW
17:53:16 <tflink> #info still waiting on the fix for this, sounds like it's waiting for another patch set that's part of the fix
17:54:12 <adamw> right
17:54:17 <tflink> not sure there's much else to say here
17:54:53 <tflink> whoops, I was looking at the wrong bug
17:55:20 <tflink> #undo
17:55:20 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0xdd14750>
17:55:34 <jreznik> yeah, that's the other one adamw commented
17:55:57 <adamw> for 969182 the patch is posted, looks like
17:56:03 <tflink> #info patch has been submitted, waiting for new build with fix
17:56:28 <tflink> anything else on this one?
17:57:08 <adamw> newp
17:57:10 <adamw> i just set it to POST
17:57:21 <jreznik> ok
17:57:28 <tflink> #topic (966795) DeviceCreateError: ('lvcreate failed for fedora_sharpie00/swap: running lvm lvcreate -L 6160m -n swap --config  devices { filter=["r|/loop3$|","r|/loop4$|","r|/loop5$|","r|/loop6$|","r|/loop7$|"] }  fedora_sharpie00 failed', 'fedora_sharpie00-swap')
17:57:32 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=966795
17:57:34 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, python-blivet, ASSIGNED
17:57:48 <tflink> #info still waiting on the fix for this, sounds like it's waiting for another patch set that's part of the fix
17:58:46 <tflink> do we know if this is still true?
18:00:05 <adamw> nope
18:00:13 <adamw> usually dlehman knows what he's doing though
18:00:22 <adamw> i'll probably do a blocker status mail at some point soon fwiw
18:00:36 <tflink> ok, we can leave this alone for now
18:00:49 <tflink> anything else on this bug?
18:01:19 <adamw> nope
18:01:26 <tflink> #topic (968936) network access is always required for offline update
18:01:29 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=968936
18:01:31 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, yum, ASSIGNED
18:02:58 <adamw> this is the offline update busted bug
18:03:02 <jreznik> I talked to Zdenek, he sent a comment - so probably waiting for hughsie too
18:03:04 <adamw> it seems to have turned into a pk/yum turf war...:)
18:03:12 <adamw> yeah, this is back on richard
18:03:15 <adamw> i'll set a needinfo on him,
18:04:42 <tflink> #info still trying to figure out exactly what the problem is here
18:05:06 <tflink> #info waiting for more info from devs to figure out what fix is needed
18:05:41 <tflink> anything else on this one?
18:06:10 <tflink> if not, that's the last of the accepted blockers
18:07:13 <tflink> I do believe that it's time for ...
18:07:17 <tflink> #topic Open Floor
18:07:28 <tflink> anything else that should be brought up today
18:07:30 <tflink> ?
18:08:54 <adamw> newwwwp
18:08:55 <jreznik> nothing from me now, I have to leave
18:09:34 * tflink sets the magical fuse
18:09:51 <jreznik> it's a kind of magic...
18:10:39 <tflink> Thanks for coming, everyone!
18:10:45 * tflink will send out minutes shortly
18:10:50 <tflink> .... BOOM!
18:10:54 <tflink> #endmeeting