17:03:16 <tflink> #startmeeting f18beta-blocker-review-9
17:03:16 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Nov 21 17:03:16 2012 UTC.  The chair is tflink. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:03:16 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:03:16 <drago01> nirik: http://94.247.144.115/anaconda.png
17:03:16 <tflink> #meetingname f18beta-blocker-review-9
17:03:16 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f18beta-blocker-review-9'
17:03:21 <tflink> #topic Roll Call
17:03:48 * satellit_e listening FYI just did DVD install of RC1 mate  i386 get openbox login only.....thought mate was removed from DVD?
17:04:27 <drago01> nirik: nothing on f3/4 nor in the logs
17:04:38 <drago01> nirik: not sure the screenshot is related though
17:04:48 <nirik> drago01: weird. no idea what that yum error means. Never seen it before.
17:05:13 * adamw calls tflink a roll
17:05:20 * jreznik is around
17:06:04 <drago01> nirik: neither do all ... "installation failed" isn't really a helpful message for debugging ...
17:07:40 <tflink> adamw: a roll? ouch
17:09:02 <tflink> hrm, anyone else?
17:11:42 * akshayvyas is here
17:11:59 <tflink> that yum error makes me wonder if there was an issue with setup
17:12:29 <tflink> there are 4 of us, lets try to get started
17:13:01 <tflink> #topic Introduction
17:13:09 <drago01> "issue with setup" ?
17:13:28 <drago01> there is nothing "special" about it
17:13:30 <tflink> drago01: an issue with getting the package set setup during install
17:13:36 <drago01> tflink: ah ok
17:13:48 <tflink> Why are we here?
17:13:50 <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 nice-to-have bugs.
17:13:57 <tflink> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
17:13:57 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
17:14:02 <tflink> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
17:14:03 <tflink> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
17:14:09 <tflink> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
17:14:10 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Alpha_Release_Criteria
17:14:10 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Beta_Release_Criteria
17:14:10 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Final_Release_Criteria
17:14:27 <tflink> #info Up for review today, there are:
17:14:33 <tflink> #info 4 Proposed Blockers
17:14:33 <tflink> #info 8 Accepted Blockers
17:14:33 <tflink> #info 1 Proposed NTH
17:14:33 <tflink> #info 22 Accepted NTH
17:14:54 <tflink> unless there are any objections, lets get started with the proposed blockers
17:15:09 <adamw> let's!
17:15:42 * tflink skips 875942 since it's VERIFIED and already NTH
17:15:50 <tflink> #topic (878225) unlock of VG w/ multiple encrypted PVs in custom leads to traceback
17:15:53 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878225
17:15:55 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, MODIFIED
17:16:22 <adamw> this ought to be fixed in RC1, needs testing
17:16:25 <adamw> kparal was unable to reproduce
17:16:43 <adamw> i'm probably -1 blocker, this is a bit pokemony.
17:16:54 <adamw> well, close.
17:17:06 <tflink> how is it pokemony?
17:17:18 <adamw> seems like you need multiple disks
17:17:31 <adamw> the VM i hit it on did have two disks connected
17:18:02 <tflink> so having 2 disks and using autopart is pokemon-y?
17:18:15 <adamw> encrypted autopart.
17:18:27 <adamw> having two disks, using encrypted autopart, and then re-installing over that setup.
17:18:33 <adamw> oh, and going into custom partitioning.
17:18:41 <adamw> and trying to unlock the existing PV.
17:18:57 <tflink> I see your point
17:18:59 <adamw> i dunno, borderline, like i said.
17:19:04 <tflink> final blocker, maybe
17:19:33 <tflink> someone's cloning jreznik again :)
17:19:44 <tflink> other thoughts?
17:19:48 <tflink> or votes?
17:19:57 <akshayvyas> for now i am +1 NTH here.
17:20:14 <tflink> it's already accepted as NTH
17:20:34 <adamw> question is 'do we slip if the fix is bad', more or less :)
17:20:42 * jreznik_ is back from another meeting, and you know, it's docking station vs wifi - so clone
17:21:17 <adamw> drago01: i'm trying to see if i can reproduce your bug.
17:21:27 <tflink> and I'm borderline on this as well
17:21:35 <drago01> adamw: ok thanks
17:21:42 <tflink> with what we have right now, I would say probably not
17:22:00 <tflink> what we have -> information and details in the bug
17:22:32 <adamw> drago01: i think it hit the slowest mirror ever, retrying...
17:22:47 * jreznik_ has to admit does not understand it very well...
17:23:03 <tflink> proposed #agreed 878225 - RejectedBlocker (beta) - This doesn't clearly hit any of the F18 beta release criterion and seems to be outside the most common paths - this doesn't prevent installs on the machine and thus, rejected as blocker
17:23:12 <nirik> ack
17:23:17 <jreznik_> ack
17:24:09 * tflink waits for a third
17:24:20 <adamw> ack
17:24:27 <tflink> #agreed 878225 - RejectedBlocker (beta) - This doesn't clearly hit any of the F18 beta release criterion and seems to be outside the most common paths - this doesn't prevent installs on the machine and thus, rejected as blocker
17:25:16 <tflink> bah, my inability to read today continues ...
17:25:24 * tflink skipped the wrong bug before
17:25:32 <tflink> #topic (875942) KeyError: None
17:25:33 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875942
17:25:33 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, MODIFIED
17:27:21 * kparal joins
17:27:33 <adamw> this is effectively the same bug, you're not having deja vu
17:27:33 <tflink> I'm thinking the same as the other encryption bug
17:27:41 <adamw> so same decision
17:27:56 <adamw> dlehman just happened to find 878225 while looking into 875942
17:28:00 <tflink> yeah, it took me a minute - the last bug appeared with the fix for this
17:29:01 <tflink> proposed #agreed 875942 - RejectedBlocker (beta) - This doesn't clearly hit any of the F18 beta release criteria and seems to be outside the most common paths - this doesn't prevent installs on affected machines and thus is rejected as a blocker for F18 beta.
17:29:30 <nirik> ack
17:30:16 <jreznik_> well, ack
17:30:56 <adamw> ack
17:31:02 <tflink> #agreed 875942 - RejectedBlocker (beta) - This doesn't clearly hit any of the F18 beta release criteria and seems to be outside the most common paths - this doesn't prevent installs on affected machines and thus is rejected as a blocker for F18 beta.
17:31:24 * tflink skips 875278 since it's NTH and already VERIFIED
17:31:31 <tflink> #topic (878967) Installation fails when selecting german language
17:31:31 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878967
17:31:31 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:31:47 * kparal is just testing that
17:32:00 <tflink> this sounds kind of blockery to me
17:32:08 <kparal> yes
17:32:19 <kparal> but does it happen only with updates-testing? need to check
17:32:37 * adamw is testing it
17:32:48 * kparal is doing DVD installaiton
17:32:59 <adamw> yeah, i just hit the error
17:33:16 <kparal> adamw: netinst?
17:33:23 <tflink> I can install man-pages-de in a F18 system
17:33:38 <adamw> kparal: yeah
17:33:43 <tflink> but that's an upgraded F17 install I had handy
17:33:49 <tflink> adamw: do you see the same yum error?
17:33:58 <adamw> yes, and i have the backing error
17:33:59 <adamw> just a sec
17:34:07 <akshayvyas> +1 here but tmrw is go/no-go
17:34:09 <adamw> http://fpaste.org/UE5w
17:34:28 <adamw> final line: "error: unpacking of archive failed on file /usr/share/man/de/man2/_exit.2.gz;50ad0e03: cpio: open failed - Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden"
17:34:32 <drago01> well the last version of man-pages-de is from july 19
17:34:38 <nirik> :(
17:34:46 * nirik wonders if they did a dir to symlink change there.
17:34:52 <tflink> what does that error message say?
17:34:57 <adamw> so, this sounds odd.
17:35:00 <kparal> "File or directory not found"
17:35:07 <kparal> google says
17:35:11 <tflink> I suppose google translate could have helped there
17:35:13 <drago01> tflink: it means "no such file or directory"
17:35:19 <kparal> ^^
17:35:44 <tflink> I wonder if this is just for german or if other lanugages are affected
17:36:10 <tflink> I'm probably +1 blocker, though
17:36:15 <jreznik_> why it happens in anaconda but not on installed f18 system?
17:36:49 <drago01> jreznik_: missing dep?
17:36:50 <tflink> I wonder if the yum errors that drago01 saw are related
17:36:54 <tflink> http://94.247.144.115/anaconda.png
17:37:32 <tflink> to my somewhat-uneducated eyes, that sounds like something went wrong in install prep but didn't manifest until the package was installed
17:37:58 <tflink> assuming that they're related, anyways
17:38:14 <adamw> the yum2 subdir doesn't appear to exist
17:38:20 <adamw> just added a comment with some data to the bug
17:38:31 <drago01> adamw: yum2? you mean man2 right?
17:38:36 <adamw> yeah, man2, sorry.
17:38:46 <adamw> there's man1, man3, man5 and man8, but no man2.
17:38:55 <drago01> rpm -qf /usr/share/man/de/man2
17:38:55 <drago01> man-pages-de-0.5-6.fc17.noarch
17:38:55 <drago01> filesystem-3-2.fc17.x86_64
17:39:00 <drago01> f17 though
17:39:15 <kparal> I don't see the error when installing from DVD
17:39:16 <adamw> yeah, and repoquery claims that man-pages-de owns it
17:39:44 <adamw> 'yum install man-pages-de' on this f18 system works fine
17:40:08 <jreznik_> yep, it works fine on f18 system
17:41:25 <jreznik_> adamw: how do you install, see kparal does not hit it from DVD - netinstall?
17:41:47 <drago01> jreznik_: yes he already said netinstall (I did a netinstall too)
17:41:51 <adamw> the sha256sum of the copy of man-pages-de in the yum cache matches the sha256sum of a copy manually downloaded from a mirror
17:41:53 <adamw> jreznik_: yes, netinst
17:42:08 <adamw> anyone else want to check? i have sha256sum 3028e760f5bd544b7ae5d27e7dd0637deb82760f2703e30da2ee6de6dd36d1ee
17:42:09 <nirik> possibly related: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569392
17:43:15 <zodbot> Ticket notification - f18finalnicetohave: [Bug 878985] MATE entry on RC1 i386 DVD install results in an incomplete mate-desktop (openbox login only) please remove mate from DVD left list <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878985>
17:43:25 <jreznik_> adamw: downloaded from koji ff0be786942cf045a8c8fd340f98c06a1a4eef5c717682e0e4bc2901562b5d2d
17:43:34 <adamw> huh.
17:43:38 <adamw> wonder if some mirror copies are bad.
17:44:00 <kparal> I'll checksum the file on DVD
17:44:17 <kparal> adamw: i386, right?
17:44:18 <nirik> adamw: odd that filesystem package shows as not signed in your output too...
17:44:20 <kparal> I did i386
17:44:30 <adamw> no. x86-64 :)
17:44:41 <adamw> why the hell do you use i386?
17:44:43 <kparal> adamw: the report says i386
17:44:44 <jreznik_> kparal: it's noarch
17:44:49 <kparal> jreznik_: ah
17:44:51 <adamw> oh, yeah, package is noarch so shouldn't matter.
17:44:53 <adamw> ah, i missed that
17:45:17 <kparal> 3028e760f5bd544b7ae5d27e7dd0637deb82760f2703e30da2ee6de6dd36d1ee  man-pages-de-0.5-7.fc18.noarch.rpm
17:45:37 <kparal> jreznik_: something's wrong with your checksum
17:45:55 <drago01> adamw: I wanted to install a vm to do some sysprof runs (with does not really work well on x86_64) so I deciced to just use f18 beta rc for that .... -> boom
17:46:05 <adamw> i match jreznik's result downloading from koji
17:46:11 <adamw> oh, signature?
17:46:17 <jreznik_> yep, signature
17:46:18 <drago01> koji packages are unsigned
17:46:20 <adamw> right.
17:46:31 <jreznik_> sorry for confusion...
17:48:18 <adamw> so, let's see...we have the same copy of the package in failed (netinst) and working (dvd) cases
17:48:22 <kparal> somebody trying a different language?
17:48:39 <adamw> well a different language won't have this directory...
17:48:55 <kparal> oh I see
17:49:04 <jreznik> yep, seems to be related to this package only
17:49:05 <kparal> it seems that on DVD man-pages-de wasn't installed at all
17:49:13 <kparal> it's not in the packaging.log
17:49:15 <adamw> ah. hm
17:49:29 <adamw> seems like a bug in itself
17:49:37 <kparal> rebooting to check
17:50:26 <kparal> confirmed, not installed
17:50:38 <kparal> that's why it haven't crashed
17:51:09 <adamw> add that to the bug?
17:51:18 <kparal> will do
17:52:07 <jreznik> ok so that's the difference between dvd and netinst, but why it works on f18 and not during installation?
17:52:19 <adamw> not sure
17:53:09 * drago01 has no idea either
17:54:03 <adamw> so...let's see. this is kinda nasty, though there is a workaround - 'use the dvd or live'.
17:54:12 <adamw> i'm not sure we're gonna get any idea what causes it.
17:54:20 <adamw> do we want to make a call or delay for data?
17:54:25 * tflink is trying a netinstall w/ japanese
17:54:31 <drago01> %{_mandir}/de/*
17:54:33 <adamw> i guess it would be really useful to know if we can fix it via repos or if we need new images
17:54:52 <adamw> drago01: is this new, btw? did you try it with previous builds?
17:54:52 <jreznik> adamw: the dvd workaround is bug itself but yeah, for rc1 it's workaround...
17:54:54 <tflink> yeah, if this is only netinstall it could be fixed w/ update
17:55:03 <adamw> tflink: for sure? what if it's something weird in yum on the dvd?
17:55:17 <adamw> you're assuming the bug is in something that gets pulled from repos during install, but i'm not sure we know that yet.
17:55:24 <drago01> adamw: I have not done any installs for a while so can't really say
17:55:24 <tflink> adamw: then it wouldn't be only on the netinstall
17:55:35 <tflink> there was an _if_ in there
17:55:36 <drago01> adamw: my "current vm" is a f17 + fedup upgrade
17:56:57 <tflink> thoughts on punting for data vs. accepting?
17:57:29 <adamw> tflink: oh sorry, misparsed
17:57:31 <akshayvyas> adamw: if there is something wrong with youm then the error wont be language specific
17:57:37 <kparal> it's likely it will hit some other languages as well
17:57:55 <tflink> unless the problem is unique to the man-de
17:57:58 * drago01 tries french
17:58:10 <tflink> but the whole not-on-dvd part concerns me a bit
17:59:20 <kparal> I think we can release Beta with just a german glitch, documented. I'd say punt and test at least several other common languages
17:59:34 <kparal> if it happens more often -> blocker
17:59:49 <tflink> it'd be nice to figure out why man isn't being installed from DVD, though
17:59:58 <kparal> and we can discuss it again tomorrow
17:59:58 <tflink> I wonder if other languages do the same
18:00:16 <zodbot> Ticket notification - f18betanicetohave: [Bug 878959] firewall-config can't set permanent rule <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878959>
18:00:22 <jreznik> kparal: well, seems reasonable and we should take a look on that missing man pages translations...
18:00:51 <tflink> proposed #agreed 878967 - This could be a blocker but it needs more triage to figure out exactly what's going on and if other languages are affected. Will re-visit once more information is available.
18:00:52 <adamw> gotta pop downstairs brb
18:00:54 <adamw> ack
18:00:57 <kparal> jreznik: we should, but I don't think that's Beta material
18:00:59 <akshayvyas> ack
18:01:04 <drago01> tflink: wait
18:01:14 <drago01> tflink: let me finish the french test first
18:01:48 <akshayvyas> well i dont think the error is language specific
18:02:06 <tflink> akshayvyas: true but the cause might be specific to the man-de package
18:02:27 <tflink> of this specific error, anyways
18:02:29 <akshayvyas> lets see what drago01 test says
18:03:04 <tflink> I'd rather wait until we also have more info about why the DVD isn't installing man but either way
18:03:34 <kparal> tflink: man-pages are installed, just man-pages-de aren't
18:03:52 <jreznik> kparal: but it should be part of custom lang install
18:04:19 <kparal> I guess. but I don't see it as that big problem. desktop translations are more important
18:04:34 <drago01> no crash so far (still running) but no man-pages-fr so far
18:05:33 <drago01> kparal: yeah the problem is that the installtion does not work when selecting a not so uncommon language ...
18:05:41 <kparal> drago01: it's installed almost at the end, according to adamw's output
18:05:49 <jreznik> kparal: well, I'm with you - missing translated man-pages is probably not beta blocker
18:05:52 <adamw> it might also be nice to test this on tc9. or tc4.
18:06:17 <jreznik> drago01: yep, so DVD is ok, we need workaround for netinst :)
18:06:35 <tflink> adamw: which part? not sure if it would make much of a difference for netinstall since it pulls from the current stable + updates-testing
18:06:43 <drago01> kparal: that's odd ...https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=649304 this wasn't at the end at all
18:06:48 <adamw> sure. it would be good to test that assumption. :)
18:06:56 <tflink> I'd be interested in seeing if this happens with netinstall w/o updates-testing
18:06:56 <adamw> and it might go some way to determining where the problem is.
18:07:34 <jreznik> could you retry it?
18:07:43 <jreznik> (w/o updates-testing)
18:07:55 <drago01> the package has not changed for a long time though
18:08:02 <drago01> did rpm change in the meantime?
18:08:12 <adamw> right, that's what interests me.
18:08:23 <adamw> and why I want to test with something old. to see if this has been broken forever and we just didn't notice.
18:08:34 <kparal> drago01: rpm changed, it's more strict in F18
18:09:30 <drago01> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864622 seems to be a change related to man pages
18:09:35 * tflink tries with TC7 netinstall x86_64
18:10:46 <adamw> i'm trying tc6.
18:11:05 <tflink> it's a good thing I've done a few installs. I can't read german at all :)
18:12:03 <jreznik> tflink: I'm unable to delete partitions at all in german...
18:12:20 <drago01> jreznik: huh?
18:12:35 <tflink> jreznik: because it doesn't work or because you also can't read german?
18:12:47 <jreznik> tflink: can't read :)
18:13:00 <jreznik> sorry for heart attacks :)
18:13:13 <robatino> "delete" is the bottom entry
18:13:23 <akshayvyas> jreznik: get remote support from drago01 :)
18:13:57 <robatino> i did it with a german minimal dvd install
18:14:01 <tflink> it seems odd that the installation pane isn't localized? have the strings been changing too quickly?
18:14:06 <drago01> french works
18:14:08 <tflink> or is it not localized yet?
18:14:26 <drago01> translations seem to be incomplete
18:14:47 <kparal> tflink: there's a bug report about it
18:14:49 <tflink> the fonts change but everything is in english for both japanese and german
18:15:09 <kparal> some strings are not i18n'd
18:15:29 <kparal> *internationalized
18:15:48 <adamw> tflink: translation was much worse in tc7 than it is in rc1.
18:16:00 <adamw> something got fixed in between.
18:16:25 <jreznik> translations are now more final issue, let's concentrate back on this german bomb
18:16:41 <tflink> now that you mention it, I remember a bunch of talk about dealing with transifex and i18n a week or so back
18:17:04 <tflink> jreznik: I think we're just waiting for installs to finish ATM
18:17:17 <adamw> 346/1175
18:18:00 <tflink> 323/1175 on the german TC7, post-install on the japanese install
18:18:52 <adamw> well if you're at post-install, you didn't hit the bug
18:18:58 <adamw> did you spot if man-pages-ja got installed?
18:19:06 * tflink checks
18:19:09 <kparal> I think we should continue with the meeting and return to this one later. after an hour, or tomorrow. in the meantime we can test
18:19:37 <akshayvyas> kparal: +1
18:19:42 <adamw> afaics man-pages-ja doesn't own any directories
18:19:45 <tflink> yes, it was install
18:19:47 <tflink> installed
18:19:52 <adamw> this may be related to man-pages-de's bogus ownership of directories, as someone linked
18:19:59 <tflink> RC1 x86_64 netinstall, Gnome, japanese language
18:20:18 <kparal> we can also check which man pages own directories first
18:20:55 <drago01> adamw: is there a way to test with a fixed pages?
18:20:59 <drago01> *package?
18:20:59 <tflink> #info may be related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569392
18:21:08 <drago01> adamw: i.e new man-pages-de build?
18:21:27 <tflink> doing that with a netinstall is a bit harder
18:21:49 <adamw> could just push one to updates-testing :)
18:22:12 <tflink> that would probably be just as easy
18:22:28 <tflink> as long as we get an u-t push and the main repo is selected instead of a mirror
18:22:57 <adamw> or, hum
18:23:04 <adamw> we could probably loop mount a DVD and use it as a network repo...
18:23:26 <tflink> I could set up a repo, too
18:23:40 <tflink> but that's going to be stateside, I don't have access to anything in europe
18:23:42 * drago01 submits a build
18:24:00 <adamw> my tc6 is at 943
18:24:07 <drago01> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4713781
18:24:41 <tflink> adamw: I wonder if just building a smoke test-ish DVD and publishing the exploded repo would be the best choice for balancing effectiveness/ease
18:24:56 <tflink> it wouldn't take much longer on my end for the build
18:25:22 <tflink> assuming that man-de is on the DVD
18:26:26 <jreznik> drago01: btw. rawhide too pls
18:26:51 <drago01> jreznik: rawhide should inherit that if there is no f19 build yet
18:27:06 <tflink> can someone check to make sure that man-pages-de is on the DVD?
18:27:15 * tflink gets set up for a build
18:27:18 <adamw> tflink: sure, sec
18:27:20 <kparal> tflink: it is
18:27:28 <tflink> kparal: thanks
18:27:33 <jreznik> drago01: it should be banned and we're working on policy to forbid it :)
18:27:35 <kparal> at least i386
18:27:43 <adamw> huh, tc6 install succeeded
18:27:47 <drago01> jreznik: and there are non so this should be in the next rawhide push as well
18:27:48 <adamw> so something somewhere changed
18:28:05 <drago01> jreznik: hire some bodyguards before doing that ;)
18:28:06 <adamw> yes, man-pages-de is on the RC1 DVD
18:28:52 <tflink> do we want to move on or keep working on this?
18:29:11 <tflink> it looks like most of the accepted blockers are somewhat OK right now
18:29:21 * tflink has some testing to do and request for fedup, though
18:30:01 <jreznik> well, if anyone can take a look on this one, I'm ok with moving on - at least we know it worked in tc6 - rpm? yum?
18:30:30 <adamw> let's blow through any other business
18:30:35 <tflink> huh, tc7 x64 netinstall seems ok too
18:31:15 <tflink> proposed #agreed 878967 - This could be a blocker but it needs more triage to figure out exactly what's going on and if other languages are affected. Will re-visit once more information is available.
18:31:44 <adamw> ack
18:31:53 <nirik> ack
18:31:57 <jreznik> ack
18:32:15 <tflink> #agreed 878967 - This could be a blocker but it needs more triage to figure out exactly what's going on and if other languages are affected. Will re-visit once more information is available.
18:32:39 <kparal> it seems that no other man-pages own directories
18:32:58 <tflink> OK, that's all of the proposed blockers
18:33:23 <adamw> kparal: that would tie in
18:33:29 <adamw> i'll ask yum folks
18:33:47 <tflink> on to the proposed NTH
18:33:58 <tflink> #topic (877871) KeyError: None
18:33:58 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877871
18:33:58 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, anaconda, ASSIGNED
18:35:15 <adamw> still -1.
18:35:33 <tflink> -1 NTH
18:37:09 <tflink> proposed #agreed 877871 - RejectedNTH - This seems like a rather non-standard use case and avoidable enough to not take a fix past freeze.
18:37:14 <kparal> I have problems to say 'no'
18:37:21 <kparal> but I assume it can break a lot of other stuff
18:37:28 <kparal> so ack
18:37:42 <adamw> well we don't have specific info that it breaks anything else, it's just normal precaution at this point
18:37:51 <adamw> since we're trying to get something releasable like *now*, we should be strict on nth
18:37:57 <nirik> ack
18:37:58 <kparal> the fix can break other stuff, I mean
18:38:03 <adamw> that's what i meant
18:38:14 <tflink> yeah, I'm not saying it's not a bug, just that the benefit doesn't seem to outweigh the risk of taking a fix past freeze
18:38:19 <adamw> it's not like we have specific info that it might, it's just the general principle that poking partition stuff at this point is a bad idea
18:38:31 <tflink> #agreed 877871 - RejectedNTH - This seems like a rather non-standard use case and avoidable enough to not take a fix past freeze.
18:38:37 <kparal> it's good that crash in partitioning no longer affects user data
18:38:40 <tflink> #topic (878959) firewall-config can't set permanent rule
18:38:40 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878959
18:38:41 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, firewalld, MODIFIED
18:39:43 <tflink> -1 NTH. could be fixed with an update
18:39:50 <tflink> could/should
18:39:53 <nirik> -1 nth
18:40:02 <kparal> -1
18:40:37 <adamw> ack
18:40:38 <adamw> -1
18:40:41 <adamw> monkeys
18:40:57 <tflink> proposed #agreed 878959 - RejectedNTH - This could be fixed with an update and thus, does not need to be pulled in past freeze and does not qualify for NTH status/
18:41:00 <tflink> proposed #agreed 878959 - RejectedNTH - This could be fixed with an update and thus, does not need to be pulled in past freeze and does not qualify for NTH status.
18:41:23 <adamw> ack
18:42:00 <tflink> other ack/nak/patch?
18:42:14 <kparal> ack
18:42:24 <tflink> I suppose that ack/patch would be better
18:42:45 <tflink> since I pretty much ignore naks w/o patches :)
18:43:08 <tflink> eh, good enough
18:43:09 <jreznik> ack
18:43:15 <tflink> #agreed 878959 - RejectedNTH - This could be fixed with an update and thus, does not need to be pulled in past freeze and does not qualify for NTH status.
18:43:22 <tflink> OK, that is all of the proposed NTH that I see
18:43:33 <tflink> on to the accepted blockers
18:43:44 <tflink> er, non-VERIFIED accepted blockers :)
18:43:50 <tflink> #topic (868755) rsync error handling - UEFI and live installs without enough space
18:43:54 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868755
18:43:56 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, MODIFIED
18:44:09 <adamw> i should be able to test this later if no-one else can.
18:44:17 <tflink> it's already been tested
18:44:29 <tflink> someone forgot to change the status
18:44:38 <kparal> mkrizek tested it
18:44:42 <tflink> #info this has been tested with RC1 and appears to have been fixed
18:44:48 <tflink> #info move to VERIFIED
18:45:02 <kparal> moved
18:45:10 <tflink> #topic (872047) fedup-dracut builds do not exist in F18
18:45:10 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872047
18:45:10 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, fedup-dracut, ON_QA
18:45:24 <tflink> #info builds exist in updates-testing and were pulled into RC1
18:45:32 <tflink> #info builds need testing and karma
18:45:56 <tflink> I'll send out testing requests later today since fedup seems to be good enough to request wider testing
18:46:13 <kparal> maybe the test case should be created, so that we have it in the matrix?
18:46:20 <tflink> yeah, in the process of that as well
18:46:20 <adamw> sounds good
18:46:36 <tflink> since I'm not sure if fedup works on UEFI yet
18:46:52 <tflink> I think it was tested but I remember reading varied results and I'm not 100% everything was fixed
18:47:10 <tflink> #topic (873459) Upgraded system does not reboot if a kernel upgrade is part of the upgrade
18:47:12 <adamw> i'm not hugely worried about that case. UEFI in practice is still pretty corner-case-y. we should make sure it works for final, but beta, eh.
18:47:13 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=873459
18:47:16 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, fedup-dracut, ON_QA
18:47:33 <tflink> I've done some testing of this and it appears to have been fixed with the most recent fedup-dracut and systemd
18:47:48 <tflink> I'd rather hold off on moving it to verified until a bit more testing is done, though
18:48:08 <tflink> as far as I can see thus far, it's been fixed though
18:48:19 <jreznik> ok
18:48:30 <tflink> #info this appears to have been fixed from limited testing
18:48:45 <tflink> #info it will be moved to VERIFIED if more detailed/varied testing holds up
18:48:57 <tflink> #topic (876366) New kernel copies its args from the Upgrade System entry
18:48:57 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876366
18:48:57 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, fedup-dracut, MODIFIED
18:49:02 <tflink> bah, this should be ON_QA
18:49:34 <tflink> again, this appears to have been fixed from my testing
18:49:45 <tflink> #info this appears to have been fixed in limited testing
18:49:57 <tflink> #info will move to VERIFIED after a more detailed verification
18:50:10 <adamw> sounds good.
18:50:25 <tflink> #topic (876655) Lorax does not support building initramfs for fedup
18:50:25 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876655
18:50:25 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, lorax, MODIFIED
18:50:35 <tflink> again, this should be ON_QA and I just changed it
18:50:55 <tflink> #info RC1 does include upgrade.img built by lorax
18:51:13 <tflink> I'm trying to remember if I did an upgrade from the RC1 repo
18:51:16 * tflink checks
18:51:27 <tflink> yes, I did
18:51:43 <tflink> #info this has been fixed, moving to VERIFIED
18:52:38 * kparal notes man-pages-it installs OK
18:53:03 <tflink> OK, I think that's all of the accepted blockers
18:53:06 <tflink> did I miss anything?
18:53:13 <adamw> looks good to me
18:53:52 <tflink> #topic Open Floor
18:54:00 <tflink> Any other topics that need to be brought up?
18:54:03 <nirik> I have an item...
18:54:07 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/975
18:54:18 <nirik> ie, fesco needs to decide if SB is a blocker or not.
18:54:50 <tflink> #info fesco has not yet decided whether secureboot functionality is a blocker for F18 beta
18:55:00 <tflink> #link https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/975
18:55:05 <nirik> just FYI if anyone wishes to weigh in
18:55:22 <tflink> yeah, that'll involve at least a week slip
18:55:29 <tflink> assuming we can find HW to test with
18:55:46 <nirik> or at least a few days if we allow the 'release on tue/wed/thur' thing
18:55:52 * kparal notes we still don't have any SB machine in Brno
18:56:14 <tflink> I need to reply to that thread
18:56:25 * tflink is strongly against the idea of only slipping a few days
18:56:51 <tflink> the added overhead of meetings, status reports and general panic doesn't help anything IMHO
18:57:17 <tflink> anything else?
18:57:56 * tflink assumes that silence == nothing else
18:58:02 <nirik> oh...
18:58:13 <adamw> nothing else, except keep working on the man-pages-de bug.
18:58:14 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/974 also needs input. ;)
18:58:24 <adamw> tflink: it may help if you could build a DVD image with dracut's 'fixed' man-pages-de build
18:58:26 <nirik> it's a request to consider releases on tue/wed/thu
18:58:32 <adamw> i ought to then be able to use that as a repo for a netinstall
18:58:32 <nirik> so we could have <1 week slips.
18:58:37 <tflink> adamw: dracut's build?
18:58:44 <adamw> tflink: drago1's
18:58:45 <adamw> sigh
18:58:52 <tflink> adamw: build is running as we speak
18:59:02 <adamw> cool
18:59:14 * tflink is planning to push the full pungi output for netinstall testing
18:59:40 <tflink> #info fesco is also deciding whether to loosen the "1 week slips only" policy
18:59:51 <tflink> #link https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/974
19:00:18 <tflink> #info input to the decision process would (probably) be appreciated by fesco
19:00:55 <tflink> #info The next blocker review meeting (if needed, pending go/no-go decision) will be on 2012-11-28 @ 17:00 UTC
19:01:03 <tflink> if there's nothing else ...
19:01:18 * tflink sets fuse for some period of time (might be negative)
19:01:38 * tflink will send out minutes shortly
19:01:43 <tflink> Thanks for coming, everyone!
19:01:47 <tflink> #endmeeting