16:04:24 <roshi> #startmeeting F22-blocker-review
16:04:24 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Mar 30 16:04:24 2015 UTC.  The chair is roshi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:04:24 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:04:24 <roshi> #meetingname F22-blocker-review
16:04:24 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f22-blocker-review'
16:04:24 <roshi> #topic Roll Call
16:04:29 <roshi> who's around?
16:05:02 * pschindl is here
16:05:18 <adamw> ahoy
16:06:13 <jreznik> nazdar!
16:06:19 <roshi> #chair pschindl jreznik adamw
16:06:19 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw jreznik pschindl roshi
16:06:23 * oddshocks here
16:06:35 * oddshocks was staring at the meeting rooms again :P
16:07:32 <roshi> hehe
16:07:59 <roshi> #topic Introduction
16:07:59 <roshi> Why are we here?
16:07:59 <roshi> #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.
16:08:03 <roshi> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
16:08:05 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
16:08:08 <roshi> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
16:08:10 <roshi> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
16:08:13 <roshi> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
16:08:16 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Alpha_Release_Criteria
16:08:18 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Beta_Release_Criteria
16:08:22 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Final_Release_Criteria
16:08:25 <roshi> hey, the list grew since last night...
16:08:27 <roshi> 7 beta proposals
16:08:32 <roshi> first up:
16:08:32 <roshi> #topic (1206760) KDE desktop doesn't notify for available updates
16:08:33 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206760
16:08:33 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, apper, VERIFIED
16:09:51 <roshi> +1 from me
16:09:55 <oddshocks> Sooo that plasma-pk-updates update will fix it?
16:09:58 <roshi> pretty clear and has a fix already
16:10:06 <oddshocks> yeah
16:10:17 <adamw> +1 anyhow
16:10:20 <oddshocks> +1
16:10:21 <pschindl> +1
16:10:31 <jreznik> +1
16:11:06 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1206760 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta criterion: "Release-blocking desktops must notify the user of available updates, but must not do so when running as a live image."
16:11:19 <adamw> ack
16:11:27 <adamw> who's secretarying? i'll do it if needed
16:11:38 <roshi> danofsatx, you around?
16:11:44 <jreznik> ack
16:11:48 <pschindl> ack
16:11:54 <roshi> #agreed - 1206760 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta criterion: "Release-blocking desktops must notify the user of available updates, but must not do so when running as a live image."
16:12:10 <roshi> looks like it's you then adamw - unless we have other volunteers
16:12:33 <adamw> alrighty
16:13:03 <roshi> #topic (1206420) docker missing from 22 Beta TC5 x86_64 trees
16:13:03 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206420
16:13:04 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, distribution, ON_QA
16:14:12 <adamw> this caused the server DVD fails in tc5, and non-dep-complete DVDs are blockers by policy anyhow.
16:14:41 <roshi> +1
16:14:43 <roshi> seems clear
16:14:48 <jreznik> +1
16:15:22 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1206420 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "When installing with a release-blocking dedicated installer image, the installer must be able to install the default package set."
16:15:26 <adamw> ack
16:15:32 * oddshocks nods
16:15:45 <jreznik> ack
16:15:52 * kparal lurks, ping me when you get to my/lbrabec's bugs
16:15:52 <adamw> we'll have no foreign nodding practices at this meeting, damnit, oddshocks
16:15:57 <adamw> you'll +1 and ack like God intended
16:16:06 <adamw> :P
16:16:07 <pschindl> ack
16:16:29 <roshi> heh
16:16:46 <roshi> #agreed - 1206420 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "When installing with a release-blocking dedicated installer image, the installer must be able to install the default package set."
16:16:56 <roshi> #topic (1207251) Fedup fail to decrypt disk
16:16:57 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207251
16:16:57 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, fedup, NEW
16:16:58 <jreznik> aye and nay!
16:17:22 <adamw> well,which is it? :P
16:17:41 <jreznik> it was to the previous nodacking discussion :D
16:17:56 <adamw> +1, i think (though it'd be good to confirm)
16:18:03 <pschindl> +1
16:18:13 <pschindl> we can close it if it is ok
16:18:18 <roshi> +1
16:18:19 <oddshocks> +1
16:18:35 <jreznik> pschindl: with it, I'm +1
16:18:36 <oddshocks> adamw: :P
16:18:48 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1207251 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the following beta criterion: "For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the previous stable Fedora release with that package set installed"
16:19:17 <pschindl> ack
16:19:28 <adamw> ack
16:19:55 <roshi> #agreed - 1207251 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the following beta criterion: "For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the previous stable Fedora release with that package set installed"
16:20:09 <roshi> #topic (1206404) Crash on transition from g-i-s to GNOME on 'basic graphics' install (nomodeset)
16:20:12 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206404
16:20:14 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gdm, NEW
16:20:21 <adamw> this one's a bit borderline, but i thought i'd put it up for discussion.
16:21:17 <oddshocks> Not sure if I should vote on this, on account of never having heard of g-i-s
16:21:19 <oddshocks> :P
16:21:28 * roshi reads
16:21:29 <oddshocks> oh
16:21:31 <oddshocks> initial setup
16:21:42 <roshi> yeah :)
16:21:42 <jreznik> there's second g-i-s crash, I'm not sure if the same or not but sounds similar in terms of description - no user, no luck
16:21:42 * oddshocks 9:21 am here ;)
16:22:00 <roshi> pretty much all the packages you'll see in a blocker meeting are user facing installation packages
16:22:11 <adamw> oddshocks: it's the initial setup thingy that runs when you install with GNOME and don't create a user.
16:22:18 <adamw> you also see a version of it after first log in to GNOME with a new user.
16:22:25 <adamw> in this bug you get to see both!
16:22:44 <oddshocks> Always love having a good selection of bug cases to enjoy
16:23:06 <pschindl> if it at least creates the user I would be more for FE
16:23:34 <roshi> yeah, same here
16:23:39 <pschindl> and if it happens only in nomodeset then I'm +0.8 FE/+0.2 blocker
16:23:44 <adamw> it does create teh suer
16:23:55 <pschindl> maybe even 0.9/0.1
16:24:08 <adamw> "On reboot, gdm runs and you can login to GNOME"
16:24:52 <roshi> +1 FE
16:25:24 <jreznik> 0 blocker, +1 FE
16:25:27 <pschindl> on reboot, gdm runs - check. And you can login to gnome - yes, but you have to reboot again :) (common bugs if it survives till release?)
16:25:27 <roshi> only nomodeset
16:27:13 <pschindl> ehm. If you are thinking about what I just wrote then don't do that it was meant for another universe where it makes sense :)
16:27:40 <oddshocks> I'll +1 for FE
16:28:52 <adamw> pschindl: oooh, how do I get there?
16:28:54 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1206404 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException Beta - This bug doesn't quite violate the criterion (gdm/g-i-s runs, and a user gets created) and appears to be only reproducible with a specific setup. If this is found to be more widespread, please repropose.
16:29:12 <jreznik> ack
16:30:14 <roshi> is that a good enough explanation?
16:30:30 <adamw> sure, wfm
16:30:30 <adamw> ack
16:30:34 <oddshocks> ack
16:30:36 <pschindl> ack
16:30:50 <roshi> #agreed - 1206404 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException Beta - This bug doesn't quite violate the criterion (gdm/g-i-s runs, and a user gets created) and appears to be only reproducible with a specific setup. If this is found to be more widespread, please repropose.
16:31:08 <roshi> #topic (1205534) gnome-initial-setup crashes upon selecting language
16:31:11 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1205534
16:31:13 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-initial-setup, NEW
16:33:01 <roshi> so, this is fixed or non-reproducible?
16:33:28 <oddshocks> Seems unclear
16:33:28 <pschindl> I think that we need more informatin/testing
16:33:30 <adamw> i haven't tried it yet
16:33:43 <roshi> +1 punt for more info
16:33:49 <oddshocks> +1
16:34:00 <pschindl> +1 punt
16:34:20 <adamw> sure
16:35:02 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1105534 - Punt - We need more information about this bug before we can determine it's blocker status.
16:35:21 <adamw> ack
16:35:37 <pschindl> ack
16:35:48 <roshi> #agreed - 1105534 - Punt - We need more information about this bug before we can determine it's blocker status.
16:36:02 <roshi> #topic (864198) grubby fatal error updating grub.cfg when /boot is btrfs
16:36:05 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864198
16:36:08 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, grubby, ASSIGNED
16:36:38 <adamw> lemme check if the anaconda folks have any specific thought on this
16:36:53 <roshi> ah, this bug
16:38:29 * adamw waits for response in #anaconda...
16:38:41 <roshi> +1 from me
16:38:48 <pschindl> +1 from me too
16:38:49 <roshi> criteria are clear, IMO
16:39:49 <oddshocks> +1
16:41:35 <jreznik> seems like ban is more preffered by dlehman
16:42:36 <adamw> yeah, +1, just wanted to check
16:42:43 <adamw> seems like they don't mind it being a blocker
16:44:17 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 864198 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the criterion: "The installed system must be able to download and install updates with the default console package manager." when /boot is on btrfs.
16:44:41 <pschindl> ack
16:44:54 <adamw> ack
16:45:15 <jreznik> ack
16:45:17 <roshi> #agreed - 864198 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the criterion: "The installed system must be able to download and install updates with the default console package manager." when /boot is on btrfs.
16:45:28 <pschindl> +
16:45:36 <roshi> #topic (1206394) Error: g-bd-md-error-quark: Failed to parse mdexamine data (0)
16:45:39 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206394
16:45:41 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, libblockdev, MODIFIED
16:46:50 <pschindl> +1
16:47:11 <adamw> i'm just about to go test the fix for this
16:47:13 <jreznik> +1
16:48:11 <roshi> +1
16:48:39 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1206394 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta RAID criterion: "The installer must be able to detect and install to hardware or firmware RAID storage devices"
16:48:48 <jreznik> ack
16:49:00 <adamw> ack
16:49:07 <oddshocks> ack
16:49:38 <pschindl> ack
16:49:49 <roshi> #agreed - 1206394 - AcceptedBlocker Beta - This bug is a clear violation of the beta RAID criterion: "The installer must be able to detect and install to hardware or firmware RAID storage devices"
16:49:56 <roshi> onto the proposals for Final
16:50:14 <roshi> #topic (1200901) invisible mouse cursor in wayland login-screen when in VM
16:50:16 <pschindl> kparal: ping
16:50:17 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200901
16:50:19 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gdm, NEW
16:50:26 * kparal is here
16:50:30 <kparal> pschindl: thanks
16:51:50 <adamw> is everyone seeing this? i don't actually know that i have
16:52:05 <pschindl> I have seen it.
16:52:07 <kparal> I see this, and lbrabec reproduced easily
16:52:15 <oddshocks> I haven't tried it, but it sounds like a blocker to me
16:52:18 <kparal> just make sure you have Tablet added to your VM config
16:52:30 <kparal> Tablet device is added automatically if you create VM as Fedora
16:52:40 <kparal> if you create it as Generic, the tablet device is not there
16:52:46 <adamw> i have one
16:52:56 <adamw> i'd have to recheck, i can't say for sure i'm not seeing the bug
16:53:10 <adamw> i'm having a hard time saying we'd block release for this, esp. as you don't really hit gdm in lives
16:53:14 <kparal> adamw: can you just boot it and see if you have a mouse cursor in gdm?
16:54:18 <kparal> I think it should be reproducible by everyone. only if you have some arcane old VM config maybe not. but if you create a fresh new VM, you should reproduce it
16:54:18 <oddshocks> oh, lives...
16:54:29 <pschindl> I just booted my VM and it is really invisible.
16:54:49 <roshi> what about switching from the spice gfx?
16:55:09 <randomuser> is having a tablet as a default input device still valid?  I don't recall doing that, usually use virt-install, and haven't seen the problems that not-tablet did in the past
16:55:17 <kparal> I don't know, but I think that's not the point. if you do some adjustments, you can remove the tablet device and you're done...
16:55:42 <kparal> randomuser: the tablet device allows vm fluent capture and release of mouse cursor
16:55:54 <kparal> so you don't need to press Ctrl+Alt to release it
16:55:59 <roshi> I wouldn't block on this, commonbugs with the workaround
16:56:02 <jreznik> so sounds like easy to workaround if needed, not sure this is beta blocker
16:56:12 <kparal> jreznik: it's not proposed for Beta
16:56:14 <roshi> oh, that's used for that functionality?
16:56:21 <roshi> we're on final
16:56:22 <kparal> roshi: afaik
16:56:26 <roshi> huh
16:56:27 <randomuser> kparal, ok, nvm, virt-install did give me tablets, carry on
16:56:28 <jreznik> kparal: ah, sorry, I'm blind
16:56:28 <roshi> TIL
16:56:45 <adamw> kparal: sorry, i'm working on two other blockers atm...
16:57:37 <kparal> I think we can consider this reliably reproducible
16:57:42 <kparal> so far everyone has reproduced it
16:58:27 <kparal> as for the impact, this is extremely annoying if you want to power off the machine from the login screen
16:58:31 <kparal> it's extremely hard
16:58:47 <adamw> tab?
16:58:50 <kparal> but that's it, no further impact, as I see it
16:59:04 <kparal> adamw: ctrl+alt+tab, if you know the shortcut. otherwise you can't switch there
16:59:08 <adamw> ah, k.
16:59:21 <adamw> i'm just trying to imagine the Final go/no-go meeting where we decide to slip the release for this
16:59:24 <adamw> seems unlikely
16:59:38 <roshi> -1, document in common bugs
16:59:45 <adamw> can't you hit the virt-manager 'power' button? doesn't that trigger a clean shutdown (not 'force off')?
16:59:49 <adamw> so yeah, leaning -1
16:59:53 <roshi> ctrl alt to get out of a vm isn't much of a hardship
16:59:55 <roshi> IMO
17:00:05 <danofsatx> -1
17:00:05 <kparal> adamw: I can try. it never worked reliably for me. sometimes it suspended the machine
17:00:25 <adamw> roshi: new blocker: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207317
17:00:31 <adamw> er, new proposed blocker
17:00:53 <roshi> kk,
17:00:56 <kparal> I hit the power button, I see black screen, and nothing is happening
17:00:57 <roshi> votes on this one?
17:01:11 <kparal> VM is probably dead
17:01:23 <kparal> needed to force off
17:02:35 <roshi> so, I count 3 -1
17:02:45 * danofsatx finally showed up
17:02:59 <kparal> I don't have a clear opinion on this. I can image we would block on it, mouse is not working. but it affects only VMs, and people using VMs can probably find a way out by themselves
17:03:01 <roshi> o/ danofsatx
17:03:57 <danofsatx> is this an F22 problem, or a libvirt/kvm/qemu problem?
17:04:05 <kparal> danofsatx: wayland problem
17:04:38 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1200901 - RejectedBlocker Final - This bug isn't severe enough to violate the Final virtualization criterion and has easy workarounds. Please document workaround in common bugs.
17:04:48 <Corey84> .fas corey84
17:04:49 <danofsatx> ack
17:04:49 <zodbot> Corey84: corey84 'Corey84' <sheldon.corey@gmail.com>
17:04:53 <Corey84> (late i apolize)
17:05:00 <roshi> no worries :)
17:05:28 <danofsatx> I just got here, too, Corey84, but shhhhh!! - don't tell anyone
17:05:34 <Corey84> lol
17:05:48 <roshi> acks nacks patches?
17:06:27 * danofsatx already acked
17:06:50 <Corey84> ack
17:06:51 <danofsatx> Corey84 made too much noise coming in, though, so you probably missed i
17:06:52 <oddshocks> ack
17:06:58 * kparal is ambivalent, that probably means ack
17:07:22 <roshi> #agreed - 1200901 - RejectedBlocker Final - This bug isn't severe enough to violate the Final virtualization criterion and has easy workarounds. Please document workaround in common bugs.
17:07:26 <roshi> #topic (1205649) virtualbox/nvidia driver installed makes newer kernel updates to be ignored in packagekit
17:07:29 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1205649
17:07:31 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, PackageKit, NEW
17:07:36 <kparal> this one is going to be much more fun
17:07:40 <roshi> lol
17:07:45 <kparal> hehehe
17:08:01 <Corey84> oh goodie
17:09:10 <kparal> in short, it seems that everyone having either virtualbox, or nvidia binary drivers, or anything else from comment 12, will not get any new kernels if they use gnome offline upgrades
17:09:23 <kparal> I've been seeing this on my F21 laptop for at least 2 months
17:09:31 <danofsatx> in other words, tainted kernels, right?
17:09:43 <Corey84> sounds that way
17:10:00 <kparal> danofsatx: it's a package manager issue, so it does not really matter whether the kernel is tainted
17:10:23 <kparal> it's more related to how those package dependencies are set up
17:10:31 <danofsatx> wait, DNF works. I'm of the opinion that DNF is default in F22, yum is no longer a blocker.
17:10:44 <kparal> danofsatx: yum and dnf works. packagekit not
17:10:49 <kparal> packagekit is used for offline upgrades
17:11:02 <roshi> software center and it's ilk doesn't use dnf - just the same libs
17:11:03 <danofsatx> oh, duh....this is packagekit.
17:11:07 * danofsatx needs to read more
17:11:37 <kparal> the fun part is that this only happens with third-party repos, we don't have anything like that in core fedora repos
17:11:55 <kparal> so many people might argue this is not a blocker
17:12:40 <kparal> I would not be that sure, because virtualbox+nvidia covers a lot of people. it's true that many of them don't use offline updates, but at least some of them do. and a lack of kernel updates is an important issue, I think
17:12:54 <kparal> of course, this can be theoretically fixed in the future
17:13:19 <Corey84> so only tainted kernels are effected then ?
17:13:20 <kparal> but still, we would release F22 with a known security issue
17:13:40 <kparal> Corey84: lbrabec reproduced it with fake packages which don't touch kernel at all
17:13:41 <roshi> this could also break if you had your own repos set up and used a similar dep scenario?
17:13:50 <kparal> roshi: yes
17:14:00 <adamw> yeah, kinda a questionable one. we *have* always quite solidly stated 'we don't support 3rd party drivers', of course.
17:14:12 <kparal> I said this one would be more fun :)
17:14:17 <Corey84> that would be kinda  nuts to have happen
17:14:39 <roshi> I mean, I always update with dnf/yum, so I wouldn't hit this
17:14:47 <kparal> roshi: no you wouldn't
17:15:14 <roshi> I'm +1 if we can find a place in the fedora ecosystem this touches
17:15:28 <roshi> regardless, packagekit needs to fix this error
17:15:47 <roshi> but I don't think I can say +1 blocker with the current info we have
17:16:26 <jreznik> -1 blocker/+1 FE, would be nice to fix it but we should be consistent with "we can't support 3rd party stuff"
17:16:40 <roshi> -1/+1 FE
17:17:21 <kparal> roshi: we have searched for other packaged in core fedora repos which would use this setup and we found none. because none of core packages need to inject a third-party module into kernel
17:17:26 <Corey84> -1 block +1 FE  here too
17:17:35 <roshi> ah
17:17:41 <danofsatx> -1/+1
17:17:43 <adamw> so this is not caused by tainting, but by the dep structure?
17:17:52 <adamw> kernel module packages are explicitly forbidden in fedora repos iirc
17:18:06 <kparal> adamw: correct, this is not about kernel tainting but about rpm deps
17:18:11 <adamw> if you can't get your kernel module in the 'kernel' srpm you're not getting it in
17:18:19 <adamw> so probably -1
17:19:23 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1205649 - RejectedBlocker Final - This bug only arises in 3rd party repos which Fedora doesn't support, so isn't considered a blocker. However, it would be good to fix this issue as many users could be impacted by it. Accepted as a freeze exception to get a fix in if it's ready in time.
17:19:34 <roshi> also, this can be fixed with an update afaict
17:19:35 <adamw> ack
17:19:59 <jreznik> ack
17:20:04 <danofsatx> ackityack
17:20:10 <roshi> #agreed - 1205649 - RejectedBlocker Final - This bug only arises in 3rd party repos which Fedora doesn't support, so isn't considered a blocker. However, it would be good to fix this issue as many users could be impacted by it. Accepted as a freeze exception to get a fix in if it's ready in time.
17:20:28 * kparal was again on the fence, for the record
17:20:38 <roshi> onto adam's beta blocker
17:20:42 <roshi> #topic (1207317) Error: g-bd-md-error-quark: malformed or invalid UUID: (null) (1)
17:20:45 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207317
17:20:47 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:21:22 <danofsatx> Wellllll.......
17:22:15 <Corey84> that poor blivet stikes again
17:22:27 <roshi> +1 under the cited criterion
17:22:34 <Corey84> +1
17:22:45 <danofsatx> Reading through Adam's BZ, every single issue I hit yesterday seems to be from the same root cause. My EFI boot partition was entered into /etc/fstab as UUID=20030-U4E211
17:22:47 <pschindl> +1
17:23:00 <adamw> i'm about to test the *next* fix in this chain...:P
17:23:02 <Corey84> maybe I'll git pull again and try to help with patch
17:23:07 <adamw> danofsatx: these bugs are specific to firmware RAID
17:23:31 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1207317 - AcceptedBlocker Final - This bug is a clear violation of the RAID criterion: "The installer must be able to detect and install to hardware or firmware RAID storage devices"
17:23:32 <jreznik> +1
17:23:36 <danofsatx> hmmm....in that case, I have another blocker. but I need to gather more info from the system at home.
17:23:40 <jreznik> ack
17:23:43 <danofsatx> +1, ack and all that
17:23:46 <Corey84> ack
17:23:58 <roshi> #agreed - 1207317 - AcceptedBlocker Final - This bug is a clear violation of the RAID criterion: "The installer must be able to detect and install to hardware or firmware RAID storage devices"
17:24:04 <roshi> #topic Open Floor
17:24:11 <roshi> anyone have anything else?
17:24:17 * roshi sets the fuse
17:24:18 <danofsatx> has anyone tried TC5 with actual DVD media?
17:24:30 <Corey84> not I
17:24:42 <kushal> I have one point.
17:24:54 <danofsatx> I attempted last night, and it failed to boot because it can't start livesys.service
17:24:59 <kushal> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204612 is now solved, the latest cloud build successfully goes through Tunir tests.
17:25:03 <adamw> danofsatx: there's some kind of Thing with UUIDs and UEFI, IIRC. UEFI 'uuids' and linux filesystem 'uuids' are not the same thing, or something that. could be related.
17:25:14 <adamw> danofsatx: the DVD is broken by the docker bug.
17:25:17 <kushal> roshi, just closing the ticket is enough, correct?
17:25:36 <adamw> kushal: only when the update goes stable.
17:25:50 <kushal> adamw, this was just a kickstart fix
17:25:59 <kushal> adamw, nothing changed in the package.
17:26:02 <Corey84> danofsatx,  try using gdisk  /dev/sdX  n   type  ef02   pre install  ( see if pre-labeling efi  works
17:26:37 <danofsatx> adamw: this wasn't a server DVD, it is KDE Live.
17:26:55 <adamw> danofsatx: oh, i see. sorry, 'dvd' is confusing
17:27:19 <adamw> in which case, no, haven't tested that yet, could be it takes too long and the service gives up waiting?
17:27:28 <roshi> kushal, as soon as the fix is published and known working - then it can close
17:27:33 <danofsatx> I'm going to try on a couple more pieces of hardware to confirm, it could be the stupid samsung laptop.
17:27:35 <adamw> kushal: in that case, yeah, if it's tested then it's OK to close the bug
17:27:39 <Corey84> danofsatx,  when you bz  up   ping me  think I may have an idea
17:27:45 <kushal> adamw, roshi thanks :)
17:28:33 <roshi> 3...
17:28:44 <Corey84> 2....
17:29:11 <roshi> 1...
17:29:15 <roshi> thanks for coming folks!
17:29:36 <Corey84> wait for it ....
17:29:38 <roshi> #endmeeting