2024-03-18 16:01:08 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !startmeeting F40-blocker-review
2024-03-18 16:01:08 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2024-03-18 16:01:08 UTC
2024-03-18 16:01:09 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'F40-blocker-review'
2024-03-18 16:01:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Roll Call
2024-03-18 16:01:17 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi
2024-03-18 16:01:18 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 16:01:20 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 16:01:21 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Brandon Nielsen (nielsenb)
2024-03-18 16:01:26 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> i know i know, i'll stop following you...
2024-03-18 16:01:48 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 16:01:49 <@zodbot:fedora.im> František Zatloukal (frantisekz)
2024-03-18 16:02:17 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> !hi
2024-03-18 16:02:18 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Geraldo S. Simião Kutz (geraldosimiao) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 16:03:50 <@jcline:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 16:03:51 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jeremy Cline (jcline) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 16:04:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> how's everyone doing this fine morning
2024-03-18 16:05:00 <@adamwill:fedora.im> (i refuse to accept other timezones and/or climates)
2024-03-18 16:05:36 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> It was 70 last week
2024-03-18 16:05:37 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> everyone knows in IT everything and everywhere is UTC
2024-03-18 16:05:42 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Yesterday I used the fireplaces
2024-03-18 16:05:52 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> I'm doing alright. it's only first monday, after all
2024-03-18 16:05:53 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I'm here at lunchtime in Brazil 
2024-03-18 16:06:02 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> what's for lunch? 
2024-03-18 16:06:25 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Beef and rice and beans 
2024-03-18 16:06:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> alright, so we're agreed to remove IoT from the distro, close all pbrobinson's accounts and also have his house demolished? ...oh shoot, he's here, everybody hide
2024-03-18 16:06:32 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 😊
2024-03-18 16:07:20 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> I feel so loved! At least you don't knnow where my new house is!
2024-03-18 16:07:40 <@adamwill:fedora.im> suuuuuure I don't
2024-03-18 16:08:16 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh, but wait, before the bulldozers arrive it'd be great if you could fix that bluetooth bug, it's driving me nuts. ;)
2024-03-18 16:08:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> anyhoo, let's get going...
2024-03-18 16:08:33 <@adamwill:fedora.im> boilerplate alert!
2024-03-18 16:08:38 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Introduction
2024-03-18 16:08:41 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Why are we here?
2024-03-18 16:08:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !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.
2024-03-18 16:08:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info We'll be following the process outlined at:
2024-03-18 16:08:51 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
2024-03-18 16:08:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info The bugs up for review today are available at:
2024-03-18 16:08:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
2024-03-18 16:08:59 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
2024-03-18 16:09:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria
2024-03-18 16:09:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Beta_Release_Criteria
2024-03-18 16:09:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria
2024-03-18 16:09:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info for Beta, we have:
2024-03-18 16:09:18 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> that's called karma adamw🤣️
2024-03-18 16:09:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 1 Proposed Blockers
2024-03-18 16:09:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 6 Accepted Blockers
2024-03-18 16:09:38 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 1 Accepted Previous Release Blockers
2024-03-18 16:09:40 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 4 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
2024-03-18 16:09:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 8 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
2024-03-18 16:09:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info for Final, we have:
2024-03-18 16:09:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 10 Proposed Blockers
2024-03-18 16:10:14 <@adamwill:fedora.im> anyone want to secretarialize?
2024-03-18 16:10:27 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> can do
2024-03-18 16:10:36 <@zodbot:fedora.im> neil gave a cookie to frantisekz. They now have 46 cookies, 2 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 16:10:45 <@zodbot:fedora.im> kparal gave a cookie to frantisekz. They now have 47 cookies, 3 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 16:11:03 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info František Zatloukal will secretarialize
2024-03-18 16:11:14 <@adamwill:fedora.im> alrighty, let's get started with:
2024-03-18 16:11:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Proposed Beta blocker
2024-03-18 16:11:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2270030) Fedora Workstation Live ISO uses wrong Plymouth theme (tribar)
2024-03-18 16:11:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270030
2024-03-18 16:11:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1526
2024-03-18 16:11:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, fedora-release, NEW
2024-03-18 16:11:34 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: BetaBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-kparal)
2024-03-18 16:11:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I tend to be -1 blocker on this, especially for Beta. correct plymouth theme is nice, but not blocking, I don't think
2024-03-18 16:11:55 <@adamwill:fedora.im> if it's actually causing anyone boot problems, i'd reconsider
2024-03-18 16:12:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> +1 FE, I guess...
2024-03-18 16:12:04 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao gave a cookie to frantisekz. They now have 48 cookies, 4 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 16:12:19 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I didn't see this just now when I tested basic graphics
2024-03-18 16:12:50 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> -1 blocker 
2024-03-18 16:13:03 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> -1 Blocker, +1 FE (if it is an issue at all in the end)
2024-03-18 16:13:05 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> +1 FinalFE 
2024-03-18 16:14:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> the spinner is there, lruzicka is just confused 😉 
2024-03-18 16:14:46 <@kparal:matrix.org> -1 betablocker
2024-03-18 16:14:46 <@jcline:fedora.im> Yeah, I'm -1 blocker, +1 FE assuming it's reproducible which it sounds like it isn't
2024-03-18 16:14:48 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> FinalBlocker -1
2024-03-18 16:14:58 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> er
2024-03-18 16:15:01 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaBlocker -1
2024-03-18 16:15:18 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:17:14 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2270030 - RejectedBlocker (Beta) AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is rejected as a beta blocker as we can't find any criterion it violates and it appears to be a merely cosmetic issue. It's accepted as an FE if it proves to be a reproducible bug with a clear and safe fix
2024-03-18 16:17:26 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:17:27 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:17:37 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:17:45 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 16:17:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2270030 - RejectedBlocker (Beta) AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is rejected as a beta blocker as we can't find any criterion it violates and it appears to be a merely cosmetic issue. It's accepted as an FE if it proves to be a reproducible bug with a clear and safe fix
2024-03-18 16:17:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ok, moving on to:
2024-03-18 16:18:03 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Ack
2024-03-18 16:18:03 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Proposed Beta freeze exceptions
2024-03-18 16:18:13 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2267754) Include GNOME Shell (etc.) 46 in Fedora 40 Beta
2024-03-18 16:18:16 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267754
2024-03-18 16:18:19 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1493
2024-03-18 16:18:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, distribution, MODIFIED, depends on other bugs 
2024-03-18 16:18:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+4,0,-2) (+ngompa, +geraldosimiao, +adamwill, +frantisekz, -nielsenb, -lruzicka)
2024-03-18 16:18:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so...I *mostly* proposed this in the hopes of doing a quickie candidate yesterday, but we didn't do that in the end
2024-03-18 16:18:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> still, i guess it's worth considering for a compose today
2024-03-18 16:19:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> (i'm kinda agitating to do a compose today, more on that later)
2024-03-18 16:19:22 <@kparal:matrix.org> what about that openqa-related blocker that was present there previously, is that fixed?
2024-03-18 16:19:29 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yeah, that was fixed afaik
2024-03-18 16:19:57 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I am +1 FE (ofc, the newer, the better, or how was that?)
2024-03-18 16:20:26 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I kinda feel like it has enough fixes for other issues, we might as well pull it in at this point
2024-03-18 16:20:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Kamil Páral: yes, mutter 46 final reverted the removal of xevent filters
2024-03-18 16:20:29 <@kparal:matrix.org> we have 4 mutter crashes proposed for Final, does this fix any of those?
2024-03-18 16:20:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> good question. no idea, off the top of my head
2024-03-18 16:20:51 <@adamwill:fedora.im> but it might create exciting new ones!
2024-03-18 16:21:13 <@kparal:matrix.org> I'm +0
2024-03-18 16:21:26 <@adamwill:fedora.im> at least one of them is, according to jadahl - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2268998#c20
2024-03-18 16:21:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> probably https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269545 too, if https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/issues/3337 made 36.0
2024-03-18 16:21:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> probably https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=2269545 too, if https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/issues/3337 made 46.0
2024-03-18 16:22:09 <@adamwill:fedora.im> probably https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show\_bug.cgi?id=2269545 too, if https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/3646 made 46.0
2024-03-18 16:22:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i will check on that
2024-03-18 16:22:51 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it looks like it did. also looks like quite a big change to have YOLOed into final, but hey
2024-03-18 16:23:29 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I mean, if we include it in a compose, we can revert it in a new one just fine
2024-03-18 16:23:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i've marked the update as fixing those two
2024-03-18 16:23:42 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I feel like they did a lot of big changes really late in their cycle
2024-03-18 16:23:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> František Zatloukal: sure, it's just a question of timing - enough time to test and find a bug, enough time to revert and compose again
2024-03-18 16:24:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> looks like it fixes 2265402 too...
2024-03-18 16:25:12 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> whether it's tested now in beta or post beta things still need to get fixed so I feel it would be better to get it in beta for wider testing and more timne before GA
2024-03-18 16:25:28 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> That's kinda where I'm at too
2024-03-18 16:25:38 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> It fixes some stuff, almost certainly breaks some others
2024-03-18 16:25:51 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> But maybe we can CommonBugs any new breakage...
2024-03-18 16:26:07 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> As opposed to day 0 carnage
2024-03-18 16:26:08 <@adamwill:fedora.im> and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2268149 ... so nearly all of them
2024-03-18 16:26:43 <@kparal:matrix.org> looks like a good argument to include it, then
2024-03-18 16:26:48 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:27:15 <@jcline:fedora.im> Beta FE +1
2024-03-18 16:29:00 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2267754 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted on the grounds it fixes a large number of crashers and other bugs, it has solid feedback so far, and seems to be passing openQA's distribution tests in Rawhide. We intend to pull it into a candidate compose (assuming there is another) without pushing it stable first, so it can easily be reverted if necessary
2024-03-18 16:29:08 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:29:16 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:29:25 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 16:29:59 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2267754 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted on the grounds it fixes a large number of crashers and other bugs, it has solid feedback so far, and seems to be passing openQA's distribution tests in Rawhide. We intend to pull it into a candidate compose (assuming there is another) without pushing it stable first, so it can easily be reverted if necessary
2024-03-18 16:30:00 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:30:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2270070) There's no F40 LXQT iso
2024-03-18 16:30:23 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270070
2024-03-18 16:30:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1527
2024-03-18 16:30:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, distribution, NEW
2024-03-18 16:30:33 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao)
2024-03-18 16:30:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we usually track this via failed-composes tickets, but there's nothing wrong with having a bug report, and accepting an FE could be useful if any changes needed to fix this require one
2024-03-18 16:30:58 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so i'm +1 FE, getting image builds fixed is always good
2024-03-18 16:31:26 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I agree
2024-03-18 16:31:32 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:32:10 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> yeah. betafe+1
2024-03-18 16:32:10 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:33:20 <@jcline:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:35:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2270070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted as we usually accept FEs to fix non-blocking image builds, of course this cannot be fixed outside of the freeze and it is a significant benefit to make sure the image is present in Beta
2024-03-18 16:35:16 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:35:25 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 16:35:29 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:35:39 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:35:52 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:37:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2270070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted as we usually accept FEs to fix non-blocking image builds, of course this cannot be fixed outside of the freeze and it is a significant benefit to make sure the image is present in Beta
2024-03-18 16:37:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> sorry, was proposing a new FE on the side...
2024-03-18 16:37:19 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2270138) Kiwi-built container base image is missing gzip and sudo
2024-03-18 16:37:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270138
2024-03-18 16:37:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1529
2024-03-18 16:37:28 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, kiwi, POST
2024-03-18 16:37:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> thanks to Jeremy Cline for running the diff
2024-03-18 16:37:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i'm definitely +1 FE to get the contents more in line
2024-03-18 16:38:01 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> +1 FE
2024-03-18 16:38:13 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:38:28 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:38:41 <@jcline:fedora.im> Yeah I feel pretty confident this won't cause problems (famous last words) so BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:38:46 <@kparal:matrix.org> +1 fe
2024-03-18 16:39:01 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:39:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> okay, #agreed it's all jcline's fault when things blow up
2024-03-18 16:39:22 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> this remembers me the RMS interjection meme
2024-03-18 16:39:55 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2270138 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted as it's clearly desirable for the Kiwi images to contain everything we intended and which was in the ImageFactory images, and the lack of gzip especially is known to screw up at least one real-world use case
2024-03-18 16:40:03 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:40:05 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 16:40:06 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:40:31 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:40:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2270138 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted as it's clearly desirable for the Kiwi images to contain everything we intended and which was in the ImageFactory images, and the lack of gzip especially is known to screw up at least one real-world use case
2024-03-18 16:41:00 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2269992) sdubby instead of grubby is installed by default
2024-03-18 16:41:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269992
2024-03-18 16:41:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1525
2024-03-18 16:41:08 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, sdubby, NEW
2024-03-18 16:41:09 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so this one's fun
2024-03-18 16:41:26 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> It got me confused
2024-03-18 16:41:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> one person mentions it, I nominate the bug as an FE, and suddenly everyone shows up saying how they noticed it months ago and worked around it
2024-03-18 16:41:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> :P
2024-03-18 16:42:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i'm definitely +1 FE, anyway. it almost *feels* blocker-y, but in practice, surprisingly little stuff doesn't work if you just...don't have grubby, these days. I think since the BLS transition, default usage doesn't really run through it any more
2024-03-18 16:42:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> but it's definitely still the way you're meant to do customizations and stuff, I think
2024-03-18 16:42:57 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:43:09 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:43:12 <@kparal:matrix.org> +1 fe
2024-03-18 16:43:14 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> For a return to the status quo
2024-03-18 16:43:17 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> +1 fe
2024-03-18 16:43:33 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> +1 FE
2024-03-18 16:43:39 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I think this impacts too if one want install sd-boot using everything iso
2024-03-18 16:43:47 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> and a full DE
2024-03-18 16:43:51 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> like KDE plasma
2024-03-18 16:44:08 <@adamwill:fedora.im> geraldosimiao: well, sdubby is what you *want* if you want to use sdboot
2024-03-18 16:44:16 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so i don't think this causes any *problems* for sdboot
2024-03-18 16:44:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it's more the other way around, sdboot path causing problems for default path...
2024-03-18 16:44:24 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah, but anaconda shows erros
2024-03-18 16:44:31 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> conflict with grubby
2024-03-18 16:44:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh, it doeS?
2024-03-18 16:44:40 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah
2024-03-18 16:44:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well, that sounds like a different thing
2024-03-18 16:44:49 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> must open a ticket for that, sorry
2024-03-18 16:44:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i'm not intending to remove the *conflict* with grubby, i believe that's valid
2024-03-18 16:45:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> but yeah, if the sdboot path has issues, please do file a bug
2024-03-18 16:45:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2269992 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted as it's clearly not intended behaviour and cannot be fixed with a post-release update, we want Beta installs to get grubby not sdubby unless they're using inst.sdboot
2024-03-18 16:45:53 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah, but anaconda shows errors
2024-03-18 16:46:01 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:46:07 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:46:10 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 16:46:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2269992 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted as it's clearly not intended behaviour and cannot be fixed with a post-release update, we want Beta installs to get grubby not sdubby unless they're using inst.sdboot
2024-03-18 16:46:17 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:46:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> my hobby: accepting things just before kparal has time to ack them
2024-03-18 16:46:51 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> it's quite the skill, truthfully
2024-03-18 16:46:59 <@kparal:matrix.org> didn't make it this time, though. At least on my end.
2024-03-18 16:47:08 <@jkonecny:fedora.im> This is community maintained feature https://anaconda-installer.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#systemd-boot-as-a-bootloader
2024-03-18 16:47:22 <@jkonecny:fedora.im> Just FYI
2024-03-18 16:47:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> my end is the only truth
2024-03-18 16:48:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> jkonecny: yeah, i wasn't going to dump it on you
2024-03-18 16:48:13 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i was gonna dump it on...whoever owns that feature, i forget. or neal, just cos. :D
2024-03-18 16:48:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2270154) Partially revert bootupd support for Atomic desktops (again)
2024-03-18 16:48:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270154
2024-03-18 16:48:55 <@jkonecny:fedora.im> Jeremy Linton is the owner
2024-03-18 16:48:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, distribution, POST
2024-03-18 16:49:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> jkonecny: right, i don't know why i forgot that when i keep pinging him this morning. hah.
2024-03-18 16:49:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so, this was filed at the request of travier 
2024-03-18 16:49:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i guess if he thinks it's best to rip this back out, i'm not opposed...
2024-03-18 16:50:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we do know the old way works, so...eh
2024-03-18 16:50:19 <@adamwill:fedora.im> and the images aren't release blocking
2024-03-18 16:50:32 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> +1 FE
2024-03-18 16:51:05 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> non blocking stuff, let developers and mainst do whatever they'd want I guess
2024-03-18 16:51:20 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:51:28 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2024-03-18 16:52:24 <@jkonecny:fedora.im> +1  anything. I'm worried about the proper fix in Anaconda could raise more issues. So having it in Rawhide first seems better to me.
2024-03-18 16:53:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2270154 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted on the grounds that we know the old way works, and the atomic desktop images are not blocking, so we're willing to defer to the maintainer's idea of what's best here since the change is limited to the atomic desktop definitions
2024-03-18 16:53:17 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:53:20 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:53:24 <@kparal:matrix.org> (didn't even read it)
2024-03-18 16:53:39 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 16:53:41 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> !hi
2024-03-18 16:53:43 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fábio Ribeiro (farribeiro) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 16:54:06 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 16:54:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> just a minute, let me patch the proposal so i can accept it before kamil acks
2024-03-18 16:54:17 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 16:54:25 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> *phew* got mine in :D 
2024-03-18 16:54:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2270154 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted on the grounds that we know the old way works, and the atomic desktop images are not blocking, so we're willing to defer to the maintainer's idea of what's best here since the change is limited to the atomic desktop definitions
2024-03-18 16:54:58 <@adamwill:fedora.im> let's move on quickly to:
2024-03-18 16:55:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Accepted Beta blocker status review
2024-03-18 16:55:09 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> we can allways react in matrix room style
2024-03-18 16:55:16 <@adamwill:fedora.im> as a reminder, we are not voting on these (unless we specifically decide to revote one), just checking the status
2024-03-18 16:55:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2267968) Raspberry Pi 400 shows nothing on screen when booting Fedora 40 images (even before grub)
2024-03-18 16:55:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267968
2024-03-18 16:55:35 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Accepted Blocker, bcm283x-firmware, ASSIGNED
2024-03-18 16:55:40 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Peter Robinson: any news on this one?
2024-03-18 16:56:00 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we did the candidates on the basis that folks might want to vote to waive this as found-too-late or not-reasonably-fixable, but if we can fix it that'd be great
2024-03-18 16:56:43 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> (I believe this still stands as a good waiving candidate as Pi 400 wasn't explicitly marked as blocking/supported before this cycle began)
2024-03-18 16:57:03 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> so I had focused on the u-boot bug, I have had some debug into this
2024-03-18 16:57:14 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> I have also filed a bug upstream
2024-03-18 16:57:41 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> I had started looking at it again this morning, I have something to try, but I've not finished it with other priorities
2024-03-18 16:58:52 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> I can get it to boot enabling some early debug, which kind of says to me it's a clocking issue in teh firmware, I may consider that a work around to get us through beta
2024-03-18 17:00:00 <@adamwill:fedora.im> could you do an attempt at that today? i'd really like to pull together another compose attempt tonight
2024-03-18 17:00:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> would trying to change that potentially break anything else?
2024-03-18 17:00:22 <@humaton:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 17:00:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh, and is just downgrading the firmware another possibility? or do we need the newer version to fix other things?
2024-03-18 17:00:24 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Tomáš Hrčka (humaton) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 17:01:13 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> a try on which bit?
2024-03-18 17:01:35 <@adamwill:fedora.im> the clocking change
2024-03-18 17:01:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> or, i guess, just enabling the early debug in the official build, if that's what you meant?
2024-03-18 17:02:01 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> we need the newer FW for other things, I tend not to upgrade it unless needed because of regressions elsewhere
2024-03-18 17:02:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> rgr
2024-03-18 17:02:47 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> I am currently writing out an RPiOS image to verify some bits and a theory, and then depending on that I will look futher
2024-03-18 17:03:31 <@adamwill:fedora.im> rgr. basically, if you can come up with something today that you figure has a shot at fixing this and not *too* much risk of breaking anything else critical, that'd be awesome
2024-03-18 17:03:37 <@adamwill:fedora.im> if not, i agree with frantisek that it's a reasonable waiver candidate
2024-03-18 17:03:41 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> I still have a corner case bug in the u-boot fix that I am trying to nail down that is annoying me
2024-03-18 17:04:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Peter Robinson is working on this one and has some avenues of investigation, we will see what he comes up with
2024-03-18 17:06:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info all other regular blockers are addressed in Beta-1.7. some that are in ON_QA could actually be marked VERIFIED, I will do that in a bit
2024-03-18 17:06:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2242759) dnf system-upgrade fails on some RPi4 due to system boot date that pre-dates gpg key
2024-03-18 17:06:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242759
2024-03-18 17:06:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Accepted Previous Release Blocker, distribution, NEW
2024-03-18 17:06:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> this one is an accepted previous release blocker that's just been kinda hanging around
2024-03-18 17:06:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we accepted it last cycle but waived it to this cycle on the endearingly optimistic basis we'd have figured out something to do about it by now
2024-03-18 17:07:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well, thanks, Past Us. here we are!
2024-03-18 17:07:26 <@adamwill:fedora.im> if nobody actually has a cunning idea to fix this bug, i think i'm kinda of the opinion we should revote it to not-a-blocker-because-we-can't-fix-the-damn thing, and just document it as best we can
2024-03-18 17:07:28 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Note that is also impacts regular offline updates as well
2024-03-18 17:07:31 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> As I discovered
2024-03-18 17:07:34 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> let's move that to the future us, could we? (my stance to life and all...) :D
2024-03-18 17:07:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao gave a cookie to pbrobinson. They now have 116 cookies, 1 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 17:08:00 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2024-03-18 17:08:02 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 17:08:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> hey neal
2024-03-18 17:08:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Yo
2024-03-18 17:09:18 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> o/ 
2024-03-18 17:09:23 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> just for the records, we should celebrate the new signed shim :)
2024-03-18 17:09:35 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to pbrobinson. They now have 117 cookies, 2 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 17:09:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> neil gave a cookie to pbrobinson. They now have 118 cookies, 3 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 17:10:44 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Signed?
2024-03-18 17:11:14 <@pbrobinson:fedora.im> yes!
2024-03-18 17:11:23 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I'm super not a fan of waiving this bug again, but I don't have any brilliant fix ideas, so I really don't know what else we can do
2024-03-18 17:11:26 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Oh my good!
2024-03-18 17:11:51 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> yep ! 

```
╰─⊙ pesign -S -i fedora/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI
---------------------------------------------
certificate address is 0x7f1edb3fd6d0
Content was not encrypted.
Content is detached; signature cannot be verified.
The signer's common name is Microsoft Windows UEFI Driver Publisher
No signer email address.
No signing time included.
There were certs or crls included.
---------------------------------------------
```
2024-03-18 17:12:37 <@adamwill:fedora.im> @farribeiro:matrix.org: yes, and it's in Beta-1.7 already
2024-03-18 17:13:14 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so...what do people want to do about this? does anyone support voting it not-a-blocker, or do we want to wait to the go/no-go and consider waiving it?
2024-03-18 17:13:25 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> I waited too long to this "no"-waive
2024-03-18 17:14:05 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> I waited too long to this "no-waive" 
2024-03-18 17:14:06 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I mean, I would prefer to leave it as a blocker, and waive at least 40 Beta
2024-03-18 17:14:19 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> it's bad enough, breaks offline updates and upgrades on supported HW
2024-03-18 17:14:24 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I agree, pragmatically I want it to stand as a blocker, but also be waived
2024-03-18 17:14:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> okay
2024-03-18 17:14:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> let's just note it, then
2024-03-18 17:14:32 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> So it doesn't lose it's mystical power
2024-03-18 17:14:43 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> So it doesn't lose its mystical power
2024-03-18 17:14:49 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> it may stay that way longer than shim, we'll see :D
2024-03-18 17:15:13 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info we note that this is sadly still outstanding, we were hoping to have figured out some kind of fix during this cycle but we clearly didn't. We believe it should remain as a blocker for now, but expect to consider waiving it again at the go/no-go meeting
2024-03-18 17:15:41 <@adamwill:fedora.im> okay, so that's all for beta, i believe
2024-03-18 17:15:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> moving on to:
2024-03-18 17:15:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Proposed Final blockers
2024-03-18 17:16:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposal in the interests of time: let's skip the mutter ones that should be fixed by the 46.0 update for now
2024-03-18 17:16:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> since we can assume they'll get closed before we really have to worry about blocker status
2024-03-18 17:16:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> sound good?
2024-03-18 17:16:28 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Sure
2024-03-18 17:16:38 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> yep
2024-03-18 17:16:39 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ok
2024-03-18 17:16:45 <@humaton:fedora.im> yes
2024-03-18 17:16:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ok
2024-03-18 17:16:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2269361) Can't login to Cockpit web interface as root
2024-03-18 17:16:50 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> yes
2024-03-18 17:16:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269361
2024-03-18 17:16:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, cockpit, NEW
2024-03-18 17:17:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: BetaBlocker (+0,0,-2) (-adamwill, -sgallagh)
2024-03-18 17:17:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-2) (-adamwill, -nielsenb)
2024-03-18 17:17:21 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> oh.. i'd noticed that on RHEL 9 a few weeks ago and thought it was just some new "feature" :D 
2024-03-18 17:17:26 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it is a feature, yeah
2024-03-18 17:17:45 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it just surprised kparal, and there is I guess an argument against the feature, but...it was an intentional change
2024-03-18 17:18:13 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> glad the message is fixed. that one was definitely confusing.
2024-03-18 17:18:28 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: around? i believe it was you who wanted to argue in favor of this one
2024-03-18 17:19:22 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Semi-here, yes
2024-03-18 17:19:31 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i'm willing to buy the argument that we should maybe have anaconda allow this when you install without an admin user, or something, but i don't think i buy it as a blocker
2024-03-18 17:19:42 <@humaton:fedora.im> on one hand its a feature but we should not produce installation without working cockpit
2024-03-18 17:20:01 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Definitely not a beta blocker (as I noted when I voted -1 for that)
2024-03-18 17:20:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i acknowledge the criterion proposal as valid, but as it's a conditional violation the determinate is subjective and my subjective opinion is not-blocker :D
2024-03-18 17:20:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i acknowledge the criterion proposal as valid, but as it's a conditional violation the decision is subjective and my subjective opinion is not-blocker :D
2024-03-18 17:20:19 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: we're on final blocker now
2024-03-18 17:20:59 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> so its a new feature request?
2024-03-18 17:21:06 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> This wouldn't pass muster for the "last blocker at Go/No-Go", so I guess -1 FinalBlocker
2024-03-18 17:21:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> jkonecny: wdyt about having anaconda tweak the cockpit config here like it does the ssh config?
2024-03-18 17:21:28 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> But I really dislike the idea that we let you create a system you cannot log into
2024-03-18 17:21:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> geraldosimiao: i would say the concepts get a bit fuzzy :D
2024-03-18 17:21:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: i mean, technically you *can* log into it, right? via direct ssh. you just can't get into it via cockpit.
2024-03-18 17:21:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i guess if you're not exposing the ssh port...
2024-03-18 17:22:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> adamw: Not if you didn't check that box for SSH...
2024-03-18 17:22:39 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> If you create only a root user, you need physical access to get in at all.
2024-03-18 17:23:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh, yeah. well...i mean...i guess that was also the case before cockpit
2024-03-18 17:23:07 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Which we do not warn about either.
2024-03-18 17:23:39 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I think this is -1 in all ways by now
2024-03-18 17:23:45 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> adamw: Which is why the checkbox for SSH exists :)
2024-03-18 17:24:15 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> At least the existence of that checkbox provides a hint that if you don't click it, you might be locked out
2024-03-18 17:24:19 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> -1 FinalBlocker, maybe a FinalFE
2024-03-18 17:25:14 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Yeah, I wouldn't block on this if push came to shove
2024-03-18 17:25:17 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> FinalBlocker -1
2024-03-18 17:25:33 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Anyway, I agree that this wouldn't block the actual Go decision, which means it's not a blocker.
2024-03-18 17:25:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> okay, seems like we have a consensus
2024-03-18 17:25:59 <@adamwill:fedora.im> but i definitely agree you've sufficiently argued that it's a situation we should fix somehow, sgallagh
2024-03-18 17:27:09 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2269361 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - this is rejected as we all agree it can be argued as a conditional violation of the criteria, but our subjective opinion (as is required for conditional violations) is that it's not a serious enough case to count as a blocker. it has been the case for several releases without major complaints
2024-03-18 17:27:32 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:27:44 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 17:27:51 <@humaton:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:27:56 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2024-03-18 17:28:02 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:28:14 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Ack
2024-03-18 17:28:16 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:28:27 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:28:34 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2269361 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - this is rejected as we all agree it can be argued as a conditional violation of the criteria, but our subjective opinion (as is required for conditional violations) is that it's not a serious enough case to count as a blocker. it has been the case for several releases without major complaints
2024-03-18 17:28:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2268583) [abrt] gnome-software: gtk_widget_get_parent_muxer.constprop.0(): gnome-software killed by SIGSEGV
2024-03-18 17:28:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2268583
2024-03-18 17:28:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1513
2024-03-18 17:28:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, gtk4, NEW
2024-03-18 17:28:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+1,0,-0) (+catanzaro)
2024-03-18 17:29:00 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+2,1,-0) (+asciiwolf, +catanzaro, nielsenb)
2024-03-18 17:30:08 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Hopefully fixed by the new pull?
2024-03-18 17:30:13 <@adamwill:fedora.im> no...it wouldn't be
2024-03-18 17:30:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> actually that's interesting, because i hadn't thought about this complication
2024-03-18 17:30:24 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Dangit
2024-03-18 17:30:38 <@adamwill:fedora.im> everyone testing the 46.0 update to gnome-shell/mutter is probably testing it *on top of the 46-rc megaupdate*
2024-03-18 17:30:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> but if we pull the 46.0 gnome-shell update we will be pulling it on top of 46-beta everything else
2024-03-18 17:31:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well...we could also pull the rc megaupdate as part of that...maybe we should...
2024-03-18 17:32:33 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Makes sense to me
2024-03-18 17:32:42 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> In a "living dangerously" kind of way
2024-03-18 17:32:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> should we circle back to 2267754 and clarify our decision there?
2024-03-18 17:33:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info discussion on this bug indicated that our decision on 2267554 was not 100% clear, so we are gonna circle back to that temporarily
2024-03-18 17:33:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2267754) Include GNOME Shell (etc.) 46 in Fedora 40 Beta
2024-03-18 17:34:34 <@adamwill:fedora.im> coming back to this: we didn't make it clear whether we were sanctioning the inclusion of https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-1ed0b13d87 *only* (that's the 46.0 update for gnome-shell/mutter), or also sanctioning the pull of https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-a74ce3e5c4 (that's the 46.0-rc update for all other GNOME components)
2024-03-18 17:35:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> do we intend to include both, or only one? I guess I'd tend to include both, as that's what people will have been testing from updates-testing. only including the RC one is not viable because of the keyboard layout issue.
2024-03-18 17:35:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I would go with both
2024-03-18 17:35:35 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Both
2024-03-18 17:35:36 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yep, me to
2024-03-18 17:36:09 <@humaton:fedora.im> both
2024-03-18 17:36:13 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> agreed
2024-03-18 17:36:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ok
2024-03-18 17:36:19 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> both
2024-03-18 17:36:30 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> for push reasons, shall I create a separate bz as a fe for the rest of the stack?
2024-03-18 17:36:40 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> wait, i'll change mine to : neither, just to be difficult
2024-03-18 17:36:40 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah
2024-03-18 17:36:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed we clarify that the FE granted to this bug intends to cover the inclusion of both https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-a74ce3e5c4 and https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-1ed0b13d87
2024-03-18 17:36:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> František Zatloukal: not necessary, we can just mark both updates as fixing the bug
2024-03-18 17:37:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> blockerbugs handles that fine
2024-03-18 17:37:07 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we do it quite a lot
2024-03-18 17:38:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ok, back to the gtk on
2024-03-18 17:38:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info returning to the proposed Final blocker bug we were previously discussing
2024-03-18 17:38:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2268583) [abrt] gnome-software: gtk_widget_get_parent_muxer.constprop.0(): gnome-software killed by SIGSEGV
2024-03-18 17:38:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info as this will likely be fixed by the Beta FE now, let's skip it for time reasons
2024-03-18 17:38:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> aaand moving on!
2024-03-18 17:39:05 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:39:14 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:39:26 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:39:30 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 17:39:50 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 😁 I think I ack without need LOL
2024-03-18 17:39:57 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> 😁😁
2024-03-18 17:39:57 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:40:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> hehe
2024-03-18 17:40:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> sorry, just doing the bz bureaucracy
2024-03-18 17:40:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> next bug coming in a sec
2024-03-18 17:40:25 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> we're just keeping the TCP session alive
2024-03-18 17:40:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2267951) [abrt] gnome-shell: gnome-shell killed by SIGBUS
2024-03-18 17:40:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267951
2024-03-18 17:40:34 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1496
2024-03-18 17:40:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, mutter, NEW
2024-03-18 17:40:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+1,1,-1) (+lruzicka, geraldosimiao, -nielsenb)
2024-03-18 17:41:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so, this one is *not* fixed in 46.0 final I believe
2024-03-18 17:41:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> do we think it's bad enough to block on?
2024-03-18 17:42:26 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it seems like so far it only crashes lruzicka's PC, so it's all about our personal feelings about lruzicka ;)
2024-03-18 17:42:55 <@humaton:fedora.im> looking at bz there is no reproducer :/
2024-03-18 17:43:21 <@humaton:fedora.im> I like lruzicka but I dont like his computer, can we vote on new computer for him?
2024-03-18 17:43:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> from the upstream PR jadahl has an idea what's going on, but it may not be fixable in mutter...
2024-03-18 17:43:30 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I do worry it's going to be on of those deals where if we don't block on it, it'll turn out it happens to everybody, all the time
2024-03-18 17:43:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> jednorozec: only if you're paying
2024-03-18 17:43:37 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> he was using chromium... one more motiv to use only FF
2024-03-18 17:43:41 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> :)
2024-03-18 17:43:42 <@humaton:fedora.im> hum
2024-03-18 17:43:53 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> But I'm still a soft -1
2024-03-18 17:44:26 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Doesn't appear super widespread right now, and a fix can just be pulled in as a regular update
2024-03-18 17:44:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Brandon Nielsen: well...we have quite a lot of people running f40 at this point and no other reporters afaict
2024-03-18 17:45:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i haven't hit it, but then i don't use chromium
2024-03-18 17:45:02 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Right, no mercy for Chromium or Java users
2024-03-18 17:45:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> unfortunately the FAF link doesn't work
2024-03-18 17:45:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so i can't see offhand if we have any dupes in FAF
2024-03-18 17:46:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> on the whole i think i'm -1 for now, would revote if we got indications more people hit this
2024-03-18 17:46:11 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Also Chromium based?
2024-03-18 17:46:31 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> (eg. Chrome like I am using? 😅😅)
2024-03-18 17:46:39 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Right
2024-03-18 17:46:50 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> elinks only
2024-03-18 17:46:55 <@humaton:fedora.im> -1 until there is reproducer
2024-03-18 17:47:26 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> FinalBlocker -1
2024-03-18 17:47:45 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ok, I'll set on FinalBlocker -1
2024-03-18 17:48:02 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> -1 FB
2024-03-18 17:48:09 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2267951 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - this is rejected for now as there seems to be no indication anyone but lruzicka has hit it yet, so it's too narrow in scope to block the release. But as Shell crashers are very serious, we will reconsider this if we see any indication anyone else is running into it
2024-03-18 17:48:15 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:48:18 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:48:21 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:48:23 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:48:31 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2267951 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - this is rejected for now as there seems to be no indication anyone but lruzicka has hit it yet, so it's too narrow in scope to block the release. But as Shell crashers are very serious, we will reconsider this if we see any indication anyone else is running into it
2024-03-18 17:48:42 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we may actually get data once the Beta is out that indicates one way or another
2024-03-18 17:48:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2266050) [abrt] plasma-workspace-libs: _execute_child(): subprocess.py:1953:_execute_child:FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'qtpaths'
2024-03-18 17:48:44 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:48:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266050
2024-03-18 17:48:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1481
2024-03-18 17:48:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Conan Kudo: indeed
2024-03-18 17:48:55 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, plasma-workspace, NEW
2024-03-18 17:48:58 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,0,-0) (+nielsenb, +lruzicka, +geraldosimiao)
2024-03-18 17:49:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so this has +3 but i did wanna just bring it up as i'm not sure anyone's *reproduced* it yet
2024-03-18 17:49:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i meant to do a kde install here and see, didn't get to it yet
2024-03-18 17:49:40 <@adamwill:fedora.im> in theory i'd be +1, though, if it really is happening out of the box on a clean kde install and generating a notification
2024-03-18 17:50:16 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it shouldn't happen on clean installs, only upgrades
2024-03-18 17:50:31 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Ah, I never tried an upgrade
2024-03-18 17:50:49 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> and is only HDR Conan Kudo ?
2024-03-18 17:50:56 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> no
2024-03-18 17:51:02 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the failed service is about configuration migration
2024-03-18 17:51:14 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I think HDR is a coincidence
2024-03-18 17:51:16 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I'm on a F40 KDE upgraded system
2024-03-18 17:51:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ah, okay
2024-03-18 17:51:40 <@adamwill:fedora.im> that would explain why openqa doesn't see it
2024-03-18 17:51:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the part that is dying here is the stuff that updates the configuration from older Plasma releases to the current one
2024-03-18 17:51:45 <@adamwill:fedora.im> that makes it a bit more ambiguously blocker-y for me...
2024-03-18 17:51:57 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so it's actually quite serious, but difficult to capture in QA
2024-03-18 17:52:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well, it probably *happens* in openqa, but we don't check for notifications in the upgrade tests
2024-03-18 17:52:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Conan Kudo: oh, so the crash does have real effects?
2024-03-18 17:52:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> what config is it that's not getting migrated?
2024-03-18 17:52:29 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> but he said somthing different "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266050#c10"
2024-03-18 17:52:37 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 1. Downlod fedora-kde-live-x86_64-40-20240303.n.1.iso image
2. Installed normally on real hardware not on Virtual Machine.
3. After installation finished just rebooted normally and got this bug on first login.

Also there is a static noise screen for a moment or two before login scrren appears.

2024-03-18 17:52:48 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> well, in this case, if a user is using a particular plugin that needs migrating and it doesn't migrate, part of the desktop can be broken
2024-03-18 17:53:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> hum, well that sounds bad
2024-03-18 17:53:23 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> hmm, I wonder if it it's running it also to populate initial configs
2024-03-18 17:53:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i kinda get a blockery...*vibe*...from this bug, but the details just feel fuzzy :)
2024-03-18 17:53:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but regardless, the fault means that part of the configuration won't be correctly populated
2024-03-18 17:53:54 <@adamwill:fedora.im> still, on the whole i think i'd be cool with accepting it as a blocker for now, we can always reconsider later if circumstances warrant
2024-03-18 17:54:08 <@adamwill:fedora.im> any other votes?
2024-03-18 17:54:13 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but I don't know how severe this case is because it depends on how much config population is stops
2024-03-18 17:54:17 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> +1 FB
2024-03-18 17:54:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but I don't know how severe this case is because it depends on how much config population it stops
2024-03-18 17:54:38 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> +1 FB
2024-03-18 17:54:41 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> +1 FB
2024-03-18 17:54:51 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Now that I understand it better, I'm okay changing my vote
2024-03-18 17:54:53 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> FinalBlocker +1
2024-03-18 17:55:00 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> TY for clarifying Conan Kudo 
2024-03-18 17:55:17 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> likely we need to also forward this on to KDE upstream
2024-03-18 17:55:36 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> because I think the reason for the failure is that we're not detecting the correct binary names for Qt CLI tools
2024-03-18 17:56:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2266050 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - the details of this don't seem to be all nailed down yet, but it definitely seems concerning enough in a couple of ways to accept as a blocker for now: the crash notification may be a violation of the final criterion requiring no crash notifications on first boot if it's confirmed to affect clean installs, and the crash indicates that some configuration migration is failing on upgrades which could cause more serious consequences also
2024-03-18 17:56:20 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack.
2024-03-18 17:56:24 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:56:27 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 17:56:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:56:29 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 17:56:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2266050 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - the details of this don't seem to be all nailed down yet, but it definitely seems concerning enough in a couple of ways to accept as a blocker for now: the crash notification may be a violation of the final criterion requiring no crash notifications on first boot if it's confirmed to affect clean installs, and the crash indicates that some configuration migration is failing on upgrades which could cause more serious consequences also
2024-03-18 17:56:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2269286) Snapshot displays only solid pink image
2024-03-18 17:56:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269286
2024-03-18 17:56:51 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1517
2024-03-18 17:56:54 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, snapshot, NEW
2024-03-18 17:56:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-nielsenb)
2024-03-18 17:58:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh, i think the megaupdate would fix this? let's see if it's included
2024-03-18 17:58:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh, no, it isn't.
2024-03-18 17:59:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i'm a bit confused that mcatanzaro says this is fixed in snapshot 46, but mclasen says it needs a new gstreamer...
2024-03-18 17:59:33 <@adamwill:fedora.im> anyhow, on the whole i'd say this fails "must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test", so i'm gonna say +1 blocker
2024-03-18 18:00:08 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> +1 FB
2024-03-18 18:00:11 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> It starts, and it functions, you just can't check your hair before you start recording... :D
2024-03-18 18:00:12 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> FB +1, yeah
2024-03-18 18:00:45 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> the strange thing is: the image is captured
2024-03-18 18:01:00 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> the file is created accondingly and is fine
2024-03-18 18:01:03 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it's not really *that* strange given (boring technical details about how video capture works)
2024-03-18 18:01:04 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> +1 FB
2024-03-18 18:01:16 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> but the visual confirmation at the applet only shows ping
2024-03-18 18:01:22 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> but the visual confirmation at the applet only shows pink
2024-03-18 18:01:29 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I am not sure if the fix is easily backportable, it looks like it'll require a major gstreamer bump
2024-03-18 18:01:39 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> as f40 is on an older branch
2024-03-18 18:01:39 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> the file is created accordingly and is fine
2024-03-18 18:01:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2269286 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of the requirement for Workstation that all preinstalled apps must "start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test" - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality
2024-03-18 18:02:00 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 18:02:03 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-03-18 18:02:04 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 18:02:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> František Zatloukal: we can waive it as not-practically-fixable if necessary, i guess...
2024-03-18 18:02:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> or just remove the app (and replace it with the old thing, or something)
2024-03-18 18:02:15 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 18:02:17 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack then
2024-03-18 18:02:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2269286 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of the requirement for Workstation that all preinstalled apps must "start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test" - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality
2024-03-18 18:02:40 <@adamwill:fedora.im> okay, we're slightly over time but there's just one more wafer-thin bug
2024-03-18 18:02:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2269343) After update wireplumber to 0.4.90-1.fc41 version only headset mic is working when I connect bluetooth headset
2024-03-18 18:02:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269343
2024-03-18 18:02:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1518
2024-03-18 18:02:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, wireplumber, NEW
2024-03-18 18:02:52 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> the rawhide bug
2024-03-18 18:02:55 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-geraldosimiao)
2024-03-18 18:03:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well, it's at least potentially an f40 bug too, 0.4.90 was submitted to f40 and 0.5.0 is pending for it
2024-03-18 18:03:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d3a88f9d74
2024-03-18 18:03:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> but indeed it's not in stable yet
2024-03-18 18:04:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we could i guess ask the reporter to test with 0.5.0 and punt...
2024-03-18 18:05:54 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2269343 - punt (delay decision) - the affected wireplumber is not stable for F40 yet, and 0.5.0 has come out in the mean time. let's punt on this one and ask the reporter to test with 0.5.0. if 0.5.0 is broken, and it gets pushed stable for F40, then we can make a decision on it...
2024-03-18 18:05:57 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yeah, sounds fine
2024-03-18 18:05:58 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 18:06:08 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-03-18 18:06:22 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-03-18 18:06:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2269343 - punt (delay decision) - the affected wireplumber is not stable for F40 yet, and 0.5.0 has come out in the mean time. let's punt on this one and ask the reporter to test with 0.5.0. if 0.5.0 is broken, and it gets pushed stable for F40, then we can make a decision on it...
2024-03-18 18:06:37 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Open floor
2024-03-18 18:06:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so, real quick: I am kinda inclined to do another candidate even if peter can't come up with a pi 400 fix
2024-03-18 18:06:53 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Open floor!
2024-03-18 18:06:54 <@adamwill:fedora.im> there's just a *lot* of FE stuff it would be nice to get in
2024-03-18 18:06:58 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> can anyone help the SOAS dev?
2024-03-18 18:07:04 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Do it
2024-03-18 18:07:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> @farribeiro:matrix.org: don't fall in!
2024-03-18 18:07:06 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> please?
2024-03-18 18:07:10 <@adamwill:fedora.im> does anyone hate this plan?
2024-03-18 18:07:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> geraldosimiao: i can try and take a look if i get time...
2024-03-18 18:07:22 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> LoL
2024-03-18 18:07:26 <@adamwill:fedora.im> but we *do* have a workaround for that bug at least, so it's not been super high priority for me
2024-03-18 18:07:29 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> fyi, secretary work is done (but the last punt, will handle that in a bit), so bba templates should be up2date for push requests and other work
2024-03-18 18:07:35 <@adamwill:fedora.im> thanks František Zatloukal !
2024-03-18 18:07:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> František Zatloukal++
2024-03-18 18:07:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> (is that how you do that? i dunno)
2024-03-18 18:08:04 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> probably no, good ol irc... :D
2024-03-18 18:08:05 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> you can use !cookie František Zatloukal  i think -- or just add a cookie emji :D 
2024-03-18 18:08:10 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> just give a cookie at matrix
2024-03-18 18:08:20 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> or maybe !cookie give? 🤔
2024-03-18 18:08:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> just go buy yourself a cookie, franta :D
2024-03-18 18:08:33 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Yes... Cookie give Works
2024-03-18 18:08:34 <@adamwill:fedora.im> any other thoughts?
2024-03-18 18:08:35 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao has already given cookies to frantisekz during the F39 timeframe
2024-03-18 18:08:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> while I go get my tennis kit on :P
2024-03-18 18:08:57 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> no other thoughs now
2024-03-18 18:09:07 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> i try to think as little as possible
2024-03-18 18:12:35 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to frantisekz. They now have 49 cookies, 5 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 18:13:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> excellent plan
2024-03-18 18:13:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> okay, thanks for coming out, everyone
2024-03-18 18:13:27 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> whe should give us cookies more often
2024-03-18 18:13:38 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> thanks for running the show adamw !
2024-03-18 18:13:41 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I'm still hungry :)
2024-03-18 18:13:48 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yep, thanks adamw and all!
2024-03-18 18:13:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i'm out for a couple of hours, then will try and pull together a new compose request
2024-03-18 18:14:00 <@zodbot:fedora.im> neil gave a cookie to adamwill. They now have 240 cookies, 11 of which were obtained in the Fedora 39 release cycle
2024-03-18 18:14:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !endmeeting