===================================== # #blocker-review:fedoraproject.org: F40-blocker-review ===================================== Meeting started by @adamwill:fedora.im at 2024-04-08 16:00:03 Meeting summary --------------- * TOPIC: Roll Call (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:00:06) * TOPIC: Introduction (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:04:38) * 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. (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:04:47) * INFO: We'll be following the process outlined at: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:04:51) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:04:54) * INFO: The bugs up for review today are available at: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:04:57) * LINK: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:01) * INFO: The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:04) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:06) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Beta_Release_Criteria (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:09) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:12) * INFO: for Fedora 40 Final, we have: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:23) * INFO: 4 Proposed Blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:31) * INFO: 1 Accepted Blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:34) * INFO: 1 Accepted Previous Release Blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:36) * INFO: 1 Proposed Freeze Exceptions (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:38) * INFO: 7 Accepted Freeze Exceptions (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:41) * TOPIC: Proposed Final blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:50) * TOPIC: (2273497) snapshot crashes on launch or after taking a picture, console error "thread 'main' has overflowed its stack", backtrace is 4000+ frames and inc "Cannot access memory at address 0xffffffffffffffff" (Logitech C920 camera) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:05:58) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2273497 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:06:00) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1560 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:06:03) * INFO: Proposed Blocker, gtk4, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:06:05) * INFO: Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+2,0,-0) (+frantisekz, +geraldosimiao) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:06:08) * AGREED: 2273497 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted both because a crash on a widely-used camera model (we found three affected people easily) is bad enough to block on its own, and we found other issues in snapshot in testing (for nirik it doesn't crash but never shows anything, and many folks found it shows 'No Camera Found' when run from overview). we recommend that we revert to Cheese again for F40 final (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:21:33) * TOPIC: (2274006) [Fedora KDE] Unable to Boot - no kernel-core installed thus no bootloader entry (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:22:35) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2274006 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:22:40) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1575 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:22:43) * INFO: Proposed Blocker, kernel, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:22:45) * AGREED: 2274006 - punt (delay decision) - we are waiting for further logs from the reporter to determine what happened to them here, it seems to have been a bootloader install failure. We need to know that to fully evaluate this (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:33:32) * TOPIC: (2273737) [abrt] plasma-systemmonitor: QHashPrivate::iterator >::node(): plasma-systemmonitor killed by SIGSEGV (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:33:39) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2273737 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:33:42) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1572 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:33:45) * INFO: Proposed Blocker, plasma-systemmonitor, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:33:48) * INFO: Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+1,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 16:33:51) * AGREED: 2273737 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of Final criterion "For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following applications must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test: ...". system monitor is not in the current list, but there is a strong consensus at the meeting (including KDE SIG folks) that this was an oversight in drafting the list and it should always have been there. We will amend the list, and accept this bug in the meantime (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:01:50) * TOPIC: (2273942) SDDM also displays users with disabled logins (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:02:00) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2273942 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:02:02) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1574 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:02:05) * INFO: Proposed Blocker, sddm, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:02:07) * INFO: Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:02:10) * AGREED: 2273942 - RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is rejected as a blocker; it's arguably a conditional criterion violation, but only with a fairly unusual condition (manually-created user account with UID >1000 and no login shell). We do grant it an FE, though; if we do want to change the default list of shells that cause a user to be hidden it seems reasonable to do that for release (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:09:45) * TOPIC: Proposed Final freeze exceptions (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:10:10) * TOPIC: (2270397) container images built from unsigned packages (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:10:17) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270397 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:10:19) * LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1573 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:10:21) * INFO: Proposed Freeze Exceptions, distribution, ASSIGNED (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:10:24) * INFO: Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+ngompa) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:10:26) * AGREED: 2270397 - RejectedFreezeException (Final) - this is clearly an important problem and we want to fix it, but an F40 Final freeze exception is no use in doing that, as the fix needs to be applied to the builders, which run Fedora 39. What we need is an infrastructure freeze break request, nirik has proposed one on the mailing list, we need releng/sysadmin-main members to vote on that at https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/XFJATU5DDOUDLF7DCBY6JG5CNLKQ4MAT/ (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:32:36) * TOPIC: Open floor (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:12) * INFO: the one previously-accepted blocker is ON_QA already, the ones accepted during the meeting will need addressing by relevant teams (KDE and GNOME) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:37) * INFO: we are still waiting for someone to come up with a bright idea to fix 2242759 (or implement one of the current potential bright ideas and show that it's workable). Aoife Moloney will try another email to poke that along (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:40:16) Meeting ended at 2024-04-08 17:44:45 Action items ------------ People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * @adamwill:fedora.im (189) * @conan_kudo:matrix.org (84) * @geraldosimiao:matrix.org (50) * @nirik:matrix.scrye.com (30) * @nielsenb:fedora.im (26) * @lruzicka:matrix.org (23) * @frantisekz:fedora.im (17) * @decathorpe:fedora.im (12) * @amoloney:fedora.im (11) * @marcdeop:matrix.org (8) * @zodbot:fedora.im (6) * @aleasto:matrix.org (3) * @meetbot:fedora.im (2) * @1vx:matrix.org (1)