#blocker-review:fedoraproject.org log

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:00:37

!startmeeting F44-blocker-review

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

16:00:38

Meeting started at 2026-04-13 16:00:37 UTC

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

16:00:38

The Meeting name is 'F44-blocker-review'

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:00:39

!topic Roll Call

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:00:45

hi hi folks, who's around for f44 blocker review fun?

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:00:51

!hi

<@jlinton:fedora.im>

16:00:54

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:00:55

Jocelyn (she/her) (Server WG: Docs): Jocelyn Gould (korora) - she / her / hers

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:01

Jeremy Linton: Jeremy Linton (jlinton)

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:01:02

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:04

Brandon Nielsen: Brandon Nielsen (nielsenb)

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:01:04

!hi Canadian Hockey Player

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:05

Sorry, I can only look up one username at a time

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:01:18

!hi

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:01:18

!hi Canadian

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:19

Sorry, but Fedora Accounts user 'Canadian' does not exist

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:01:21

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:22

Kamil Páral: Kamil Páral (kparal) - he / him / his

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:22

Christopher Boni: Christopher Boni (boniboyblue)

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:01:28

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:32

Lukáš Růžička: Lukáš Růžička (lruzicka)

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:01:47

!hi

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:01:48

hi lukasy

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:01:49

Jaroslav Groman: Jaroslav Groman (jgroman)

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:02:15

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:02:16

Derek Enz: Derek Enz (derekenz)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:02:53

how's everyone doing this fine monday morning

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:03:18

Fine thx you?

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:03:29

i'm doing alright

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:03:40

good good

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:04:04

ready to step on a bug's back

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:04:41

Ready for my dinner.

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:05:27

You eat bugs for dinner?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:06

nothing wrong with some nice juicy bugs

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:12

alrighty

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:22

boilerplate time

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!info The bugs up for review today are available at:

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!topic Introduction

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

Why are we here?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!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>

16:06:28

!info We'll be following the process outlined at:

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_44_Final_Release_Criteria

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_44_Beta_Release_Criteria

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:28

!link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:41

!info for Final, we have:

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:46

!info 4 Proposed Blockers

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:46

!info 5 Accepted Blockers

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:50

!info 4 Proposed Freeze Exceptions

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:06:50

!info 10 Accepted Freeze Exceptions

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:07:00

who wants to secretarialize?

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:07:16

I do

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:07:22

note i left some bugs which technically have a +/-3 vote in for the meeting, i figured this close to final we should be careful and cover all opinions

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:30

sorry, context switching

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:37

!info Lukáš Růžička will secretarialize

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:45

let's get started with:

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:48

!topic Proposed Final blockers

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:56

!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+4,1,-0) (+augenauf, +geraldosimiao, +derekenz, +nielsenb, kparal)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:56

!topic (2455855) Storage editor fails to prevent mounting btrfs / subv over /home subv

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:56

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2455855

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:56

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2096

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:56

!info Proposed Blocker, cockpit, NEW

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:09:56

!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+2,0,-0) (+kparal, +nielsenb)

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:10:07

which LLM are you using to spend context so quickly?

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:11:37

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:11:44

geraldosimiao: Geraldo S. Simião Kutz (geraldosimiao) - he / him / his

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:12:23

i'm a bit on the fence with this one

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:12:28

This seems like it's just going to "go away" with the mount option

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:12:30

I am not very sure about this being extremely blockery.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:12:36

it's a 'shoot yourself in the foot with a popgun' sort of thing

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:13:21

the cited criterion says "installer must reject invalid configurations without crashing" and, well, it does that

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:13:38

if you do this, it's awkward and weird, but it doesn't eat your data or blow up or anything. you can go back and fix it, or reboot and fix it

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:13:51

It's a niche case for me, not likely to happen too often, I believe

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:13:53

the proposed fixes certainly look like good improvements, though

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:14:03

and there's no hard consequence

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:14:31

Yeah, the only reason I could see letting this go is because there's not really any consequence except some annoyance

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:14:34

yeah...I think i'm -1 blocker, +1 fe

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:14:39

but you can't fix it in UI, you have to unmount manually

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:14:47

(for the FE i think i like the idea of just backporting the 'hide the mount button in webui' thing)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:14:58

sure, "awkward and weird"

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:15:19

I voted +0, but I feel closer to tilted towards -1 a bit

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:15:27

I voted +0, but I feel tilted towards -1 a bit

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:15:42

I'm -1 blocker, +1 fe as well

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:16:00

I only tilted +1 because of the "anything the spoke let's you do that's sane..." clarifying text

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:16:05

me too, but folks from askfedora won't be happy

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:16:16

Mounting seems sane, though I've never needed to mount anything from the installer

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:16:18

brilliant ideas like "hide the button that breaks stuff" are my specialty 😄

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:16:20

Alright, with that rationale I can revert to -1 blocker and go +1 FE

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:16:34

not sure I can credit the idea completely, but I did raise it 🙂

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:17:12

-1 FB, +1 FE

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:17:22

That's the thing, you don't need to mount anything, it just confuses people

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:17:43

Confuses people like the anaconda web ui

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:17:44

Ok with that being said FB -1 FE +1

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:18:14

Confuses people and the anaconda web ui

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:20:16

proposed !agreed 2455855 - RejectedBlocker (Final) Accepted FreezeException (Final) - this is an awkward corner case if you encounter it, but you have to do something that's not really *necessary* to hit it (try and mount partitions) and it doesn't crash the installer or eat any data, you just get a bit stuck. you can recover with a manual unmount, or by rebooting and trying again. We agreed this doesn't really clearly violate either the cited criterion or the Final "Disk layouts" criterion. It's accepted as an FE because we *would* like to fix this small footgun safely if possible.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:20:28

proposed !agreed 2455855 - RejectedBlocker (Final) Accepted FreezeException (Final) - this is an awkward corner case if you encounter it, but you have to do something that's not really *necessary* to hit it (try and mount filesystems) and it doesn't crash the installer or eat any data, you just get a bit stuck. you can recover with a manual unmount, or by rebooting and trying again. We agreed this doesn't really clearly violate either the cited criterion or the Final "Disk layouts" criterion. It's accepted as an FE because we *would* like to fix this small footgun safely if possible.

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:20:36

ack

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:20:42

ack

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:20:45

ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:20:48

ack

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:20:51

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:21:56

!agreed 2455855 - RejectedBlocker (Final) Accepted FreezeException (Final) - this is an awkward corner case if you encounter it, but you have to do something that's not really necessary to hit it (try and mount filesystems) and it doesn't crash the installer or eat any data, you just get a bit stuck. you can recover with a manual unmount, or by rebooting and trying again. We agreed this doesn't really clearly violate either the cited criterion or the Final "Disk layouts" criterion. It's accepted as an FE because we would like to fix this small footgun safely if possible.

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:22:06

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:22:15

!info Proposed Blocker, flatpak, MODIFIED

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:22:15

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2101

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:22:15

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2456353

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:22:15

!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+4,0,-0) (+asciiwolf, +ngompa, +geraldosimiao, +adamwill)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:22:15

!topic (2456353) flatpak-1.17.4 is available

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:22:15

!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+1,0,-4) (+asciiwolf, -boniboyblue, -nielsenb, -niknikovsky, -kparal)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:22:58

this is already accepted FE and will get pushed stable after the meeting, so let's not spend too much time on it i guess

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:23:22

Why should we block on a new release?

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:23:34

-1 FB

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:23:45

I'm -1 FB/+1 FE

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:24:02

!hi

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:24:03

I'm still FB -1

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:24:04

Ahmed Almeleh: Ahmed Almeleh (ahmedalmeleh) - he / him / his

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:24:04

CVEs, but both cited are rated Moderate by RH

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:24:12

if they were Important this could be a blocker

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:24:14

/hi

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:24:15

so i'm -1 on that basis

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:24:49

-1 FB +1 FE

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:05

proposed !agreed 2456353 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - the CVE criterion says CVEs rated Important or above on RH's scale can be blockers, and the two cited here are both Moderate. Note this is already accepted FE and will be pushed stable soon anyhow.

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:25:18

ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:25:19

ackey

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:25:19

ack

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:25:20

ack

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:25:23

ack

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:25:29

ack

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:25:41

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:41

!agreed 2456353 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - the CVE criterion says CVEs rated Important or above on RH's scale can be blockers, and the two cited here are both Moderate. Note this is already accepted FE and will be pushed stable soon anyhow.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:54

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2103

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:54

!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+7,0,-0) (+asciiwolf, +nielsenb, +augenauf, +boniboyblue, +geraldosimiao, +kparal, +derekenz)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:54

!info Proposed Blocker, gnome-shell-extension-background-logo, NEW

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:54

!topic (2457639) The background logo is too transparent and hard to see on F44

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:54

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2457639

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:25:54

!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+2,0,-6) (+asciiwolf, +petersen, -augenauf, -nielsenb, -derekenz, -boniboyblue, -geraldosimiao, -kparal)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:26:04

so we have a -4 vote here, but i figured let's bring it up at the meeting just to be safe

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:26:21

i think we did previously accept this branding being entirely *missing* as a blocker, in one cycle?

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:27:04

-1 FB/+1 FE

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:27:14

But it's not entirely missing. And we don't even do the watermark for KDE.

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:27:25

-1 FB / +1 FE

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:27:55

It's also only for light mode users. The dark mode is fine.

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:27:59

I believe this is being currently worked on by the fedora workstation team

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:28:08

(or the design team, uncertain)

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:28:18

yes

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:28:44

Its not serious enough to be a blocker -1 FB

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:28:56

+1 FE nice to have clearer though

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:29:29

For the reasons above

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:29:29

+1 FE

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:29:29

-1 FB

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:29:36

don't think asciiwolf is around to defend the proposal

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:30:27

proposed !agreed 2457639 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - we agreed this isn't serious enough to constitute a violation of the artwork criteria. The watermark *is* present and visible, just a bit subtle; it's also not really an issue on the dark mode wallpaper.

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:30:40

ack

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:30:44

ack

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:30:46

What about accepted FE?

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:30:51

ack

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:31:00

acky ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:07

!agreed 2457639 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - we agreed this isn't serious enough to constitute a violation of the artwork criteria. The watermark is present and visible, just a bit subtle; it's also not really an issue on the dark mode wallpaper.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:18

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2456896

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:18

!topic (2456896) Raspberry Pi 4 KDE fails to boot into GUI without nomodeset on 4K KVM

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:18

!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+5,0,-1) (+derekenz, +ngompa, +geraldosimiao, +boniboyblue, +nielsenb, -pbrobinson)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:18

!info Proposed Blocker, kwin, NEW

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:18

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2099

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:32

so this one got a lot of initial momentum but the picture seems a bit more complicated now

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:31:48

if we're only sure it's failing on one specific monitor/KVM that seems less obviously blocker-y

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:32:13

Yeah that seems to be the case

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:32:18

peter robinson is AFK atm but he told me: "my general opinion is that it's likely the KVM monitor thing and doesn't appear to be a widespread problem AFAICT, it looks to be just affecting KDE too, so likely some capability that the device reports via EDID that Kwin picks up on that other desktops don't maybe? I am by no means a display/EDID/wayland capabilities specialist though."

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:32:36

also "and the tester confirmed it works on another device, I have tested it on my monitors, as has at least @pwhalen has tested on another 4K monitor"

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:32:49

do we know if this affects also 4K monitors, or just 4K KVM?

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:33:11

I don't think this is serious enough to be a blocker, but up to y'all

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:33:24

KDE does do stuff with high refresh rate / VRR for gaming, right? could be involved?

<@jlinton:fedora.im>

16:33:27

Possibly, just very high refresh 4k monitors? Would be nice to know the model that is having a problem.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:33:28

and HDR...

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:33:29

Yeah, this is starting to feel really hardware specific to me.

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:33:33

According to the issue, it's also present in F43-1.6

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:33:34

I filed the bug but I do not have 4K monitor to test it.

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:34:05

It might be just my chinesium KVM though.

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:34:55

However Gnome handles it gracefully

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:35:03

This feels like hardware... -1 FB/+1 FE

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:35:05

so it looks like: you hit the bug with the 4K KVM attached and a 2K monitor attached to the KVM. you don't hit the bug with the 2K monitor attached directly. you don't have a 4K monitor to test how that would go with/without the KVM

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:35:06

is that right?

<@jlinton:fedora.im>

16:35:27

Given i'm always having USB-C monitor issues with fedora, i'm a -1 FB too

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:35:57

It is either KVM or 2K monitor but otherwise you are right.

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:35:58

-1 FB

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:35:58

+1 FE

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:35:58

Hardware issue that seems to be unrelated to Fedora 44.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:36:10

yeah, on the whole so far this has the 'tied to this specific KVM' feeling to me...i'm -1 at this stage, could reconsider based on future info

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:36:30

Same

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:36:42

FinaleBlocker -1

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:36:49

-1 FB +1 FE

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:37:01

Yes, agreed. FB -1

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:37:33

can anyone tell me if this specific combination is too widespread or not?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:37:33

Derek Enz Conan Kudo 🤒 what say you? you're both +1 atm

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:37:49

*is it me or does this feel like participating in the stock market*

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:37:56

geraldosimiao so far, AFAICT, we only know that Jaroslav's specific KVM switch is affected by this

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:37:59

I can revert my vote too if its too corner case

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:38:10

some arm folks did test with 4K monitors directly attached to Pis and it worked

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:38:11

With more info here ill change to FB -1 FE +1

<@kashyapc:fedora.im>

16:38:15

It doesn't seem to be wide-spread, from my quick reading.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:38:25

it's all about vibes

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:38:26

FinalBlocker -1

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:38:32

-1 FB, +1 FE

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:38:34

it's a lot like that, except you never make any money!

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:38:41

Since nobody else was complaining so far it seems to be niche problem.

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:38:46

Hmm, I thought this was effecting all Raspberry Pi's so I'm going to revert to FB -1.

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:38:51

~~Just like real stocks to be honest~~

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:38:52

ok, so -1 FB and +1 FE

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:38:58

It works for me on my LG regular LCD

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:39:09

I have seen issues with a 4K HDMI KVM on my x86 PC, but not quite the same ones

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:39:14

~~Just like real stocks, especially crypto to be honest~~

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:39:28

mine is that kwin just gets stuck and then pressing buttons makes it work somehow

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:40:00

How wide spread of an issue?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:40:28

well sample size = 2 🤷‍♂️

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:40:48

We need a third for balance. LOL

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:41:04

I think we should address this when a third issue is opened

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:41:09

And skip it for now

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:41:30

proposed !agreed 2456896 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - it's seeming like this issue is not a general "all Pi 4s and all 4K displays" issue, but more of a "specific problem between kwin and some strange EDID data from the tested KVM switch" issue. On that basis we reject it per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ#What_about_hardware_and_local_configuration_dependent_issues? , but we will keep an eye on further investigation results and can reconsider if necessary

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:41:36

I'm ok with that. I'm still -1 FB/+1 FE

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:41:40

ack

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:41:48

ack

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:41:51

ack

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:41:53

ack

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:41:54

ack

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:41:56

ack

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:41:59

ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:42:00

ackintosh

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:42:06

ack

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:42:09

ack

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:42:15

ack

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:42:19

Just my 0,07PLN though

<@jlinton:fedora.im>

16:42:54

ack, but we probably should at some point make a larger effort to assure that USB-C docks, MST, HDR, etc are more widly supported.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:43:08

!agreed 2456896 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - it's seeming like this issue is not a general "all Pi 4s and all 4K displays" issue, but more of a "specific problem between kwin and some strange EDID data from the tested KVM switch" issue. On that basis we reject it per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ#What_about_hardware_and_local_configuration_dependent_issues? , but we will keep an eye on further investigation results and can reconsider if necessary

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:43:18

yes

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:43:21

Just my 0,08PLN though

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:43:33

!info that's all the proposed blockers, moving onto:

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:43:36

we should probably identify popular docks and add them to the test matrix on x86 and arm

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:43:38

!topic Proposed Final freeze exceptions

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:43:57

I use a popular KVM switch and I do get problems occasionally and it's annoying to validate with sample =1

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:43:59

Probably not a bad idea

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:44:02

I use a popular KVM switch and I do get problems occasionally and it's annoying to validate with sample = 1

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:44:12

i suspect 'popular docks' is 'whatever they sell in apple stores plus whatever you can buy off amazon for $20 this week'

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:44:41

there are a few well-known brands used in offices

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:44:47

Or AliExpress for 500 vietnamese dongs

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:44:47

and there's the kvm switches in monitors

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:44:53

those are becoming more common

<@kepstin:kepstin.ca>

16:45:10

There's probably a limited number of DP-HDMI and MST chips used in cheap docks, so representative samples might be sufficient.

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:45:18

I need to get a 3 port KVM that has two USB-C hubs in it...

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:45:39

Back to the this eventually?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:47:07

yeah, was just letting the discussion play out

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:47:15

!info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, kf6, ON_QA

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:47:15

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2102

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:47:15

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2457573

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:47:15

!topic (2457573) FE: KDE Frameworks 6.25.0 + Plasma 6.6.4

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:47:15

!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+3,0,-1) (+geraldosimiao, +derekenz, +boniboyblue, -nielsenb)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:47:44

so i'm +1 in theory, but since we may actually have a chance of Go this week, i might not want to pull this in...

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:48:05

So I believe that this is updating the KDE spin to those versions?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:48:21

yes, that's the idea

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:48:31

well, I might wind up including the FE fix for plasma-setup in that update

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:48:35

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:48:42

I'm pretty sure I know how to fix the dark mode thing now

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:48:49

we typically give gnome and kde some leeway to do bugfix updates in final freeze and slightly late pushes of new releases in beta freeze, but i don't particularly like to do it three days before a go/no-go decision

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:48:49

I just need to actually write the patch and test it

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:48:56

ohh thats lovely

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:49:05

I'm here to test it

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:49:13

You mean the light mode wallpaper thing or..?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:49:29

Conan Kudo 🤒 it'd be nice to have specific FE bug fixes separate from huge platform-wide updates :/

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:49:51

unfortunately it's not really possible anymore

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:49:54

no, thats gnome. the KDE thing is with icon at the menu

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:49:58

if I had figured out the problem last week, sure

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:50:03

but not now

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:50:04

Lots of good karma in the update so I'm still FE +1

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

16:50:15

niknikovsky has already given cookies to ngompa during the F43 timeframe

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:50:20

FE +1

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:50:24

all things are possible if you believe hard enough

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:50:35

(and are willing to whack git with a big enough stick)

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:50:41

Except for [content blocked]

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:50:52

lol

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

16:51:00

that would probably mean "revert in git, apply fix to old version, build, submit as separate update, drop package from the large update" ? (if that's even possible)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:51:08

i'm fine with +1 in principle, we can think about whether to actually land it when building the next candidate

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:51:14

+1 FE

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:51:26

'drop package from the large update' is probably not necessary, two updates for same package can co-exist with different NVRs

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:51:28

From what I'm reading though it seems we might need to also give this a FE: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-bef0050737

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

16:51:37

still ugly :)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:52:18

i have done this on more than one occasion, heh

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:52:19

anyhow

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:52:28

that one involves CVE fixes, so that probably can FE right through

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:53:00

And probably safer from some potential future CVE fixes

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:53:07

proposed !agreed 2457573 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted in principle as it's good to get the latest upstream fixes in the release. However, we may decide not to pull it into an RC aimed at approval on Thursday (if that comes to pass) due to tight timing

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:53:20

ack

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:53:24

ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

16:53:25

ack

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

16:53:28

ack

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:53:30

ack

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

16:53:38

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:53:38

has anyone proposed it? it needs to be proposed

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:53:40

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:53:47

- AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted in principle as it's good to get the latest upstream fixes in the release. However, we may decide not to pull it into an RC aimed at approval on Thursday (if that comes to pass) due to tight timing

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:53:48

grr

<@ahmedalmeleh:matrix.org>

16:53:52

ack

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:54:04

Doesn't look like it.

<@kparal:matrix.org>

16:54:06

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:54:06

!agreed 2457573 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted in principle as it's good to get the latest upstream fixes in the release. However, we may decide not to pull it into an RC aimed at approval on Thursday (if that comes to pass) due to tight timing

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:54:13

I'll get the command

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:54:21

Ok?

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:54:27

Nvm

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

16:54:29

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:54:48

!topic (2456893) CVE-2026-39860 nix: privilege escalation via symlink following during output registration [fedora-all]

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:54:48

!info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, nix, ON_QA

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:54:48

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2105

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:54:48

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2456893

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:54:55

oh good more CVEs

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:55:39

~~CVEez nuts~~

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:55:44

Okay that was not good

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:56:11

patrick-boo.gif

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:56:33

is nix in any images?

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:56:56

The Linux distro?

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:57:14

No, but I do believe it's a F44 change.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:57:36

the tool this bug is about

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:58:06

ehhh, i guess FE is fiiiiine

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:58:10

weak +1

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

16:58:38

I don't think nix is preinstalled anywhere. but it's *already* in F44 (and older branches) so it would be nice not to ship OOTB with a broken version

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:58:39

Yeah

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

16:58:43

FinalFE +1

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

16:58:56

Nah - nix is the package manager.

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:59:22

Okay then

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:59:23

nixos is the distro

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

16:59:35

nixair is the airline

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:59:40

I'll hold my vote off then since I clearly don't know what is going on

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

16:59:44

From the report a FE +1 seems good

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

16:59:51

And what? Nixmobile is a carrier?

<@korora:fedora.im>

16:59:53

Yeah, this is one of those “this isn’t confusing at all”

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

17:00:07

I'm FE +1

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:00:40

proposed !agreed - 2456893 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted as it's nice to fix CVEs in the stable repo for folks installing or upgrading ahead of release. It's not a blocker as nix isn't included in any release-blocking images by default.

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:00:47

Why does TMobile show up when searching that

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:00:53

ack

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

17:00:58

ack

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:01:01

I’m abstaining on this one

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:01:15

I'm opting to remain neutral

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:01:21

no, it was actually founded years before the cellphone was invented, it's a cross-continent trucking company. confusing, huh?

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

17:01:23

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:01:31

Bob Nix really should've had a better idea than naming all his companies after himself

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:01:32

ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

17:01:33

ack

<@kparal:matrix.org>

17:01:48

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:01:57

!agreed - 2456893 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted as it's nice to fix CVEs in the stable repo for folks installing or upgrading ahead of release. It's not a blocker as nix isn't included in any release-blocking images by default.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:02:09

ugh i think i just broke my own house style about whether agreements end in a period. noooo

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:02:22

https://m.youtube.com/@nixmobile

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:02:22

It's also a YouTube channel

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:02:25

!topic (2455362) xdg-desktop-portal causes nautilus to open wrong initial directory

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:02:25

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2455362

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:02:25

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2106

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:02:25

!info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, xdg-desktop-portal, VERIFIED

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:02:25

!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+kparal)

<@kepstin:kepstin.ca>

17:02:32

For some context, both [2455362](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2455362) (file portal opens in wrong dir) and [2457805](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2457805) (background apps missing) get fixed by the same update, xdg-flatpak-portal 1.21.1. Also includes a CVE fix (sandbox escape, allows flatpak apps to trash files they don't have access to)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:02:42

stop ruining my headcanon! :D

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:03:03

niknikovsky gave a cookie to adamwill. They now have 306 cookies, 13 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:03:10

might also fix https://github.com/flatpak/xdg-desktop-portal/issues/1962 ? i like fixy tings

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:03:42

so, sure, i'm +1 for the actual bug, and the vibes

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

17:03:54

FE +1

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:03:55

FinalFE +1

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:04:00

FE +1 for the above reason

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:04:03

FE +1

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:04:07

(i think i might have reported this too, somewhere? i think openqa hit it in something.)

<@decathorpe:fedora.im>

17:04:21

ohhh shiny. I was getting annoyed by this. :D FE+1

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:04:29

~~the kneecaps?~~

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

17:04:37

+1 FE

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

17:04:58

+1 FE

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:05:55

proposed !agreed 2455362 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is certainly an annoying bug for portal-using apps where you use the file chooser, and you can encounter it on live media, so an FE makes sense. We also note that the update fixes a CVE and likely some crashes too

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

17:06:06

ack

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:06:07

ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

17:06:10

ack

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:06:10

ack

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:06:10

ack

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:06:19

ack

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:06:25

(h)ackintosh

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

17:06:45

ackathon

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:07:33

!agreed 2455362 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is certainly an annoying bug for portal-using apps where you use the file chooser, and you can encounter it on live media, so an FE makes sense. We also note that the update fixes a CVE and likely some crashes too

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:07:41

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2457805

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:07:41

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2104

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:07:41

!info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, xdg-desktop-portal, ON_QA

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:07:41

!topic (2457805) Background Apps missing in GNOME 50

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:07:41

!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+3,0,-0) (+boniboyblue, +asciiwolf, +kparal)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:07:41

!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+1,0,-0) (+asciiwolf)

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:07:50

How many more to go?

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:08:18

Huh, so it is

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:08:22

this is the last

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:08:32

unless someone's proposed the CVE thing from earlier

<@kepstin:kepstin.ca>

17:08:33

this looks like the last one, but it's the same as the previous one (xdg-flatpak-portal 1.21.1)

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:08:49

In my opinion if those apps don't affect normal functionality, just FE it

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:09:26

oh, this is also fixed by the xdg-desktop-portal update?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:09:47

man, maybe i should be using it as a wrinkle cream too

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

17:09:49

Yes - already fixed. I proposed to get it into final.

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:10:04

+1 FE since it's fixed by the xdg desktop portal

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:10:16

+1 FE as it's fixed as well

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:10:24

i'm kinda on the fence about this one in itself, but since we're already pulling the update in, let's not waste too much time on it

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:10:24

FE +1

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:10:27

Why not use it as a "fix everything" cream

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:10:43

the libraw thing hasn't been proposed yet?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:10:46

I'll do that

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:10:55

My luck I'd be allergic to it

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:11:03

not unless it was done in the last ten minutes

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:11:08

the list regens every 30 mins

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:11:30

I'd be lethally allergic with my luck

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:12:07

proposed !agreed 2457805 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted as another annoying bug fixed by the xdg-desktop-portal update. We didn't want to spend too much time debating it as we're pulling in that update for the previously-discussed bug anyway

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:12:09

Same

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:12:15

ack

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:12:21

(wh)ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

17:12:23

ackronym

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

17:12:25

ack

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:12:26

ack

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:12:27

ack

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:12:30

niknikovsky gave a cookie to lruzicka. They now have 46 cookies, 9 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:12:33

just did it now

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:12:54

derekenz has already given cookies to ngompa during the F43 timeframe

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:12:57

niknikovsky has already given cookies to ngompa during the F43 timeframe

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:13:19

!agreed 2457805 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted as another annoying bug fixed by the xdg-desktop-portal update. We didn't want to spend too much time debating it as we're pulling in that update for the previously-discussed bug anyway

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:13:25

okay, let me manually do that one then

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

17:13:26

Ack

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:14:26

ack

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:14:49

!topic (2456557) CVE-2026-20884 LibRaw: LibRaw: Arbitrary code execution via integer overflow in deflate_dng_load_raw [fedora-all]

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:14:49

!info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, LibRaw, MODIFIED

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:14:49

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2456557

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:15:29

An FE would fix or block fixing the CVE?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:15:34

this is rated moderate, but it does seem pretty bad in theory, yeah

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:15:38

FE would allow us to fix it.

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:15:48

+1 FE

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:15:51

FE +1

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:15:54

i'm +1 in theory, though i don't like that it's a 20+ package update

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:15:54

Say no more

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:15:54

+1 FE

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:15:57

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:15:58

Michel Lind ☘ UTC+1: Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:16:02

+1 if my vote counts

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:16:06

are we sure the update is safe to land alone, without any other updates that are kicking their heels in u-t?

<@boniboyblue:fedora.im>

17:16:08

FE +1

<@jgroman:fedora.im>

17:16:13

+1 FE

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:16:16

it all goes into the algorithm

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:16:22

FinalFE +1

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:16:39

the KDE update technically requires this update

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:16:47

since libraw is a dependency for KF6

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:16:48

I can help run checks quickly if there are safety concerns

<@haasjona:matrix.org>

17:17:01

+1 FE

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:17:45

Conan Kudo 🤒 i'm more concerned about the other way round: will there be problems if we push this update without the kde update (or any other update)

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

17:17:51

Fe +1

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:18:04

no, that is fine

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:18:09

the kde update requires this one though

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:18:22

proposed !agreed 2456557 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted to fix a fairly significant (though only rated Moderate, so it's not a blocker) CVE in release-blocking images.

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:18:30

ack

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:18:31

ack

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:18:32

`ebranch check-update -b rawhide FEDORA-2026-ffba395f42 -v`

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:18:40

ack

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:18:42

ack

<@lruzicka:fedora.im>

17:18:46

ack

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:18:48

uh what Koji is saying that side tag does not exist

<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>

17:18:55

Ack

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:19:05

oh that update is... already stable :)

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:19:16

(wh)ack(a-mole)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:19:24

you're looking at the rawhide one

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:19:29

f44 is FEDORA-2026-bef0050737

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:19:34

oh thanks

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:20:20

this will take a while, I'll circle back if it found something ominous

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:20:22

which I doubt

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:20:23

it does appear to be missing a build of swayimg

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:20:25

package: swayimg-4.7-2.fc44.x86_64 from https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/repos/f44-build/latest/x86_64

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:20:25

ERROR:run_rmdepcheck.py:Rmdepcheck failed!

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:20:25

Dependencies of other packages that would be BROKEN by the tested packages:

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:20:25

libraw.so.24()(64bit)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:20:42

huh, there's one in there. why didn't that test rerun

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:09

yeah editing the list of packages should retrigger tests right? or maybe not if it's backed by a side tag?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:21:15

no, it always should

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:21:18

i'll look into that later

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:25

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:25

```

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:25

```

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:25

[check-update] finding reverse dependencies

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:25

[check-update] 196 reverse dependencies to check: BlockOutII, CImg, COPASI, DankMaterialShell, GoldenCheetah, NsCDE, PerceptualDiff, PyMca, WindowMaker, a2ps, allegro5, anyremote, asymptote, autotrace, awesome, ballerburg, biloba, blender, bottles, braille-printer-app, budgie-backgrounds, c-graph, caja-extensions, ccdciel, cegui06, chemical-mime-data, clips, corrida, crack-attack, crossfire-client, crystal-stacker, darktable, dbus-c++, diffoscope, diffpdf, digikam, dillo, dmapd, dvdauthor, dx, embree, enblend, enigma, enlightenment, eom, epix, ettercap, eureka, extrema, f42-backgrounds, f43-backgrounds, f44-backgrounds, fastfetch, fbida, fedora-eln-backgrounds, foobillard, freecol, freedroidrpg, freewrl, gap-pkg-hap, gemdropx, gerbv, gimp, gimp-resynthesizer, gmsh, gnokii, gnome-colors-icon-theme, gnome-photos, golly, greyhounds, grisbi, gscan2pdf, gyazo, icecat, iyfct, jpilot, julia, keepass, kwave, kxstitch, latex2rtf, lbrickbuster2, libopenshot, libpst, lilypond, louvre, luxcorerender, lyx, m1n1, materialx, mathomatic, maxima, mediainfo, meshlab, morserunner, mpsolve, mrrescue, mtpaint, nemo-extensions, ngspice, njam, ocaml-menhir, ogre, oidn, olive, openarena, openbabel, opencascade, openscad, openshadinglanguage, openxr-explorer, pachi, pcb, pcmanfm-qt, perl-Graphics-TIFF, perl-Image-Sane, perl-PAR-Packer, perl-PDF-API2, perl-PDF-Builder, perl-Panotools-Script, pfstools, pgmodeler, php-splitbrain-slika, pidgin-chime, pioneer, pipepanic, plasma-desktop, plasma-login-manager, playonlinux, prusa-slicer, psiconv, pstoedit, putty, puzzles, python-geotiler, python-img2pdf, python-pyobd, python-sphinx, python-wand, qtile-extras, qview, ravada, rcssserver3d, rss-glx, rubygem-activestorage, rubygem-mini_magick, rubygem-rmagick, scorched3d, sddm, shutter, simcoupe, simspark, skribilo, skychart, slic3r, stellarium, sway-config-fedora, sympy, synfig, tango-icon-theme, tango-icon-theme-extras, terminology, tigervnc, transfig, tuxanci, tuxpaint, tuxpuck, tuxtype2, unifont, uqm, usbview, usd, variety, vfrnav, vodovod, w3m, waf, warsow, whichwayisup, wv, wxMaxima, xawtv, xephem, xfig, xforms, xgalaxy, xine-lib, xmms2, xournal, xskat, xtrkcad, zasx, zaz, zenon, zipios++, zynaddsubfx

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:25

[check-update] 225 changed provides (223 updated, 2 removed)

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:25

whoa

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:21:33

196 to check :P

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:00

anyhoo

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:09

!agreed 2456557 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is accepted to fix a fairly significant (though only rated Moderate, so it's not a blocker) CVE in release-blocking images

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:23

!info that's all the proposals, let's do a quick look over:

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:30

!topic Accepted Final Blocker review

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:22:36

`Summary: all 196 reverse dependencies OK.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

17:22:36

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:37

remember we're not revoting here, checking in on fix status

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:58

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2074

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:58

!topic (2359799) Inital-setup: VK_ERROR_DEVICE_LOST using nvidia hardware

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:58

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2359799

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:22:58

!info Accepted Blocker, mesa, NEW

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:23:29

so the bad news is some folks said f44 is affected, the good news is airlied is getting somewhere on a fix

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:24:18

don't think we can do much besides wait on him at this point

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:24:27

I wonder if this is also related to the crashes people reported with slitherer with nvidia hardware too

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:24:30

thanks to everyone who tested

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:24:59

!info bad news: it does seem this affects f44. good news: airlied seems to be making progress on a fix. we anxiously await more developments

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:25:15

!topic (2448283) Selecting a non-ASCII capable keyboard layout should automatically also select US English as a second layout

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:25:15

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2448283

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:25:15

!info Accepted Blocker, plasma-setup, NEW

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:25:15

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2078

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:25:24

KDE folks, are we getting anywhere with this and the next one?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:25:36

cards on the table, if we get down to these two as the only blockers i will propose waiving them

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:25:58

I don't know

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:26:04

Merritt seemed to think these would be difficult

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:27:03

yeah, that was my read too, making this behave properly is more of a 'start over' than a 'quick one liner'

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:27:43

!info we are waiting on upstream to work out how to address this, but will consider waiving it as not fixable on a reasonable timeframe if other blockers are resolved

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:27:54

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2453216

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:27:54

!topic (2453216) plasma-setup Keyboard Layout page pre-selection is broken - always shows English (US) if that is the system language, otherwise shows nothing

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:27:54

!info Accepted Blocker, plasma-setup, NEW

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:27:54

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2087

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:28:05

!info we are waiting on upstream to work out how to address this, but will consider waiving it as not fixable on a reasonable timeframe if other blockers are resolved

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:28:14

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2455469

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:28:14

!info Accepted Blocker, plasma-setup, NEW

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:28:14

!topic (2455469) Configuring WifI network via Network pane appears to not work

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:28:14

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2094

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:28:16

how about this one?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:28:25

it sort of slipped off my radar

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:30:55

we don't know why NetworkManager is adding the plasma-setup user as the only authorized user for system connections

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:31:17

if that line isn't added to system connections, then it works as expected

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:31:57

have we talked to NM devs about it?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:32:28

I don't think so yet?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:32:36

do we know an NM dev to ask?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:32:47

we know it's a change with NM 1.56 as it doesn't happen with 1.54 in F43

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:35:08

file an issue on NM upstream?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:35:12

i guess we can do some bisecting...

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:35:39

!info this seems to be caused by changed behavior in NetworkManager, but we don't yet know why it changed. we need to pull an NM dev into the discussion here and maybe do some research on NM changes

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:35:48

!action adamw to look into NM changes here a bit and find a dev to poke

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:38:11

thanks adamw

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:38:20

!info Accepted Blocker, uboot-tools, ON_QA

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:38:20

!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2079

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:38:20

!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2448365

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:38:20

!topic (2448365) rpi4 fails to boot from usb drive after upgrade to RC3

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:38:22

last one!

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:38:26

we need testers to confirm the fix here

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:38:44

!info the fix for this is available for testing, we need Pi-owning folks to test and confirm

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:41:58

Is it included in an image?

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:41:58

I guess that wraps up today's meeting?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:43:54

Brandon Nielsen er, probably not if it's only in u-t

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:43:59

you could test rawhide i guess

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:02

that'd be a good enough proxy

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:09

or...hack up an image somehow? i dunno how to do that

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:15

🇵🇱 | Nik Nikovsky [possible limited digital detox] nearly, yeah

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:17

!topic Open floor

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:20

any other business, folks?

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

17:44:24

there is previously rejected blocker as issue happened only at single hw, but now there are more affected laptops with 120Hz display: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2441941

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:28

ohhh right that

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:31

i forgot about that

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:42

and we actually only rejected it for beta, i think

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:44:47

jforbes are you around by any chance?

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:44:50

*the floor opens beneath everyone and they all fall into a dark pit*

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

17:45:15

I gave ntb to dracut developer its under debugging; not more info now

<@korora:fedora.im>

17:45:15

not agaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii,,,,

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

17:45:38

Kinda... On PTO helping a kid move

<@derekenz:fedora.im>

17:45:56

Looks like it may already be tested......https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-c4b1e19b5c

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:46:04

it's definitely not

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:48:07

😩

<@jlinton:fedora.im>

17:48:09

So, many of these problems would be solved if the GOP were the default device until switch root.

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

17:48:48

So, problematicly, I have not seen a fix for this

<@kepstin:kepstin.ca>

17:49:10

that was proposed a while ago as https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/PlymouthUseSimpledrm

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:49:44

do you have any info or thoughts about this bug as a final blocker? the 120Hz laptop display one

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:49:54

i remember you were against it as a beta blocker but not necessarily as final

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:50:07

it breaks other things though, so there's no winning

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:50:43

I'd say put it off for now

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:50:51

Until you can find a proper solution

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:50:58

well, we kind of can't

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:51:09

we need to decide blockery status now because go/no-go is thursday

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

17:51:47

adamw: I don't have a proper solution. Most laptops do not default to this, though I guess the new Lenovo does

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:51:55

Most people still use 60Hz monitors, right?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:52:04

probably not?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

17:52:14

75Hz and 120Hz monitors are pretty common in laptops now

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

17:52:29

true, it seems that 120hz display are pretty new

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:53:29

I'd say FE since monitors allow fallback modes

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:54:32

we can punt it to go/no-go, i guess

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:54:38

but we should probably re-propose it, i'll do that

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:54:57

It's actually not clear to me how you'd get around this in the "clean F44 install" case

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:55:09

Install without encryption I guess

<@kepstin:kepstin.ca>

17:55:30

manually specifying a mode on the kernel command line might be a workaround too

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:55:40

Is this about 120Hz displays or encryption?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:55:50

there's a cmdline workaround mentioned in the bug i think

<@kepstin:kepstin.ca>

17:55:54

(i'm not sure if that's permitted on secureboot systems tho?)

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:56:05

If the first, then I was thinking defaulting to like 60Hz on the first boot?

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

17:56:06

It is just about 120hz

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:56:07

oh, no, maybe not

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

17:56:12

its about 120hz display, you cant see typing your LUKS password

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:56:14

If the first, then I was thinking of defaulting to like 60Hz on the first boot?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:56:28

encryption is relevant because it makes the bug more important

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

17:56:37

the bug always exists on affected hardware, though

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:56:43

..a password beep

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:56:43

We could introduce a similar system that Lenovo laptops have.

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:56:59

Yeah, you still boot into a system with graphics issues

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:57:11

Or if the hardware is detected as Lenovo, display a warning

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

17:57:16

And it's not clear that setting the refresh rate to something different works around the issue, if you can even do that on a laptop

<@supakeen:fedora.im>

17:57:55

Sorry adamw I was busy debugging some things with multipathd and the 7.0.0-rc kernel but the Pi USB bug has been tested by multiple people and confirmed to work.

<@supakeen:fedora.im>

17:58:02

(Way too late, but you know)

<@niknikovsky:fedora.im>

17:58:13

I guess that's blocker no 2

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:59:13

derekenz has already given cookies to supakeen during the F43 timeframe

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

17:59:51

niknikovsky gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 6 cookies, 3 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

18:00:39

I can take a look at the current state when I get back to the hotel, but as I recall, the 120hz problem is still a problem in 7.0

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:00:47

!info i have reproposed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2441941 as a blocker since there's some inclination that it should block final. we'll discuss it at go/no-go if it can't be fixed before then

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:00:57

thanks jforbes

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

18:01:00

Meaning there is no real fix.

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:01:14

if you could update the bug with whatever info you have on current upstream state it'd be great

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

18:01:49

But from the initial bug posting, no laptop defaulted to this until the new Lenovo that brought it back up

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

18:02:07

Will do

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

18:02:13

yes, issue is also with kernel 7.0

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:02:14

it does seem like still only lenovos affected so far. but now it's at least two lenovos. :D

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:02:33

Isn't it a Lenovo and a Dell now?

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

18:02:42

I think it is a specific panel model?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:02:54

the dell was a different bug, wasn't it?

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

18:03:01

Yes

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:03:10

oh no, first comment on this was an xps 13 plus

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:03:10

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2441941

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:03:23

Reporter is a Dell, and a Lenovo gets the bug after a kernel update on F43

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

18:03:24

the reported says "Intel-based Dell XPS 13 Plus (9320)" , I could see it with Lenovo

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:03:30

yeah, sorry

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:03:36

so we have one dell, one lenovo

<@jforbes:fedora.im>

18:03:47

Okay

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:03:51

wait, hold on

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:04:01

are these actually both the 120hz thing? sigh

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:04:58

ugh, no. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2438442 was the bug where we actually decided it was 120Hz

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:05:03

yup

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:05:07

that one was closed as fixed by https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/163098/

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

18:05:21

and when I connect external usb-c monitor. It displays there

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:06:10

There is a workaround in the closed dupe

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:06:13

this one doesn't mention refresh rates at all

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:06:36

i might've given petr bad info when i said his was a dupe, honestly, i was getting confused with the other 120Hz bug

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:06:49

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2455924#c5

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:07:10

looking at them again, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2441941 and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2455924 don't *necessarily* look like the same thing

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:07:26

They look pretty same-y to me

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:07:45

different laptops...possibly somewhat different behavior (both have issues typing luks passphrase, but Jiri says the display is "blinking", petr says it's black)

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:08:02

Petr Sklenar when the bug happens can you type your passphrase blind? if so, do graphics work OK after that?

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:08:11

Given that the Dell boots to random-ish display corruption, ehhhh

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

18:08:29

yes, I could see just black. and yes you can type by blind

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:08:52

and after that, do you get a working desktop without graphical issues?

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

18:09:28

yes, than its working fine, just this typing of password

<@psklenar:fedora.im>

18:09:40

yes, than its working fine, just this typing of password by blind

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:09:43

Okay, probably not a dupe then

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:10:01

Not sure if that's good or bad :D

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:10:13

yeah, i think jiri said that even if he gets past LUKS, graphics are still broken in his case

<@nielsenb:fedora.im>

18:10:25

That's my understanding, yeah

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:11:56

ok, re-opened petr's bug

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:12:21

not really sure we can/should block on either, though. i guess we can propose them both and discuss it thurssday?

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:14:10

ok, thanks for coming out, everyone

<@adamwill:fedora.im>

18:15:42

!endmeeting