Session defaults to X11 after reboot in the 39 beta.
by Scott Lembcke
So I just put a fresh install of the F39 beta on a Ryzen 7840U laptop (Framework 14). Everything is up to date as of Oct 20th.
The issue: after booting the laptop and logging in, it defaults to an X11 session even though "Gnome" is selected from the gear menu in the lower right. To get a Wayland session, all I need to do is log out and immediately log back in. It only seems to do this after a fresh boot.
I don't know enough about GDM to debug this any further and make a proper bug report. Is there a particular log file I should look into?
8 months, 1 week
Failed to start udisks2.service
by camiro pan
Hello everybody,
i run fedora 38 on my dell xps 9300 and want to install Fedora 39 beta/nightly.
When i boot from a Fedora 39 (nightly) boot device i get the error message:
"[Failed] Failed to start udisks2.service - Disk Manager".
After that error message, the Gnome desktop starts normaly and usullay (not every time) the window with the button "install fedora" appears.
Clicking on the install button loads the installer, but before it launches an error message appears and closes immediatly, so i can not report or see the error log.
The output of "systemctl status udisks2.service" is
"
udisks daemon version 2.10.1 starting
*** stack smashing detected ***: terminated
udisks2.service: Main process exited, code=dumped, status=6/ABRT
udisks2.service: Failed with result 'core-dump'.
Failed to start udisks2.service - Disk Manager.
"
this happens to all version of fedora with udisks v2.10.1, so fedora-rawhide, fedora 39 beta and fedora 39 nightly.
After searching for this issue, i found out that udisks v2.10.1 has a dependency on libblockdev
and since fedora rawhide comes with the newer version libblockdev 3.0.4-1.fc40, i was hoping that this fix the issue.
Unfortunaly, as i mention, it doesn't.
I'm pretty sure that the fedora installer crashs because of the udisks error.
8 months, 1 week
2023-10-16 @ 15:00 UTC - Fedora QA Meeting
by Adam Williamson
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2023-10-16
# Time: 15:00 UTC
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto)
# Location: ** #fedora-meeting on irc.libera.chat **
Greetings testers! It's time for another QA meeting.
As usual lately, please note this meeting will really be *on IRC*.
The Matrix bridge is still down and the meeting bot for Matrix is not
quite done yet. So please use an IRC client or the web client -
https://web.libera.chat/#fedora-meeting - to join.
If anyone has any other items for the agenda, please reply to this
email and suggest them! Thanks.
== Proposed Agenda Topics ==
1. Previous meeting follow-up
2. Fedora 39 status
3. Test Day / community event status
4. Open floor
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw(a)fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net
8 months, 1 week
Re: Access a Virtual disk without the VM running
by George R Goffe
Thanks to those who responded.
guestfish is looking promising... Thanks for the suggestion.
Best Regards,
George...
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2023 22:17:38 -0700
From: Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Access a Virtual disk without the VM running
To: test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Message-ID: <efc87d7d-4175-44c2-ad1b-dfde4784a549(a)gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
On 2023-10-14 15:04, George R Goffe via test wrote:
> Ideally, I would mount the VDI on the host and just copy the file. Is
> there a way to do this easily?
https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/tip-open-virtualbox-vdi-file-using-...
guestfish tools should work...
8 months, 1 week
Access a Virtual disk without the VM running
by George R Goffe
Hi,
I'm having some problems installing the latest Fedora iso images for the past week or so (Fedora-Everything-netinst-x86_64-Rawhide-20231014.n.0.iso) under VirtualBox... I keep getting fatal error messages "Error in POSTIN for rpm pkg dbus-common" and then the install fails. I have captured /tmp into a tar file and would like to make the files available to this list for debugging purposes but now need to move the file from the VM into my host.
Ideally, I would mount the VDI on the host and just copy the file. Is there a way to do this easily?
Best regards,
George...
For the past week
8 months, 2 weeks
Fedora Linux 39 Final blocker status summary #2
by Adam Williamson
Hi folks! We're still trying to get F39 done, so time for another
status update...
Action summary
==============
Accepted blockers
-----------------
1. curl - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2243182 - ON_QA: QA to test and
karma https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-0f8d1871d8
2. distribution - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2243034 - ASSIGNED:
maintainers to try and squeeze out any possible space savings, FESCo to
consider https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3082
3. ghostscript - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241112 - ON_QA: QA to
test and karma
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c2665a9ff3
4. initial-setup - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241274 - ON_QA: QA (and
pwhalen, who reported the bug) to test and karma
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-133bdc4283
5. mutter - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241632 - ASSIGNED: desktop
team to investigate and fix, now this is well triaged
6. shim - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2113005 - NEW: stakeholders to
consider waiving again at go/no-go
7. uboot-tools - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241252 - ASSIGNED: ARM
team to investigate and fix
8. distribution - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2242759 - NEW:
stakeholders to consider whether any 'fix' is realistic, implement if
so
Proposed blockers
-----------------
1. anaconda - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2243206 - POST: blocker
voters to vote, anaconda team to fix if accepted
Bug-by-bug detail
=================
Accepted blockers
-----------------
1. curl - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2243182 - ON_QA
CVE-2023-38545 curl: a heap based buffer overflow in the SOCKS5 proxy
handshake [fedora-all]
The fix for this is in updates-testing and just needs testing and
karma.
2. distribution - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2243034 - ASSIGNED
Fedora 39: Server boot aarch64 image exceeds maximum size
This image is oversize because of increases in the size of qualcomm
firmware. (The sizes of aarch64 and x86_64 images differ somewhat
because they include different firmware packages; x86_64 is fine ATM).
We can't drop the new firmware files (says pbrobinson) and I couldn't
see any obvious other place to save 6M when I looked at this. In any
case, the 700M size limit makes no practical sense for aarch64 (700M is
set as the limit because it's the size of a CD; hands up if you have an
aarch64 device with a CD-but-not-DVD drive!), and we are probably
reaching the limits of its usefulness as a protection against "bloat",
since linux-firmware is constantly increasing in size even if we don't
introduce any new "bloat" to the installer environment. So I've
proposed https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3082 to bump the size limit to
1G for the aarch64 image at least. If FESCo goes for that proposal,
this would be addressed.
3. ghostscript - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241112 - ON_QA
CVE-2023-43115 ghostscript: GhostPDL can lead to remote code execution
via crafted PostScript documents [fedora-all]
The fix for this is in updates-testing and just needs testing and
karma.
4. initial-setup - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241274 - ON_QA
initial-setup text fails on hardware
The fix for this is in updates-testing and just needs testing and
karma. Especially it'd be great if pwhalen could test and confirm as he
reported the issue.
5. mutter - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241632 - ASSIGNED
Netinstall ISO renders a black screen when using kickstart install
(bare metal and VM)
I've managed to narrow this down to a specific mutter pull request
which caused the problem, and found a small change (discovered by
someone from upstream to address a different symptom) that avoids this
bug. Now up to the desktop team to decide what the best real fix is.
6. shim - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2113005 - NEW
Live image made with BOOTX64.EFI from latest shim-x64-15.6-2 fails to
boot on some boards
Sadly we will probably have to waive this one more time, at this point
in the cycle it's not realistic to start backporting kernel changes.
7. uboot-tools - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2241252 - ASSIGNED
Fedora-Workstation-39_Beta-1.1 boots to a black screen on Raspberry Pi
4
pbrobinson has said he's working on this, unless anyone else expert in
uboot-tools stuff wants to help, not much more to be done.
8. distribution - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2242759 - NEW
dnf system-upgrade fails on some RPi4 due to system boot date that pre-
dates gpg key
We seem to have developed a pretty good understanding of this one now,
but based on that understanding, it may not be realistically possible
to "fix" it - the only interventions proposed so far that might "fix"
it seem rather too radical to introduce as updates to a stable release
(F38), which is where they'd have to go. Unless anyone has a bright
idea, we might just have to accept that this isn't realistically
fixable and waive it to be addressed with documentation.
Proposed blockers
-----------------
1. anaconda - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2243206 - POST
anaconda should allow installations on drives providing installation
source
This is at -3, +1 in voting currently. Needs more votes. If it happens
to be accepted, anaconda team would have to decide on a fix.
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw(a)fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net
8 months, 2 weeks
pipewire-0.3.81-1 in updates-testing will be a 0-day breakage for
some
by Ian Laurie
Looks like pipewire-0.3.81-1 has some issues. At first it looked like
it only impacted virtual machines but my laptop turned out to be a
victim also. It fails 100% for me in VirtualBox across a wide range of
hosts for all current Fedora guests (F37, 38, 39 and Rawhide).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2242080
For me, last known working version is pipewire-0.3.80-1. Downgrading to
this fixes all cases (VMs and native).
All of that said, it's working on 2 other native hosts, however the VMs
on those host all fail until Downgrading to 0.3.80-1.
Ian
--
Ian Laurie
FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser
TZ: Australia/Sydney
8 months, 2 weeks
Partitioning in VirtualBox using FedoraCore 40
by George R Goffe
Hi,
I'm having trouble creating a partition scheme that I have been using it seems like forever. It's not working now with the "latest" spin iso image (/isos/Fedora-Everything-netinst-x86_64-Rawhide-202310
10.n.0.iso).
I keep getting this popup error message (enclosed). It looks like anaconda is choosing to try partitions named by appending "/efi" to the partition name.
I'm sure I'm doing something wrong but for the life of me, can't see where I'm going wrong.
Can anyoneone help me please?
Best regards,
George...
8 months, 2 weeks
Fwd: [Test-Announce] Please help complete validation testing for
current Fedora 39 candidate nightly!
by Kamil Paral
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Adam Williamson <adamwill(a)fedoraproject.org>
Date: Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 1:50 AM
Subject: [Test-Announce] Please help complete validation testing for
current Fedora 39 candidate nightly!
To: <test-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Hey folks! You probably saw the mail "Fedora 39 Branched 20231010.n.0
nightly compose nominated for testing" today. Although we still don't
have an RC for the Fedora 39 Final release, I want to ask folks to
please help us fill out the matrices for this candidate as much as
possible. It's best if we find any remaining blocker bugs *now*, not
wait for an RC before doing the full testing.
You can use testcase_stats to see what test cases probably need running
- https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/testcase_stats/39/ . The pages there
shows the execution history and last run date for each test on the
corresponding matrix page, so you can see at a glance which tests
haven't been run recently or at all. Please focus on tests marked
Basic, Beta or Final that have not yet been run, or not been run for
some time. And of course, if you find a significant bug, mark the test
as a failure, file a bug, and nominate it as a release blocker.
Thanks a lot folks!
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw(a)fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
test-announce mailing list -- test-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-announce@lists.fedorap...
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
8 months, 2 weeks
