Fedora 12 RC-3

[Gene Czarcinski]

I must say that the whole Fedora 12 process and the result has been a
pleasure.  It has been so much a pleasure that I plan on being a day zero (or
more likely a day minus <whatever>) installer/user of Fedora 12 x86_64 on my
production systems.

One thing I noticed that tells me that RC-3 is not the final release version is
that when I did the install from a physical DVD, there was no install-time
option to add an "updates" repository and/or a base repository.  Thus, I did
not have the option to install packages not on the DVD itself.  I have found
the ability to install with updates and with an everything repository (really
the same as rawhide/development at this point) to be very useful.

Has this "feature" been dropped or is this simply a characteristic of the fact
I am using the RC-3 DVD?

It is no big deal to add additional packages post basic install but it is a
nice feature and I hope the real final candidate (real GA version) will have
the ability of adding additional repositories.

Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Vedran Miletić]

On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Gene Czarcinski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I must say that the whole Fedora 12 process and the result has been a
> pleasure.  It has been so much a pleasure that I plan on being a day zero (or
> more likely a day minus <whatever>) installer/user of Fedora 12 x86_64 on my
> production systems.

:-)

> One thing I noticed that tells me that RC-3 is not the final release version is
> that when I did the install from a physical DVD, there was no install-time
> option to add an "updates" repository and/or a base repository.  Thus, I did
> not have the option to install packages not on the DVD itself.  I have found
> the ability to install with updates and with an everything repository (really
> the same as rawhide/development at this point) to be very useful.
>
> Has this "feature" been dropped or is this simply a characteristic of the fact
> I am using the RC-3 DVD?

Repositories are not yet ready, that's the reason why it's not available.

> It is no big deal to add additional packages post basic install but it is a
> nice feature and I hope the real final candidate (real GA version) will have
> the ability of adding additional repositories.

Sure.

--
Vedran Miletić

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Sunday 08 November 2009 09:16:57 Vedran Miletić wrote:

> > One thing I noticed that tells me that RC-3 is not the final release
> > version is that when I did the install from a physical DVD, there was no
> > install-time option to add an "updates" repository and/or a base
> > repository.  Thus, I did not have the option to install packages not on
> > the DVD itself.  I have found the ability to install with updates and
> > with an everything repository (really the same as rawhide/development at
> > this point) to be very useful.
> >
> > Has this "feature" been dropped or is this simply a characteristic of the
> > fact I am using the RC-3 DVD?
>
> Repositories are not yet ready, that's the reason why it's not available.
>

I understand that the real repositories are not ready yet but the yum repo
files point to mirros which have been "faked up" top point fedora and updates
to development (rawhide).  I was surprised that this was not done with RC-3
also.  I am not sure not anaconda is setup and if it is looking for the
repositories dynamically or not but I assume that it uses the same mirror
lists that yum uses.  Therefore, I expected to see "fedora" and "updates"
listed as network-accessible repositories even if they both point to
(ultimately) development ... just like yum repo files.

Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Jesse Keating-3]

On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 13:36 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
>
> I understand that the real repositories are not ready yet but the yum repo
> files point to mirros which have been "faked up" top point fedora and updates
> to development (rawhide).  I was surprised that this was not done with RC-3
> also.  I am not sure not anaconda is setup and if it is looking for the
> repositories dynamically or not but I assume that it uses the same mirror
> lists that yum uses.  Therefore, I expected to see "fedora" and "updates"
> listed as network-accessible repositories even if they both point to
> (ultimately) development ... just like yum repo files.

Hrm, you are supposed to see those repos.  Do you still have the yum.log
from your install attempt?

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating


--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:06:20 Jesse Keating wrote:

> On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 13:36 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > I understand that the real repositories are not ready yet but the yum
> > repo files point to mirros which have been "faked up" top point fedora
> > and updates to development (rawhide).  I was surprised that this was not
> > done with RC-3 also.  I am not sure not anaconda is setup and if it is
> > looking for the repositories dynamically or not but I assume that it uses
> > the same mirror lists that yum uses.  Therefore, I expected to see
> > "fedora" and "updates" listed as network-accessible repositories even if
> > they both point to (ultimately) development ... just like yum repo files.
>
> Hrm, you are supposed to see those repos.  Do you still have the yum.log
> from your install attempt?
>

On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them here or
should I open a BZ report?

Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:22:17 Gene Czarcinski wrote:

> On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:06:20 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 13:36 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > I understand that the real repositories are not ready yet but the yum
> > > repo files point to mirros which have been "faked up" top point fedora
> > > and updates to development (rawhide).  I was surprised that this was
> > > not done with RC-3 also.  I am not sure not anaconda is setup and if it
> > > is looking for the repositories dynamically or not but I assume that it
> > > uses the same mirror lists that yum uses.  Therefore, I expected to see
> > > "fedora" and "updates" listed as network-accessible repositories even
> > > if they both point to (ultimately) development ... just like yum repo
> > > files.
> >
> > Hrm, you are supposed to see those repos.  Do you still have the yum.log
> > from your install attempt?
>
> On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them here
>  or should I open a BZ report?

I am doing a quick install of F12RC3 as a qemu-kvm guest (hosted on F12-
rawhide).  I will open a BZ report and put the yum.log files there but I am
attaching here the screenshot of the frame showing no additional (optional)
repositories listed.

Gene

Gene


--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Jesse Keating-3]

On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them here or
> should I open a BZ report?
>

BZ is fine, please post the number here though.


--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating


--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:38:56 Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them here
> > or should I open a BZ report?
>
> BZ is fine, please post the number here though.
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533740

Includes yum.log files and a copy of the screenshot

Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Sunday 08 November 2009 16:04:40 Gene Czarcinski wrote:

> On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:38:56 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them
> > > here or should I open a BZ report?
> >
> > BZ is fine, please post the number here though.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533740
>
> Includes yum.log files and a copy of the screenshot

Jesse --- could the problem here be related to comment#7 in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533658

Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Jesse Keating-3]

On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 16:08 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> Jesse --- could the problem here be related to comment#7 in
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533658
>

Related only in that they both involve anaconda and yum and repos, but
no they are not the same problem.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating


--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Sunday 08 November 2009 16:04:40 Gene Czarcinski wrote:

> On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:38:56 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them
> > > here or should I open a BZ report?
> >
> > BZ is fine, please post the number here though.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533740
>
> Includes yum.log files and a copy of the screenshot

Tested RC4 and it now works ... BZ report closed.

Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Monday 09 November 2009 10:40:13 Gene Czarcinski wrote:

> On Sunday 08 November 2009 16:04:40 Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:38:56 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > > On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them
> > > > here or should I open a BZ report?
> > >
> > > BZ is fine, please post the number here though.
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533740
> >
> > Includes yum.log files and a copy of the screenshot
>
> Tested RC4 and it now works ... BZ report closed.

As I was thinking about it, I notice that the list of optional additional
repositories now includes not just updates but updates-testing.  This differs
from F11 where only the everything base and updates was listed.

Was this intentional?

Personally, I think this may be a good idea.  However, will it cause problems
for some users who are not prepared to deal with software not completely
tested?

Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 11:17 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:

> On Monday 09 November 2009 10:40:13 Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > On Sunday 08 November 2009 16:04:40 Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:38:56 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > > > On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them
> > > > > here or should I open a BZ report?
> > > >
> > > > BZ is fine, please post the number here though.
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533740
> > >
> > > Includes yum.log files and a copy of the screenshot
> >
> > Tested RC4 and it now works ... BZ report closed.
>
> As I was thinking about it, I notice that the list of optional additional
> repositories now includes not just updates but updates-testing.  This differs
> from F11 where only the everything base and updates was listed.

Yup.

> Was this intentional?

Nope.

> Personally, I think this may be a good idea.  However, will it cause problems
> for some users who are not prepared to deal with software not completely
> tested?

It's unintended and different from F11 behaviour, but Jesse couldn't fix
it safely (fixing it so this repo set gets displayed is a small and safe
change, but fixing it not to show updates-testing is bigger, AIUI). We
decided it was acceptable.

--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Gene Czarcinski]

On Monday 09 November 2009 11:29:17 Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 11:17 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > On Monday 09 November 2009 10:40:13 Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > On Sunday 08 November 2009 16:04:40 Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:38:56 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > > > > On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat
> > > > > > them here or should I open a BZ report?
> > > > >
> > > > > BZ is fine, please post the number here though.
> > > >
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533740
> > > >
> > > > Includes yum.log files and a copy of the screenshot
> > >
> > > Tested RC4 and it now works ... BZ report closed.
> >
> > As I was thinking about it, I notice that the list of optional additional
> > repositories now includes not just updates but updates-testing.  This
> > differs from F11 where only the everything base and updates was listed.
>
> Yup.
>
> > Was this intentional?
>
> Nope.
>
> > Personally, I think this may be a good idea.  However, will it cause
> > problems for some users who are not prepared to deal with software not
> > completely tested?
>
> It's unintended and different from F11 behaviour, but Jesse couldn't fix
> it safely (fixing it so this repo set gets displayed is a small and safe
> change, but fixing it not to show updates-testing is bigger, AIUI). We
> decided it was acceptable.
>

As I said, I personally think having the option of using updates-testing may
be a good idea.  But, I personally would not use it for the install unless
there was some fix in updates-testing which impacted the install for my
particular set of hardware (e.g., kernel, firstboot, etc.).

Perhaps there should be some warning to users in the updated Release Notes.

Regardless, having updates-testing is much better than no optional additional
repositories.

--
Gene

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Lawrence E Graves]

On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 08:29 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 11:17 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > On Monday 09 November 2009 10:40:13 Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > On Sunday 08 November 2009 16:04:40 Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 08 November 2009 15:38:56 Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:22 -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > > > > > On two system ... regular bare metal and a laptop.  Do you wnat them
> > > > > > here or should I open a BZ report?
> > > > >
> > > > > BZ is fine, please post the number here though.
> > > >
> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533740
> > > >
> > > > Includes yum.log files and a copy of the screenshot
> > >
> > > Tested RC4 and it now works ... BZ report closed.
> >
> > As I was thinking about it, I notice that the list of optional additional
> > repositories now includes not just updates but updates-testing.  This differs
> > from F11 where only the everything base and updates was listed.
>
> Yup.
>
> > Was this intentional?
>
> Nope.
>
> > Personally, I think this may be a good idea.  However, will it cause problems
> > for some users who are not prepared to deal with software not completely
> > tested?
>
> It's unintended and different from F11 behaviour, but Jesse couldn't fix
> it safely (fixing it so this repo set gets displayed is a small and safe
> change, but fixing it not to show updates-testing is bigger, AIUI). We
> decided it was acceptable.
>
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>

Just installed RC-4 64-bit and everything is working fine except of
kmod-nvidia drivers for the new kernel.  Not your problems.  Waiting
patiently on rpmfusion to release.


--
Lawrence E Graves <[hidden email]>

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 10:28 -0700, Lawrence E Graves wrote:

> Just installed RC-4 64-bit and everything is working fine except of
> kmod-nvidia drivers for the new kernel.  Not your problems.  Waiting
> patiently on rpmfusion to release.

If you're going to use the proprietary driver and run pre-releases or
even upgrade quickly on stable ones, you really should install
akmod-nvidia .

--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list