When will we have access to https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org ?
Hello Adam, Since the infra move we do not have anymore access to https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org Do you know when it is planned to have access to it ? So unable to have access to openqa tests results for aarch64 and ppc64le. -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
timing window Rawhide tests and f32 release
Hello Adam, seem there is a timing window problem between Rawhide tests and f32 release as per failure https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/587422 === Cannot find HDD_1 asset hdd/disk_f32_support_5_x86_64.img! === failed Fedora-Rawhide-20200426.n.1 about an hour ago ( 0 ) failed Fedora-Rawhide-20200425.n.0 2 days ago ( 0 ) passed Fedora-Rawhide-20200423.n.0 4 days ago ( 02:00 minutes ) === There is not yet a f32 in https://fr2.rpmfind.net/linux/fedora/linux/releases/ === [DIR] 30/ 2019-04-26 22:58- [DIR] 31/ 2019-10-25 17:05- [DIR] test/ 2020-03-13 21:00- === I experienced similar problem trying createhdds for ppc64le -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Random boot failures on openQA.stg for ppc64le f32
On 4/3/20 2:52 PM, Normand wrote: Hello Adam, I identified two tests that randomly failed on openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org (1)&(2) We do not have such problem in our IBM intranet openQA. So I am wondering if difference could be related to configuration/software versions differences of P9 hosts. Our P9 is installed with f31, but no updates since 03/17 === $rpm -qa |grep -iE ^'kernel-header|qemu-kvm|slof' |sort kernel-headers-5.5.8-200.fc31.ppc64le qemu-kvm-4.1.1-1.fc31.ppc64le SLOF-0.1.git20191022-1.fc31.noarch === Oops above if for openQA server, the P9 is: === kernel-headers-5.4.7-200.fc31.ppc64le qemu-kvm-4.1.1-1.fc31.ppc64le SLOF-0.1.git20190114-2.fc31.noarch === From last autoinst-log.txt and serial0.txt it seems you have same slof older kernel and specific qemu. Do you have other specific changes ? === Linux 5.3.16-300.fc31.ppc64le qemu-4.2.0-1.fc31.infra SLOF release 20191022 === (1) server flavor install_default_upload, failed only one time (last compose 20200402) https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/794105#step/_console_wait_login/8 (2) server flavor upgrade_2_minimal, failed multiple times https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/794304#step/_console_wait_login/22 https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/794304#next_previous -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Random boot failures on openQA.stg for ppc64le f32
Hello Adam, I identified two tests that randomly failed on openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org (1)&(2) We do not have such problem in our IBM intranet openQA. So I am wondering if difference could be related to configuration/software versions differences of P9 hosts. Our P9 is installed with f31, but no updates since 03/17 === $rpm -qa |grep -iE ^'kernel-header|qemu-kvm|slof' |sort kernel-headers-5.5.8-200.fc31.ppc64le qemu-kvm-4.1.1-1.fc31.ppc64le SLOF-0.1.git20191022-1.fc31.noarch === From last autoinst-log.txt and serial0.txt it seems you have same slof older kernel and specific qemu. Do you have other specific changes ? === Linux 5.3.16-300.fc31.ppc64le qemu-4.2.0-1.fc31.infra SLOF release 20191022 === (1) server flavor install_default_upload, failed only one time (last compose 20200402) https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/794105#step/_console_wait_login/8 (2) server flavor upgrade_2_minimal, failed multiple times https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/794304#step/_console_wait_login/22 https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/794304#next_previous -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
About "Disabling cgroup usage" when starting openQA job
Hello Adam, Do you have lines with "Disabling cgroup usage ..." in the journalctl of workers host ? I noticed that since December 2019 after a dnf distro-sync seems to be related to an upstream change https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/blame/master/lib/OpenQA/Worker/Engines/isotovideo.pm#L320 === journalctl extract: worker[4090]: [info] +++ setup notes +++ worker[4090]: [info] Start time: 2020-02-13 12:38:28 worker[4090]: [info] Running on abanb.tlslab.ibm.com:3 (Linux 5.4.8-200.fc31.ppc64le #1 SMP Mon Jan 6 16:29:22 UTC 2020 ppc64le) worker[4090]: [info] Preparing cgroup to start isotovideo worker[4090]: [warn] Disabling cgroup usage because cgroup creation failed: mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/systemd: Permission denied at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Mojo/File.pm line 87. worker[4090]: [info] You can define a custom slice with OPENQA_CGROUP_SLICE or indicating the base mount with MOJO_CGROUP_FS. worker[4090]: [info] Starting isotovideo container === -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
What is "FuturWarning" while calling fifloader.py ?
Hello Adam, I am starting to use locally the fifloader.py and templates.fif.json Is the "FuturWarning" message something to be worked on ? Is it something you also have in your openQA servers ? === $./fifloader.py -w --filename xx.upstream templates.fif.json /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/jsonschema/_validators.py:200: FutureWarning: Possible nested set at position 7 not re.search(patrn, instance) Input template data is valid Generated template data is valid === -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Why so many errors on stg for PowerPC for last composes ?
On 1/14/20 5:43 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Tue, 2020-01-14 at 11:58 +0100, Normand wrote: Hello Adam, I am surprised by the number of errors for PowerPC on openqa stg since 20200110 compose: https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/group_overview/3 Is there some pending changes on those machines ? We do not have such errors in our local openqa server at IBM for same compose versions. Hi Michel! Long story short, it's: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784961 I took out the workaround we had in the templates to set the machine to pseries-4.0 because I thought we didn't need it any more, but I've just figured out that's what's causing the problems. We're hitting the behaviour described in that bug, where the kernel checks something to do with xive, then triggers a reboot. That breaks all tests where we want to pass in kernel params, because when the reboot happens, our params get lost (our test code doesn't know to enter them again, as it's not something we envisaged when writing the tests). Kevin was trying to do a backport of the qemu fix, if he's succeeded with that I'll try it out, otherwise I'll put the pseries-4.0 workaround back in. Sorry for the inconvenience! Thanks for the details, I understand so the difference. BTW, did you notice I enabled update tests for ppc64le on staging? :) Thanks :), I missed that, I will look at tests results. -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
still running job started 4 mont ago on
openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org has a strangely pending job that started 4 month ago ! https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests === Medium: BuildFedora-Rawhide-20190928.n.2 of fedora-Rawhide-Server-dvd-iso.ppc64le Test: realmd_join_sssd@ppc64le (restarted) Progress: 100 % Started: 4 months ago === looking at related job, it is in 'uploading' state with infinit UI refresh. https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/635112 I assume it should be manually killed. -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Why so many errors on stg for PowerPC for last composes ?
Hello Adam, I am surprised by the number of errors for PowerPC on openqa stg since 20200110 compose: https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/group_overview/3 Is there some pending changes on those machines ? We do not have such errors in our local openqa server at IBM for same compose versions. -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@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/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora Atomic Host Nearing End Of Life
On 11/21/19 11:33 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote: This content also exists at: https://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2019/11/fedora-atomic-host-nearing-eol/ Last year we [introduced the plans for Fedora CoreOS] [1] including that Fedora CoreOS would be the successor to Fedora Atomic Host and Container Linux (from CoreOS Inc.). As part of that succession plan we decided that Fedora 29 Atomic Host would be the last stream of Fedora Atomic Host to be released. Fedora 29 Atomic Host has served us well, but with Fedora 29 End of Life coming soon [2], so will the last release of Fedora 29 Atomic Host. The next release of Fedora 29 Atomic Host (in the next few weeks) will be the last two-week release. It will contain all of the latest content from Fedora 29. After that release, Fedora 29, and Fedora 29 Atomic Host will no longer receive any updates. Please try out the Fedora CoreOS preview to help us get it towards stable. Documentation and download links can be found at https://getfedora.org/coreos/ The Atomic Host Team [1] https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-coreos/ [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VUK3CJ5LO4ROUH3JTCDVHYAVVYAOCU62/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Thanks for the info, But what about arches that are not x86_64 ? Where could we found for exemple the ppc64le coreos replacement of Atomic Host ? Is there already a web page to retrieve them ? -- Michel Normand ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora Atomic Host Two Week Release Announcement: 29.20190820.0
On 8/20/19 7:56 PM, nore...@fedoraproject.org wrote: We are releasing images from multiple architectures but please note that x86_64 architecture is the only one that undergoes automated testing at this time. Is there wiki pages that describe what are those automated tests, and how/where they have been run ? -- Michel Normand ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 31 release-blocking deliverables
On 8/6/19 2:39 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: The list of release-blocking deliverables for Fedora 31 is now available[1]. If there are any changes that should be made that were part of an already-accepted Fedora 31 Change proposal, please let me know. If an edit is required that was not part of an accepted Change proposal, please file a FESCo ticket[2]. Please note that this is the first time we have used an announcement-based model instead of a poll-based model for blockers as approved by FESCo[3]. I am open to your suggestions on timing and format for this in future releases. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/31/ReleaseBlocking [2] https://pagure.io/fesco/new_issue [3] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2108 Thank you for the information, The list of deliverables is drastically shorter for 31 (1) than it was for 30 (4) ! Why ppc64le, s390x deliverables not listed for 31 release ? Do we have different Release process for Container and Silverblue deliverables ? (4) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/30/ReleaseBlocking -- Michel Normand ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
f28/f29 container composes failure since a while, is it already tracked by an issue ?
In fedora registry (1) we have f30/rawhide containers updated from last compose (2) but f28 last dated 20181007 but f29 last dated 20190218 Probably related to the DOOMED status reported in Container compose (3) Where f28/f29 traceback.global file reports failures. Is there already known issue tracking this Container compose failure ? (1) https://registry.fedoraproject.org/repo/fedora/tags/ (2) https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/latest-Fedora-30/compose/Container/ https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/latest-Fedora-Rawhide/compose/Container/ (3) https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/container/Fedora-Container-28-20190403.0/ https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/container/Fedora-Container-28-20190403.0/logs/global/traceback.global.log https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/container/Fedora-Container-29-20190404.0/ https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/container/Fedora-Container-29-20190404.0/logs/global/traceback.global.log -- Michel Normand ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora 28 is officially here! also available for secondary architectures
On 01/05/2018 16:00, Matthew Miller wrote: It's almost Mother's Day, and that means it's time for Fedora 28, which is officially released today. Congratulations to everyone who contributed to this amazingly smooth and polished release. You all are awesome. Read the official announcement at: * https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-28/ or just go ahead and grab it from: * https://getfedora.org/ As a reminder and because not very clear in above getfedora.org, the secondary architectures (aarch64, ppc64/ppc64le, s390x) are downloadable from: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/alt/ (accessible from "Alternative Downloads" => "Alternate Architectures" -- Michel Normand ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
git clone ... Permission denied
Since today, I have a problem accessing the openqa git tree from pagure. I do not understand what I am doing wrong. any suggestion ? === $git clone -v https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/os-autoinst-distri-fedora.git Cloning into 'os-autoinst-distri-fedora'... fatal: unable to access 'https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/os-autoinst-distri-fedora.git/': Failed to connect to pagure.io port 443: Permission denied === -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: missing f27 images from createhdds for PowerPC on openqa.stg
On 27/11/2017 18:01, Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 09:32 +0100, Normand wrote: Hello Adam, As per openQA output failure (1) it seems the createhdds was not executed for PowerPC on openqa.stg. I do not know how it is done for x86-64, but we would probably need to do something similar for PowerPC. We already do. If the image isn't there, it means creation of it is failing and we need to figure out why... I do not know how I could help to investigate that. But what I already verified is that createhdds is correctly generating the f27 images the local Power8 host we are using for our openQA tests. -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
missing f27 images from createhdds for PowerPC on openqa.stg
Hello Adam, As per openQA output failure (1) it seems the createhdds was not executed for PowerPC on openqa.stg. I do not know how it is done for x86-64, but we would probably need to do something similar for PowerPC. (1) https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/210974/file/autoinst-log.txt === end time: 2017-11-26 14:05:25 result: setup failure: Cannot find HDD_1 asset hdd/disk_f27_minimal_2_ppc64le.img! === -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
what openQA packages versions on openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org
Hello Adam, What are the currently running openQA rpm versions on openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org ? I saw in (1) that this version is sorting the successive runs with most recents on top, which is an option I like. But we do not have such behaviour on our openQA server running f26 fedora with following openQA versions: === $rpm -qa |grep -i openqa |sort openqa-4.4-49.20170409gitfead7af.fc26.noarch openqa-client-4.4-49.20170409gitfead7af.fc26.noarch openqa-common-4.4-49.20170409gitfead7af.fc26.noarch openqa-httpd-4.4-49.20170409gitfead7af.fc26.noarch openqa-plugin-fedmsg-4.4-49.20170409gitfead7af.fc26.noarch openqa-worker-4.4-49.20170409gitfead7af.fc26.noarch === (1) https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/group_overview/3 -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Could we have a git branch that map openQA source used by openqa.stg ?
Hello Adam,
I discovered this morning that the openQA running on openqa.stg has some
hack code (1) but this change is not visible in master or staging branch
on pagure.
So I am not able to identify if any other changes are present on the
machine.
Would it be possible to have a remote read access to the openQA source
code used by openqa.stg to help for test failure investigation ?
(1)
https://openqa.stg.fedoraproject.org/tests/156101/modules/server_cockpit_default/steps/1/src
===
sub run {
my $self = shift;
# HACK HACK HACK
assert_script_run "setenforce 0";
# check cockpit appears to be enabled and running and firewall is
setup
assert_script_run 'systemctl is-enabled cockpit.socket';
===
--
Michel Normand
___
qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
How to handle patches for openqa_fedora in Pagure ?
Hello Adam, I saw you copied the git trees of openqa from Bitbucket to Pagure as per ticket T863 (1) What is the way to submit patches on openqa_fedora in Pagure ? Are there fork and pull-request functionality in Pagure ? or do I have to handle in another place my changes and submit patches by email ? (1) https://phab.qa.fedoraproject.org/T863 -- Michel Normand ___ qa-devel mailing list -- qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to qa-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedpkg update cannot find release f24
On 02/06/2016 10:53, Charalampos Stratakis wrote: Hello Normand, As I saw there are no builds of your package. When you do some changes to your package you need to build it first with "fedpkg build". After that you can do a "fedpkg update" to sent it to bodhi so it goes through the testing repositories and then to stable (fedpkg update is not requires for rawhide/master branch). Thank you Charalampos for the answer. The build for this package is only for PowerPC (in ppc koji secondary) not in primary koji. I already did a fedpkg build request (taskid 3426817 (2)) as reported by second trial appended below (3) So if there is an error it is something else. Some basic workflow can be found here [0] [0]https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=PackageMaintainers/Join#Import.2C_commit.2C_and_build_your_package Regards, Charalampos Stratakis - Original Message - From: "Normand" <norm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 9:31:46 AM Subject: fedpkg update cannot find release f24 Hi there, This is the first time I am using fedpkg update command, and I hit the error (1). Is the "Cannot find release ..." error a concequence of f24 still not yet released ? or is there something wrong in my setup of fedpkg environment ? === (1) [michel@fc24ppc64le:~/work/libcxl] $git branch * f24 master $fedpkg update ... No handlers could be found for logger "fedora.client.bodhi" Creating a new update for libcxl-1.4-4.fc24 Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/bodhi", line 537, in main() File "/usr/bin/bodhi", line 225, in main data = bodhi.save(**update_args) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py", line 93, in wrapper raise BodhiClientException(problems) fedora.client.bodhi.BodhiClientException: Invalid koji build: libcxl-1.4-4.fc24 Cannot find release associated with build: libcxl-1.4-4.fc24, tags: [] Could not generate update request: Command 'bodhi --new --release f24 --file bodhi.template libcxl-1.4-4.fc24 --username michelmno' returned non-zero exit status 1 === === (3) [michel@fc24ppc64le:~/work/libcxl] $fedpkg build ... Could not execute build: Package libcxl-1.4-4.fc24 has already been built Note: You can skip this check with --skip-nvr-check. See help for more info. === (2) http://ppc.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3426817 === -- Michel Normand -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
fedpkg update cannot find release f24
Hi there, This is the first time I am using fedpkg update command, and I hit the error (1). Is the "Cannot find release ..." error a concequence of f24 still not yet released ? or is there something wrong in my setup of fedpkg environment ? === (1) [michel@fc24ppc64le:~/work/libcxl] $git branch * f24 master $fedpkg update ... No handlers could be found for logger "fedora.client.bodhi" Creating a new update for libcxl-1.4-4.fc24 Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/bodhi", line 537, in main() File "/usr/bin/bodhi", line 225, in main data = bodhi.save(**update_args) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fedora/client/bodhi.py", line 93, in wrapper raise BodhiClientException(problems) fedora.client.bodhi.BodhiClientException: Invalid koji build: libcxl-1.4-4.fc24 Cannot find release associated with build: libcxl-1.4-4.fc24, tags: [] Could not generate update request: Command 'bodhi --new --release f24 --file bodhi.template libcxl-1.4-4.fc24 --username michelmno' returned non-zero exit status 1 === -- Michel Normand -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible PPC kernel bug on builders
On 08/10/2014 08:36, Dan Horák wrote: On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 16:27:52 -0600 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com wrote: I posted about this 5 days ago on ppc list [1], but have had no response. I tried to get some attention on #fedora-ppc today, also with no success. I am failing miserably to get the attention of any of the PPC folks, so I am trying email here to see if this will work. Still nothing. Can anybody help me get the attention of somebody on the PPC team? we know about it, don't have any answer yet :-( Dan, is there a bug reference ? -- Michel Normand -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
