[Test-Announce] Proposal to CANCEL: 2018-07-09 Fedora QA Meeting
Hi folks! I'm proposing we cancel the QA meeting on Monday. I don't see anything urgent to discuss, so let's take the time off. If you're aware of anything important we have to discuss this week, please do reply to this mail and we can go ahead and run the meeting. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test-announce mailing list -- test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-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/test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WSPKRDYU46VEQ6UDBAGQVNEEIIMQKHE7/
Re: Broken dnf from 06-30-2018
On Fri, 2018-07-06 at 12:33 +0100, Russel Winder wrote: > By pure fluke I ran "dnf check-update --refresh" not as root and got: > > RuntimeError: C++ std::exception: Failed to open backup database: > /var/lib/dnf/history/history-2015-04-01.sqlite > > Surprising in that I have run this command not as root before and it didn't > fail, but the file was owned root:root on 0600 so the failure is not a > surprise. The file being in /var I took the view that it is ephemeral and so > deleted it. > > Now as root I get proper behaviour, and indeed as not root I get proper > behaviour. That's interesting, but rather odd, as it suggests that run as root dnf just *happens* to have a *different* issue involving the same file (since obviously, when run as root, it wouldn't have had any problem accessing it). I don't suppose you kept a backup of the file? That would be very helpful for investigating the problem... -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-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/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/FMFYVTT6XDJXIT6E6YUGGXUZQ7OEU6BS/
Re: Broken dnf from 06-30-2018
On Fri, 2018-07-06 at 11:57 +0100, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 12:49 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> […]
> >
> > But the new dnf doesn't break everywhere; I updated to it and didn't
> > hit any of the reported issues. I'm sure the DNF developers *do* test
> > it on their local machines, but this is not some sort of cast-iron
> > guarantee that it will never fail anywhere else.
>
> Can I suggest that the DNF people ought to be interested in the fact that two
> people prepared to say something on this list have a real problem that they
> have no idea how to fix without doing a reinstall from scratch.
Sure they are. So far as I'm aware, no-one claimed that the bugs
*aren't* a problem, did they?
> It sounds like there is a set up for which there is no problem and that is
> good. It implies there is hope!
>
> If given direction I can create a list of all packages installed, George I
> suspect can do likewise. This then might be able to allow people to ascertain
> what went wrong, why the tests didn't find it, and (the most important thing)
> how to get out of this situation.
It wouldn't hurt (it's easy to do: rpm -qa | sort -u >
packagelist.txt), but it may not necessarily help either. The problem
may not be down to some specific combination of packages, but some
other factor to do with exactly how your repositories are set up or
something like that.
> I did an "strace dnf check-update" and got:
>
> …
> pwrite64(24,
> "\305\33\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\34\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\35\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\36\10\3\2"...,
> 1024, 1595392) = 1024
> pwrite64(24,
> "s\2\305\215\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\216\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\217\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\220\10"...,
> 1024, 1596416) = 1024
> pwrite64(24,
> "\3\7s\2\305\377\10\3\2\3\7s\2\306\0\10\3\2\3\7s\2\306\1\10\3\2\3\7s\2\306"...,
> 609, 1597440) = 609
> munmap(0x7f95ff0c8000, 1598055) = 0
> close(24) = 0
> --- SIGSEGV {si_signo=SIGSEGV, si_code=SEGV_MAPERR, si_addr=0x40} ---
> +++ killed by SIGSEGV (core dumped) +++
> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
>
> but that isn't entirely helpful on its own I guess.
No, generally speaking, when you get a core dump, the backtrace of the
core dump (as generated by abrt, if you're lucky) is the most useful
thing you can provide. strace is only helpful in some specific
situations.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-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/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/RHB5YH6QHXENCLK6IZ7XOLLNCQ4VXMJG/
Re: Broken dnf from 06-30-2018
By pure fluke I ran "dnf check-update --refresh" not as root and got: RuntimeError: C++ std::exception: Failed to open backup database: /var/lib/dnf/history/history-2015-04-01.sqlite Surprising in that I have run this command not as root before and it didn't fail, but the file was owned root:root on 0600 so the failure is not a surprise. The file being in /var I took the view that it is ephemeral and so deleted it. Now as root I get proper behaviour, and indeed as not root I get proper behaviour. I am now upgrading all my Fedora Rawhide machines. :-) -- Russel. === Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-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/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YORASOA6X7BT3Y5743344O5NFDQVBOJS/
Re: Broken dnf from 06-30-2018
On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 12:49 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
[…]
>
> But the new dnf doesn't break everywhere; I updated to it and didn't
> hit any of the reported issues. I'm sure the DNF developers *do* test
> it on their local machines, but this is not some sort of cast-iron
> guarantee that it will never fail anywhere else.
Can I suggest that the DNF people ought to be interested in the fact that two
people prepared to say something on this list have a real problem that they
have no idea how to fix without doing a reinstall from scratch.
It sounds like there is a set up for which there is no problem and that is
good. It implies there is hope!
If given direction I can create a list of all packages installed, George I
suspect can do likewise. This then might be able to allow people to ascertain
what went wrong, why the tests didn't find it, and (the most important thing)
how to get out of this situation.
I did an "strace dnf check-update" and got:
…
pwrite64(24,
"\305\33\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\34\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\35\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\36\10\3\2"...,
1024, 1595392) = 1024
pwrite64(24,
"s\2\305\215\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\216\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\217\10\3\2\3\7s\2\305\220\10"...,
1024, 1596416) = 1024
pwrite64(24,
"\3\7s\2\305\377\10\3\2\3\7s\2\306\0\10\3\2\3\7s\2\306\1\10\3\2\3\7s\2\306"...,
609, 1597440) = 609
munmap(0x7f95ff0c8000, 1598055) = 0
close(24) = 0
--- SIGSEGV {si_signo=SIGSEGV, si_code=SEGV_MAPERR, si_addr=0x40} ---
+++ killed by SIGSEGV (core dumped) +++
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
but that isn't entirely helpful on its own I guess.
--
Russel.
===
Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-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/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/DPLLV5CF5QERGBRVPNS57736A2QHODEE/
