Re: F30 - podman run ; iptabels PRE_trusted
update = thank you for review and feedback of my message ... So, I have done (since the original message) , (2) `dnf update` cycles on that machine. To this end, I am now having success in the ` podman run --rm -it centos /bin/bash` command. If helpful I can add details or information as requested. Let me know if there is anything specific, OK? Otherwise, IF there is anything I should direct attention to let me know., OK? I am planing to start digging into networking/CNI (ideally IPv6 'containers'). I hope all have a great weekend Doug On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:05 PM Daniel Walsh wrote: > If you are trying out a podman packag eon Fedora rawhide, then open a > bugzilla on an issue on github.com/containers/libpod. > > > On 2/10/19 11:19 AM, Douglas E. Hopley Jr. wrote: > > Greetings. > Let me know if there is any specific details I can add to this. > > // > Looking to test 'podman' I pulled an image (with success). > When I went to run a container with podman run I got an error. > Specifically = [ > podman run --rm -it centos /bin/bash > error adding firewall rules for container > cd76e8db21afdb10df7a875c920bc274325aaa30457457f527bf928b27752da9: failed to > add the address 10.88.0.8/32 to trusted zone: COMMAND_FAILED: > '/usr/sbin/iptables-restore -w -n' failed: iptables-restore v1.8.0 > (legacy): Couldn't load target `PRE_trusted':No such file or directory > ] > > I can add more details, let me know what is needed, OK? > > - uname ~= 5.0.0-0.rc4.git3.1.fc30.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Feb 1 08:47:51 UTC > 2019 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > - podman --version = podman version 1.0.1-dev > > - podman info = [ > host: > BuildahVersion: 1.6-dev > Conmon: > package: podman-1.0.1-17.dev.gitd5593b8.fc30.x86_64 > path: /usr/libexec/podman/conmon > version: 'conmon version 1.12.0-dev, commit: > d3cac30f4e81084c7bc36922e02817841ccc3456' > Distribution: > distribution: fedora > version: "30" > MemFree: 462692352 > MemTotal: 1800531968 > OCIRuntime: > package: runc-1.0.0-70.dev.gite4fa8a4.fc30.x86_64 > path: /usr/bin/runc > version: |- > runc version 1.0.0-rc6+dev > commit: 5b54487295859772ddfc57918f10e82994e501ae > spec: 1.0.1-dev > SwapFree: 3871338496 > SwapTotal: 3871338496 > arch: amd64 > cpus: 1 > hostname: ipd2.ipcloud.net > kernel: 5.0.0-0.rc4.git3.1.fc30.x86_64 > os: linux > rootless: false > uptime: 99h 31m 17.95s (Approximately 4.12 days) > insecure registries: > registries: [] > registries: > registries: > - docker.io > - registry.fedoraproject.org > - quay.io > - registry.access.redhat.com > - registry.centos.org > store: > ConfigFile: /etc/containers/storage.conf > ContainerStore: > number: 3 > GraphDriverName: overlay > GraphOptions: > - overlay.mountopt=nodev > GraphRoot: /var/lib/containers/storage > GraphStatus: > Backing Filesystem: extfs > Native Overlay Diff: "true" > Supports d_type: "true" > Using metacopy: "false" > ImageStore: > number: 1 > RunRoot: /var/run/containers/storage > ] > > // > Is this a good way to report details like this? Is there a better/more > preferred way? > > Thanks for your time. > > Sincerely, > Doug > > ___ > 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 > > > ___ > 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 > ___ 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
Re: Testing Rawhide (F30) 0214 drop
On Thu, 2019-02-14 at 14:05 -0800, Thomas Gilliard wrote: > f30 liveinst unable to install bootloader > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677415 > > On 2/14/19 1:26 PM, pmkel...@frontier.com wrote: > > After down loading the 0214 drop ISO, I ran the ISO check sum and it > > passed. I burned the ISO to a DVD and the DVD check sum passed. The > > DVD was used to boot the test machine (Lenovo M58p with E8400 > > processor). The media check that runs right after boot passed. Install > > to Hard Disk was selected. Anaconda started normally. American English > > was selected. and on the next screen the keyboard and network were > > identified correctly. For the disk, the Delete All and Reclaim Space > > options were selected. The installation was started and seemed to run > > normally, but a pop up displayed a message that the boot loader could > > not be installed so the system would not be able to boot. I was not > > able to determine if the fault was with Anaconda or the file(s) that > > provide the boot loader code. I tried this twice with the same result. This is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1676357 , I already reported it this morning, and we fixed it a couple of hours ago. -- 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
Re: Testing Rawhide (F30) 0214 drop
f30 liveinst unable to install bootloader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1677415 On 2/14/19 1:26 PM, pmkel...@frontier.com wrote: After down loading the 0214 drop ISO, I ran the ISO check sum and it passed. I burned the ISO to a DVD and the DVD check sum passed. The DVD was used to boot the test machine (Lenovo M58p with E8400 processor). The media check that runs right after boot passed. Install to Hard Disk was selected. Anaconda started normally. American English was selected. and on the next screen the keyboard and network were identified correctly. For the disk, the Delete All and Reclaim Space options were selected. The installation was started and seemed to run normally, but a pop up displayed a message that the boot loader could not be installed so the system would not be able to boot. I was not able to determine if the fault was with Anaconda or the file(s) that provide the boot loader code. I tried this twice with the same result. Have a Great Day! Pat (tablepc) ___ 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 ___ 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
Testing Rawhide (F30) 0214 drop
After down loading the 0214 drop ISO, I ran the ISO check sum and it passed. I burned the ISO to a DVD and the DVD check sum passed. The DVD was used to boot the test machine (Lenovo M58p with E8400 processor). The media check that runs right after boot passed. Install to Hard Disk was selected. Anaconda started normally. American English was selected. and on the next screen the keyboard and network were identified correctly. For the disk, the Delete All and Reclaim Space options were selected. The installation was started and seemed to run normally, but a pop up displayed a message that the boot loader could not be installed so the system would not be able to boot. I was not able to determine if the fault was with Anaconda or the file(s) that provide the boot loader code. I tried this twice with the same result. Have a Great Day! Pat (tablepc) ___ 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
Re: RFC: DNF proposed Change submitted to FESCo
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 08:25:42AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > [1] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2088 > > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNF_Default_Best > Personally I think I'm fine with this. (Though I might suggest that ' > --nobest' instead be called '--skip-broken' or at least have it as an > alias, since AFAICS this change makes DNF behave the way yum used to, > and --skip-broken was the name of yum's equivalent to "--nobest"...) That makes a lot of sense, yes. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ 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
Re: RFC: DNF proposed Change submitted to FESCo
On Thu, 2019-02-14 at 09:05 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > Hi QA team, > > DNF is asking FESCo for approval to short circuit the Changes process > to land a change to the default configuration of dnf in Fedora 30. > Since this is a key part of our release deliverables, I'd like you to > weigh in on the FESCO ticket[1]. The full Change proposal is in the > wiki[2]. > > [1] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2088 > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNF_Default_Best Personally I think I'm fine with this. (Though I might suggest that ' --nobest' instead be called '--skip-broken' or at least have it as an alias, since AFAICS this change makes DNF behave the way yum used to, and --skip-broken was the name of yum's equivalent to "--nobest"...) -- 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
Fedora Rawhide-20190214.n.0 compose check report
No missing expected images. Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check! 8 of 47 required tests failed, 8 results missing openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING** below Failed openQA tests: 25/143 (x86_64), 3/24 (i386), 1/2 (arm) New failures (same test not failed in Rawhide-20190213.n.0): ID: 353025 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353025 ID: 353026 Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353026 ID: 353042 Test: i386 Workstation-live-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353042 ID: 353045 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default_upload **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353045 ID: 353046 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_default@uefi **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353046 ID: 353047 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso install_no_user **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353047 ID: 353056 Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_live URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353056 ID: 353132 Test: x86_64 universal install_european_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353132 ID: 353133 Test: x86_64 universal install_asian_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353133 ID: 353137 Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353137 ID: 353138 Test: x86_64 universal install_arabic_language URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353138 Old failures (same test failed in Rawhide-20190213.n.0): ID: 353005 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_role_deploy_domain_controller **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353005 ID: 353006 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353006 ID: 353009 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_cockpit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353009 ID: 353010 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso realmd_join_sssd **GATING** URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353010 ID: 353011 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_master URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353011 ID: 353012 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_replica URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353012 ID: 353013 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_freeipa_replication_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353013 ID: 353058 Test: i386 KDE-live-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353058 ID: 353059 Test: arm Minimal-raw_xz-raw.xz install_arm_image_deployment_upload URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353059 ID: 353074 Test: x86_64 universal support_server URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353074 ID: 353096 Test: x86_64 universal install_iscsi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353096 ID: 353122 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353122 ID: 353123 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353123 ID: 353124 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353124 ID: 353126 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353126 ID: 353141 Test: x86_64 universal install_kickstart_nfs URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353141 ID: 353144 Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_realmd_client URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353144 ID: 353160 Test: i386 universal upgrade_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353160 Soft failed openQA tests: 4/24 (i386), 2/143 (x86_64) (Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug) Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Rawhide-20190213.n.0): ID: 353020 Test: i386 Server-boot-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353020 ID: 353021 Test: i386 Server-dvd-iso install_default URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353021 ID: 353039 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353039 ID: 353040 Test: x86_64 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353040 ID: 353044 Test: i386 Workstation-boot-iso memory_check URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353044 ID: 353146 Test: i386 universal upgrade_2_desktop_32bit URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/353146 Passed openQA tests: 97/143 (x86_64), 17/24 (i386) New passes (same test not passed in Rawhide-20190213.n.0): ID: 352996 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/352996 ID: 352998 Test: x86_
Re: Eucalyptus
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 2:44 PM wrote: > > In the Cloud test matrix [1], there is an Eucalyptus section. > I don't know what it was (it is), but https://www.eucalyptus.com/ > doesn't exist anymore. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_30_Rawhide_20190214.n.0_Cloud > > Such session it should be dropped? Eucalyptus was a on prem clone of AWS using xen and was bought out by HP back in the day, it can certainly be removed. Peter ___ 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
Eucalyptus
In the Cloud test matrix [1], there is an Eucalyptus section. I don't know what it was (it is), but https://www.eucalyptus.com/ doesn't exist anymore. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_30_Rawhide_20190214.n.0_Cloud Such session it should be dropped? Ciao, A. ___ 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
RFC: DNF proposed Change submitted to FESCo
Hi QA team, DNF is asking FESCo for approval to short circuit the Changes process to land a change to the default configuration of dnf in Fedora 30. Since this is a key part of our release deliverables, I'd like you to weigh in on the FESCO ticket[1]. The full Change proposal is in the wiki[2]. [1] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2088 [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNF_Default_Best Thanks, BC -- Ben Cotton Fedora Program Manager TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ 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
