Re: Fedora Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 02:33:05PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I did close the infra ticket:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9271
> Anyhow, happy testing. 


Thanks Kevin!

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 12:08:58PM -0700, Erich Eickmeyer wrote:
> HI all,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 2:36 pm, Matthew Miller 
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 02:25:25PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >  There's a FBR (freeze break request) to patch all the builders to
> > > fix
> > >  this problem[1], but I don't know if it has been applied yet.
> > > 
> > >  [1]: 
> > > 
> > 
> > Ah, yeah, looks like it has been. And I see a Jam image built. So
> > hopefully
> > this is good to go?
> > 
> 
> So far as I can tell, this has indeed been sorted. Thanks to everyone
> involved!

Yeah, sorry for not posting back here when it was applied. 

I did close the infra ticket:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9271

Anyhow, happy testing. 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Erich Eickmeyer]

HI all,

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 2:36 pm, Matthew Miller 
 wrote:

On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 02:25:25PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
 There's a FBR (freeze break request) to patch all the builders to 
fix

 this problem[1], but I don't know if it has been applied yet.

 [1]: 



Ah, yeah, looks like it has been. And I see a Jam image built. So 
hopefully

this is good to go?



So far as I can tell, this has indeed been sorted. Thanks to everyone 
involved!


Erich

___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 02:25:25PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> There's a FBR (freeze break request) to patch all the builders to fix
> this problem[1], but I don't know if it has been applied yet.
> 
> [1]: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastruct...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/7M3DLZCPKOKTMJGHJE3Z54LLPWRVEVYS/

Ah, yeah, looks like it has been. And I see a Jam image built. So hopefully
this is good to go?

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 2:23 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:52:25PM -0700, Erich Eickmeyer wrote:
> > This is just very disappointing [3]. Unless there is a huge delay in
> > the beta timeline due to *actual* blockers, we've got no beta to
> > test since this is 1-2 weeks out due to further testing needed [2].
> > So, unless this minor Koji release gets expedited, I've done a ton
> > of hard work and nothing to show for it.
>
> Yeah, disappointing our spins maintainers like this isn't living up to our
> goals. Can this particular thing be worked-around in the kickstart %post for
> beta, instead of using `bootloader --append`?
>

There's a FBR (freeze break request) to patch all the builders to fix
this problem[1], but I don't know if it has been applied yet.

[1]: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastruct...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/7M3DLZCPKOKTMJGHJE3Z54LLPWRVEVYS/



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:52:25PM -0700, Erich Eickmeyer wrote:
> This is just very disappointing [3]. Unless there is a huge delay in
> the beta timeline due to *actual* blockers, we've got no beta to
> test since this is 1-2 weeks out due to further testing needed [2].
> So, unless this minor Koji release gets expedited, I've done a ton
> of hard work and nothing to show for it.

Yeah, disappointing our spins maintainers like this isn't living up to our
goals. Can this particular thing be worked-around in the kickstart %post for
beta, instead of using `bootloader --append`?

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Erich Eickmeyer]

Hi Adam,

On 8/27/20 2:18 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:

Unfortunately, as Jam isn't a release-blocking image, it can't by
definition block the Beta release. Even if it doesn't build at all.

As Neal suggested, I'd recommend requesting the fix be backported to
our Koji by filing a ticket with the infra team.


Already done. [1]

This is just very disappointing [3]. Unless there is a huge delay in the 
beta timeline due to *actual* blockers, we've got no beta to test since 
this is 1-2 weeks out due to further testing needed [2]. So, unless this 
minor Koji release gets expedited, I've done a ton of hard work and 
nothing to show for it.


[1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9271
[2] https://pagure.io/koji/issue/2437
[3] I just can't win, can I?

--
Erich Eickmeyer
Maintainer
Fedora Jam
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 19:07 -0700, Erich Eickmeyer wrote:
> HI all,
> 
> Since the release of Koji 1.22, there has been a bug [1] blocking any 
> Fedora Jam 33 or Rawhide iso images from being spun. As you can imagine, 
> this is making me quite nervous. As it turns out, I'm waiting for Koji 
> 1.22 to be released so that images can start building again. If this 
> isn't done in time for beta, then that means Fedora Jam will be unable 
> to participate in beta testing.

Unfortunately, as Jam isn't a release-blocking image, it can't by
definition block the Beta release. Even if it doesn't build at all.

As Neal suggested, I'd recommend requesting the fix be backported to
our Koji by filing a ticket with the infra team.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Erich Eickmeyer]

Hi Neal,

On 8/26/2020 7:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:08 PM Erich Eickmeyer
 wrote:

HI all,

Since the release of Koji 1.22, there has been a bug [1] blocking any
Fedora Jam 33 or Rawhide iso images from being spun. As you can imagine,
this is making me quite nervous. As it turns out, I'm waiting for Koji
1.22 to be released so that images can start building again. If this
isn't done in time for beta, then that means Fedora Jam will be unable
to participate in beta testing.


If you'd like this fix backported to Fedora's Koji instance ASAP, you
should file a ticket with the infrastructure team here:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues

I did this for the Btrfs stuff a while back:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9138


Ok, will do.


The issue in question is caused because Jam adds "threadirqs" as a boot
argument in addition to the normal boot arguments. This is a way to add
some low-latency characteristics to a kernel that isn't otherwise a
lowlatency kernel and is known to cut-down on xruns in audio production.

However, one question came up as to if threadirqs is a default in the
kernel configuration, but nobody could answer that. I was wondering if
anyone on this list knew?


threadirqs are not default in the Fedora kernel, as far as I recall.

Contrary to popular belief, CONFIG_IRQ_FORCED_THREADING=y does not
default to threaded IRQs. It only enables the ability to turn them on
by passing "threadirqs" as a kernel parameter. Yes, I know this is
stupid and makes no sense, but Kconfigs are not designed to make
sense...


BIG facts.


I don't know if there's a good reason for them _not_ to be on by
default, though. It doesn't really cause a significant impairment in
almost every case I can think of...
Exactly. It is something I've been considering passing as a parameter in 
Ubuntu Studio as well since that it seems to solve a lot of xrun issues.

I'm also going to be a little more intentional with working with the
pipewire developers on figuring out jack compatibility issues during the
F34 release cycle.


Isn't the idea that PipeWire would replace JACK and PulseAudio for
most, if not all, cases in the Fedora 34 timeframe? The pace of
development there seems to indicate some very intentional drive toward
that.

Yes, that's the goal. Unfortunately, there are multiple instances where 
packages that use JACK are looking specifically for the .so and aren't 
finding it, then throwing dnf errors when they don't find what they're 
looking for. I'm not sure it there needs to be some sort of symbolic 
link for compatibility reasons, but that's something I'm planning on 
exploring with the PipeWire team.


--
Erich Eickmeyer
Maintainer
Fedora Jam
___
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 Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:08 PM Erich Eickmeyer
 wrote:
>
> HI all,
>
> Since the release of Koji 1.22, there has been a bug [1] blocking any
> Fedora Jam 33 or Rawhide iso images from being spun. As you can imagine,
> this is making me quite nervous. As it turns out, I'm waiting for Koji
> 1.22 to be released so that images can start building again. If this
> isn't done in time for beta, then that means Fedora Jam will be unable
> to participate in beta testing.
>

If you'd like this fix backported to Fedora's Koji instance ASAP, you
should file a ticket with the infrastructure team here:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues

I did this for the Btrfs stuff a while back:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9138

> The issue in question is caused because Jam adds "threadirqs" as a boot
> argument in addition to the normal boot arguments. This is a way to add
> some low-latency characteristics to a kernel that isn't otherwise a
> lowlatency kernel and is known to cut-down on xruns in audio production.
>
> However, one question came up as to if threadirqs is a default in the
> kernel configuration, but nobody could answer that. I was wondering if
> anyone on this list knew?
>

threadirqs are not default in the Fedora kernel, as far as I recall.

Contrary to popular belief, CONFIG_IRQ_FORCED_THREADING=y does not
default to threaded IRQs. It only enables the ability to turn them on
by passing "threadirqs" as a kernel parameter. Yes, I know this is
stupid and makes no sense, but Kconfigs are not designed to make
sense...

I don't know if there's a good reason for them _not_ to be on by
default, though. It doesn't really cause a significant impairment in
almost every case I can think of...

> I'm also going to be a little more intentional with working with the
> pipewire developers on figuring out jack compatibility issues during the
> F34 release cycle.
>

Isn't the idea that PipeWire would replace JACK and PulseAudio for
most, if not all, cases in the Fedora 34 timeframe? The pace of
development there seems to indicate some very intentional drive toward
that.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
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

Fedora Jam 33 Beta - Possible Blocker?

[Erich Eickmeyer]

HI all,

Since the release of Koji 1.22, there has been a bug [1] blocking any 
Fedora Jam 33 or Rawhide iso images from being spun. As you can imagine, 
this is making me quite nervous. As it turns out, I'm waiting for Koji 
1.22 to be released so that images can start building again. If this 
isn't done in time for beta, then that means Fedora Jam will be unable 
to participate in beta testing.


The issue in question is caused because Jam adds "threadirqs" as a boot 
argument in addition to the normal boot arguments. This is a way to add 
some low-latency characteristics to a kernel that isn't otherwise a 
lowlatency kernel and is known to cut-down on xruns in audio production.


However, one question came up as to if threadirqs is a default in the 
kernel configuration, but nobody could answer that. I was wondering if 
anyone on this list knew?


I'm also going to be a little more intentional with working with the 
pipewire developers on figuring out jack compatibility issues during the 
F34 release cycle.


Thanks,
Erich

[1] https://pagure.io/koji/issue/2437

--
Erich Eickmeyer
Maintainer
Fedora Jam
___
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