Sam,
Thanks for your response. Note, however, that this info is "as of"
almost a year ago. Has any progress been made since then?
The only remotely possible way I know of to install Fedora on a P4B is
to follow the complex instructions at
https://medium.com/ironhaul/installing-64-bit-fedora-on-the
On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 16:00 -0300, Geraldo Simião Kutz wrote:
> Same issue here on the f33 workstation rawhide iso built yesterday.
>
> Same workaround as you, tty2 and startx...
Just boot with enforcing=0.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP:
The Go/No-Go meeting is Thursday. Here we go!
Action summary
Accepted blockers
-
1. sddm — login stuck when changing users repeatedly (log out, log in
a different one) — ASSIGNED
ACTION: kf5-kglobalaccel maintainers to provide systemd service file
NEEDINFO: rd
I just installed the latest unofficial nightly version of Fedora 33
Workstation, using the
"Everything Boot" iso.
I am in it now writing this email, and have spent about 30 minutes surfing
the web, and tinkering
with settings.
The only thing unusual about this install was that this was my first e
Same issue here on the f33 workstation rawhide iso built yesterday.
Same workaround as you, tty2 and startx...
=(
Em sex, 9 de out de 2020 14:15, David escreveu:
> I mentioned yesterday, I was having a gdm issue.
>
> I was able to get back into my Rawhide graphical environment,
> and ran yeste
No missing expected images.
Failed openQA tests: 7/181 (x86_64)
New failures (same test not failed in Fedora-33-20201008.n.1):
ID: 689503 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/689503
ID: 689515 Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc
On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 10:43 -0700, Tom London wrote:
> Similar issue here...
>
> Adding 'enforcing=0' to the boot options "makes it work for me".
Yeah, it's an selinux issue. Sorry, I caught it and filed it but
should've given the list a heads up. Bug report is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bu
OLD: Fedora-33-20201008.n.1
NEW: Fedora-33-20201009.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 2
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:40.00 KiB
Size of
Similar issue here...
Adding 'enforcing=0' to the boot options "makes it work for me".
tom
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 10:15 AM David wrote:
> I mentioned yesterday, I was having a gdm issue.
>
> I was able to get back into my Rawhide graphical environment,
> and ran yesterday's update. I rebo
I mentioned yesterday, I was having a gdm issue.
I was able to get back into my Rawhide graphical environment,
and ran yesterday's update. I rebooted, and still have the
gdm issue.Meaning I have to hit Crtl-Alt-F2 while in gdm,
and then login in and then type "startx."
I have no idea yet
On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 08:01:15PM -0500, David wrote:
> I am excited to report that my Rawhide install finally borked, and now
> I am faced with either trying to learn how to fix it, or starting over from
> scratch.
I love this attitude!
> I had been away from my computer for about 24 hours, and
Missing expected images:
Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Compose FAILS proposed Rawhide gating check!
5 of 43 required tests failed, 8 results missing
openQA tests matching unsatisfied gating requirements shown with **GATING**
below
Failed openQA tests: 19/170 (x86_64)
Old failures (same test failed in Fed
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20201008.n.1
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20201009.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:0
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 0
Dropped packages:3
Upgraded packages: 59
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 0 B
Size of dropped packages:820.43
No missing expected images.
Passed openQA tests: 7/7 (x86_64)
--
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproj
No missing expected images.
Soft failed openQA tests: 1/16 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)
Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-IoT-34-20201008.0):
ID: 689076 Test: x86_64 IoT-dvd_ostree-iso iot_clevis
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/te
On 10/8/20 10:05 PM, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via test wrote:
This is a fairly harsh response. If you really meant to say "Never",
please elaborate. What is the issue? The P4B is an important product,
potentially one that will establish ARM as a valid desktop and small
server option. For Fedora t
16 matches
Mail list logo
