Not strictly a "test" question but.....
I rebuilt NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6.git20140704 from F21 for F20 and installed it. After 2 days I have not seen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059597. It normally crops up within 6 hrs of a reboot. So, I've fairly high confidence that this has fixed the issue.
How best to go about asking for NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6 be officially added to F20? I've made a note in the bugzilla....but there doesn't appear to have been any activity on bug since being reported back in January.
On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 07:30 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Not strictly a "test" question but.....
I rebuilt NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6.git20140704 from F21 for F20 and installed it. After 2 days I have not seen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059597. It normally crops up within 6 hrs of a reboot. So, I've fairly high confidence that this has fixed the issue.
How best to go about asking for NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6 be officially added to F20? I've made a note in the bugzilla....but there doesn't appear to have been any activity on bug since being reported back in January.
Bugzilla is usually the best way, I guess Dan hasn't had time for this one yet :( I'll try and bring it to his attention.
I mentioned this on the bug, but 0.9.9.0 -> 0.9.10.0 is a major upgrade and probably too dangerous a change in a core component like NM for a stable release. What would be better is if we can identify the specific commit that fixes the bug, and backport that fix.
Thanks, and sorry we didn't get to the report before now.
On 09/17/14 15:23, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 07:30 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Not strictly a "test" question but.....
I rebuilt NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6.git20140704 from F21 for F20 and installed it. After 2 days I have not seen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059597. It normally crops up within 6 hrs of a reboot. So, I've fairly high confidence that this has fixed the issue.
How best to go about asking for NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6 be officially added to F20? I've made a note in the bugzilla....but there doesn't appear to have been any activity on bug since being reported back in January.
Bugzilla is usually the best way, I guess Dan hasn't had time for this one yet :( I'll try and bring it to his attention.
Thanks.
I mentioned this on the bug, but 0.9.9.0 -> 0.9.10.0 is a major upgrade and probably too dangerous a change in a core component like NM for a stable release. What would be better is if we can identify the specific commit that fixes the bug, and backport that fix.
Thanks, and sorry we didn't get to the report before now.
I was concerned about it being a major upgrade. But don't know if it is possible to identify the actual patch that fixes the issue. As always, I'd be willing to test patches.
FWIW, I'm not having any issues with running the F21 NM. It also fixes another issue with not totally disabling a link.
On Ter, 2014-09-16 at 07:30 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Not strictly a "test" question but.....
I rebuilt NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6.git20140704 from F21 for F20 and installed it. After 2 days I have not seen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059597. It normally crops up within 6 hrs of a reboot. So, I've fairly high confidence that this has fixed the issue.
How best to go about asking for NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6 be officially added to F20? I've made a note in the bugzilla....but there doesn't appear to have been any activity on bug since being reported back in January.
backport ? backport means backport cherry pick a patch , what patch ?
On the other hand , http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=335
F20 have NetworkManager-0.9.9.0-44.git20131003.fc20 and F21 have NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6.git20140704.fc21
upgrade 0.9.9 to 0.9.10 could not ever happen on F20
On Wed, 2014-09-17 at 11:57 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
F20 have NetworkManager-0.9.9.0-44.git20131003.fc20 and F21 have NetworkManager-0.9.10.0-6.git20140704.fc21
Why are we still shipping git snapshots for such a critical system component? If these versions are good enough for other distros, they should be released to other distros, and if they are not, then they should not be considered good enough for Fedora.