On Tue, 2024-10-08 at 11:02 +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hello Peter and Adam,
>
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > > I noticed that the vesa and fbdev X.org drivers were recently
> > > retired
> > > from Rawhide. There appears to be no Change for this. The commit
>
> I remember that there was a Change for this filed by Ajax some time
> ago:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyXorgDriverRemoval
>
> but I see now that FESCo didn't approve it at the time:
>
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3059#comment-875144
>
> So I guess that Peter's commit needs to be reverted...
>
> This is partially my fault, because Peter did ask me if I thought
> that it
> is time to drop the xorg-x11-drv-{vesa,fbdev} DDX drivers and I said
> yes.
This information is interesting , but remove of vesa , fbdev on Fedora
was not Peter ...
As stated in F37 Change: Legacy Xorg Driver Removal (System-Wide Change
proposal)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LegacyXorgDriverRemoval
nomodeset can be replaced by vga=ask and vesa and fbdev drivers can be
an alias of modesetting drive
That is the point for me, if we have an replacement there is no point
on keeping old code.
we are revisiting
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org…
and after reading a bit, I support Adam's decision and I'm convinced
that is the correct
> > > messages for the retirements refer to this old Change:
> > >
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceFbdevDrivers#Detailed_Descrip…
> > >
> > > but that Change was for Fedora 36, and was considered "completed"
> > > at
> > > the time with no removal of any X.org drivers. The scope of that
> > > Change
> > > says nothing about retiring X.org drivers.
> > >
> > > This has had at least one substantial impact that somebody
> > > noticed:
> > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/…
> > >
> > > booting with 'nomodeset', which has decades of history as a
> > > standard
> > > workaround for having some kind of issue with the native driver
> > > for
> > > your hardware, no longer works, it seems.
> > >
>
> Yes, agreed that we shouldn't break that.
>
> > > To me this is a significant change which maybe should be a
> > > Change, not
> > > just slipped in with reference to a Change from six releases ago
> > > which
> > > did not have this in its scope.
> >
>
> Yeah, probably Ajax's proposal could be revisited.
>
> > In all fallback cases it should be using simpledrm and the
> > associated
> > mesa driver. There's been a number of changes since the original F-
> > 36
> > change that has moved a bunch of that stuff forward to the point
> > that
> > there's little to no fbdev left, did you mean vesa?
> >
> > I don't see enough info on that thread to tell.
> >
>
> I believe this could be a problem for x86 legacy BIOS systems that
> are not
> setting a VGA mode using the "vga=" kernel cmdline parameter. Since
> in that
> case a VESA mode isn't set and so a "simple-framebuffer" device won't
> be
> registered and match the simpledrm driver.
>
> In those cases, probably just goes from vgacon -> Xorg + xorg-x11-
> drv-vesa.
> The user won't have a fbcon/VT, but at least will get Xorg working
> with the
> user-space vesa driver.
>
> A solution could be for Anaconda to add a "vga=ask" or "vga=795" (a
> default
> resolution of 1920x1080) to the kernel cmdline or the "safe graphics
> mode"
> entry. That way, a "simple-framebuffer" device will be registered by
> sysfb
> and the simpledrm driver probed.
>
> Then users will have both a fbcon/VT and could even start a wayland
> session
> even in the "safe graphics mode".
>
> > P
> > --
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Javier Martinez Canillas
> Core Platforms
> Red Hat
>
--
Sérgio M. B.
I noticed that the vesa and fbdev X.org drivers were recently retired
from Rawhide. There appears to be no Change for this. The commit
messages for the retirements refer to this old Change:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ReplaceFbdevDrivers#Detailed_Descrip…
but that Change was for Fedora 36, and was considered "completed" at
the time with no removal of any X.org drivers. The scope of that Change
says nothing about retiring X.org drivers.
This has had at least one substantial impact that somebody noticed:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/…
booting with 'nomodeset', which has decades of history as a standard
workaround for having some kind of issue with the native driver for
your hardware, no longer works, it seems.
To me this is a significant change which maybe should be a Change, not
just slipped in with reference to a Change from six releases ago which
did not have this in its scope.
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net
Hi,
I've been having a consistent failure of startx apparently due to the addition of "nomodeset" to the kernel boot parameters. I have been using "nomodeset" for several years. This has been happening for about 2 weeks. See startx log below.
Has anyone else seen this problem?
Best regards,
George...
xauth: file /root/.serverauth.136471 does not exist
xauth: (stdin):2: unknown command "3cf149665e8d99e82510d31544f1a594"
X.Org X Server 1.21.1.13
X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
Current Operating System: Linux fc42 6.12.0-0.rc0.20240927git075dbe9f6e3c.14.fc42.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Fri Sep 27 17:02:57 U
TC 2024 x86_64
Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=(hd0,msdos1)/vmlinuz-6.12.0-0.rc0.20240927git075dbe9f6e3c.14.fc42.x86_64 root=UUID=6ef3dfc3-32ed-4f01
-bebb-64f66a016d37 ro resume=UUID=e3537362-f3a8-48f3-94e7-f7b4de63fe42 nomodeset vga 791 net.ifnames=0 biosdevname=0 audit=0 selinux=
0
Build ID: xorg-x11-server 21.1.13-4.fc42
Current version of pixman: 0.43.4
Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org
to make sure that you have the latest version.
Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting,
(++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational,
(WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown.
(==) Log file: "/var/log/Xorg.0.log", Time: Wed Oct 2 10:37:28 2024
(==) Using config directory: "/etc/X11/xorg.conf.d"
(==) Using system config directory "/usr/share/X11/xorg.conf.d"
(EE)
Fatal server error:
(EE) no screens found(EE)
(EE)
Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support
at http://wiki.x.org
for help.
(EE) Please also check the log file at "/var/log/Xorg.0.log" for additional information.
(EE)
(EE) Server terminated with error (1). Closing log file.
xinit: giving up
xinit: unable to connect to X server: Connection refused
xinit: server error
Having a problem when upgrading an installed F41:
...
sudo dnf upgrade
Breaks with:
transaction failed: Rpm transaction failed.
- file /usr/lib64/libtesseract.so.5.4.1 from install of
tesseract-libs-5.4.1-4.fc41.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
tesseract-5.4.1-2.fc41.x86_64
Anybody could solve this problem??
Kind regards
Joachim Backes
--
Fedora release 41 (Forty One)
6.11.2-300.fc41.x86_64
Joachim Backes <joachim.backes(a)rhrk.uni-kl.de>
https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/
Hey folks,
A few moons ago, I volunteered to write a Beta Release Criteria. The idea
is to set a "criteria"
to have Beta images with Updates Testing enabled by default. Note, we *do*
this and have been doing this for some time and nothing has broken badly
due to keeping UT repos enabled.
This IMO will encourage our community to try to test more Beta images and
package sets which will be served to them when they upgrade to Beta or
install beta from various installation sources.
Proposed Beta Criteria:
Release identification
A fedora-release package containing the correct names and information and a
fedora-repos package containing the correct repository configuration for a
Beta Fedora release must be present on release-blocking images and the
appropriately versioned generic-release package must be available in the
release repository.
updates-testing enabled
One specific expectation is that the updates-testing repository and any
corresponding repositories (e.g. updates-testing-modular) must be enabled
for upgrades to beta and fresh installs.
Please let me know your thoughts.
--
//sumantro
Fedora QE
TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED <https://redhat.com/trusted>
# F10 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2024-10-07
# Time: 16:00 UTC
# Location:
https://matrix.to/#/#blocker-review:fedoraproject.org?web-instance[element.…
Hi folks! It's time for a Fedora 41 blocker review meeting! We have 5
proposed blockers and 1 proposed freeze exception for Final.
Here is a handy link which should show you the meeting time
in your local time:
https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Fedora+41+Blocker…
The meeting will be on Matrix. Click the link above to join in a web
client - you can authenticate with your FAS account - or use a
dedicated client of your choosing.
If you have time this weekend, you can take a look at the proposed or
accepted blockers before the meeting - the full lists can be found
here: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ .
Remember, you can also now vote on bugs outside of review meetings! If
you look at the bug list in the blockerbugs app, you'll see links
labeled "Vote!" next to all proposed blockers and freeze exceptions.
Those links take you to tickets where you can vote.
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review has instructions on how
exactly you do it. We usually go through the tickets shortly before the
meeting and apply any clear votes, so the meeting will just cover bugs
where there wasn't a clear outcome in the ticket voting yet. **THIS
MEANS IF YOU VOTE NOW, THE MEETING WILL BE SHORTER!**
We'll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the
Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they're not
fixed. Information on the release criteria for F40 can be found on the
wiki [0].
For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process,
check out these links:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process
And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting
works - or how it's supposed to go and you want to run one - check out
the SOP on the wiki:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
Have a good weekend and see you on Monday!
[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net
=====================================
# #meeting:fedoraproject.org: Quality
=====================================
Meeting started by @adamwill:fedora.im at 2024-09-30 15:00:10
Meeting summary
---------------
* TOPIC: Roll Call (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:00:16)
* TOPIC: Previous meeting follow-up (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:04:49)
* INFO: "kparal and adamw to work on common issues ahead of Beta release tomorrow" - we did that, I think we covered all the proposed ones, see https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/c/ask/common-issues/82 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:05:24)
* INFO: "sumantro to draft a beta criteria requiring updates-testing to be enabled" - sumantro is working on this, it'll be done soon (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:13:25)
* INFO: "adamw and/or kparal to propose rewording of the beta upgrade criterion footnote about package sets" - we didn't get to this yet, we'll try and do it for next time (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:15:21)
* ACTION: adamw to propose rewording of the beta upgrade criterion footnote about package sets (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:15:29)
* TOPIC: Fedora 41 status (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:17:09)
* INFO: 41 seems to be rolling along fairly smoothly, GNOME 47.0 is in, KDE 6.1.90 (6.2 beta) is in (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:19:38)
* TOPIC: Test Day / community event status (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:36:39)
* INFO: kernel 6.11 test week is underway at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2024-09-29_Kernel_6.11_Test_Week (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:43:16)
* INFO: FCOS and IoT test weeks starts 2024-10-07 at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:Fedora_41_CoreOS and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2024-10-07_Fedora_41_IoT_Edition (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:43:38)
* INFO: an Atomic test week has been proposed and is being worked on at https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/issue/791 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:43:54)
* INFO: KDE Plasma 6.2 release is timed tightly against our release schedule, Conan Kudo will try to co-ordinate that, we may need to grant FEs (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:47:13)
* TOPIC: Open floor (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:47:44)
* INFO: previous info about KDE was meant for this section (@adamwill:fedora.im, 15:47:51)
Meeting ended at 2024-09-30 16:00:18
Action items
------------
* adamw to propose rewording of the beta upgrade criterion footnote about package sets
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* @adamwill:fedora.im (59)
* @conan_kudo:matrix.org (33)
* @sumantrom:fedora.im (22)
* @farchord:fedora.im (20)
* @frantisekz:fedora.im (13)
* @kparal:matrix.org (10)
* @nielsenb:fedora.im (8)
* @zodbot:fedora.im (6)
* @lruzicka:matrix.org (3)
* @geraldosimiao:matrix.org (2)
* @derekenz:fedora.im (2)
* @meetbot:fedora.im (2)
* @jnsamyak:matrix.org (1)
* @jrelvas:fedora.im (1)
* @amoloney:fedora.im (1)
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net
With the arrival of GIMP 3 on Fedora 41, it is time to retire the long
dead upstream GIMP plugins due to their
dependency to Python 2.7.
gimp-layer-via-copy-cut:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gimp-layer-via-copy-cut
gimp-save-for-web: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gimp-save-for-web
Both packages are listed on fedora-obsolete-packages pull-request which
should be updated before Fedora 41 release.
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer