September 2017 - Atomic Working Group

[atomic-wg] Issue #322: [Test Day] Proposed Dates for F27 Atomic Test Day
by Dusty Mabe 20 Sep '17

20 Sep '17

dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` we talked about it today and the 29th sounds great! `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/322

1 0

[atomic-wg] PR #332: add me to the meeting invite
by Tomas Tomecek 20 Sep '17

20 Sep '17

ttomecek opened a new pull-request against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` add me to the meeting invite `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/pull-request/332

2 1

[atomic-wg] PR #334: Update meeting-people.txt
by David Duncan 20 Sep '17

20 Sep '17

davdunc opened a new pull-request against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` Update meeting-people.txt `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/pull-request/334

2 1

[atomic-wg] Issue #338: Add Examples to Container Guidelines
by Jason Brooks 20 Sep '17

20 Sep '17

jasonbrooks reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` as discussed in https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2017-09-06/fedora_atomic…: ``` 17:14:14 <jberkus> jbrooks: there was also a a request for two example dockerfiles, complete 17:14:22 <jberkus> one simple service, and one complex one 17:14:36 <jberkus> let's maybe create a ticket for that 17:14:57 <maxamillion> +1 17:15:07 <jbrooks> Don't we at least have a simple example in the container guidelines? 17:15:21 <kushal> jbrooks, maybe a better big application :) 17:15:25 <maxamillion> I think the example used for the workshop is a perfect "simple one" ... not sure it gets much more simple than the bc calculator 17:15:42 <ksinny> jbrooks: Is there any documentation to follow up on container workshop? couldn't attend it becasue of clashing workshop (Alternative arches debugging issues) which I was part of part of. 17:15:56 <ksinny> sorry, jberkus ^ 17:16:12 <jberkus> jbrooks: we don't actually 17:16:25 <jberkus> and the complex example (postgres) isn't end-to-end 17:16:40 <jbrooks> #action jbrooks to create issue for adding examples to container guidelines ``` `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/338

1 0

[atomic-wg] Issue #322: [Test Day] Proposed Dates for F27 Atomic Test Day
by Sumantro Mukherjee 19 Sep '17

19 Sep '17

sumantrom added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` @dustymabe there is a Kernel Test day on 27th , can you guys please make it 29th or 30th? If people are feeling its too soon , I am okay with delaying this till oct 2nd week. Thoughts? `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/322

1 0

[Fedocal] Reminder meeting : Atomic Working Group Weekly Meeting
by dusty＠dustymabe.com 19 Sep '17

19 Sep '17

Dear all, You are kindly invited to the meeting: Atomic Working Group Weekly Meeting on 2017-09-20 from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 UTC At fedora-meeting-1@freenode The meeting will be about: This is the meeting for the Fedora Atomic Working Group. We typically go over previous meeting action items and then cover all tickets with the meeting keyword: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting More information available at: [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Atomic_WG#Meetings](https://fedoraproject.or… Source: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/meeting/6370/

1 0

[atomic-wg] Issue #337: F26 updates/updates-testing branches have missing commits
by Micah Abbott 18 Sep '17

18 Sep '17

miabbott reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` The `HEAD` of the branches returns a commit when you `curl` them, but an inspection of the entire `ostree log` on each branch can't find said commit. This could cause problems when folks try to deploy by commit. updates-testing: ``` # curl -f https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/atomic/26/refs/heads/fedora/26/x86_64/te… f5cc5928cf44a11b93276c95a3f7ff4eb39a545575b65876cde21426e62d39f1 # ostree pull --commit-metadata-only --depth=-1 fedora-atomic:fedora/26/x86_64/testing/atomic-host 33 metadata, 0 content objects fetched; 17 KiB transferred in 5 seconds # ostree log fedora/26/x86_64/testing/atomic-host | head commit f53bb0efacc0959044ecc6a14b1751d59ba0e675f1804f29af801282c8e812a1 Date: 2017-09-15 04:09:51 +0000 Version: 26.103 (no subject) # ostree log fedora/26/x86_64/testing/atomic-host | grep f5cc5928cf44a11b93276c95a3f7ff4eb39a545575b65876cde21426e62d39f1 # ``` updates: ``` # curl -f https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/atomic/26/refs/heads/fedora/26/x86_64/up… f6378bcfdbf3264267f56bb05954aec5dd363b9b4a116ef28fd3a4ff20af3639 # ostree pull --commit-metadata-only --depth=-1 fedora-atomic:fedora/26/x86_64/updates/atomic-host 78 metadata, 0 content objects fetched; 32 KiB transferred in 10 seconds # ostree log fedora/26/x86_64/updates/atomic-host | head commit ec84d8b30ee5de761c19193717de54b2c33fd07e02b51a6b1855815c91f4e81a Date: 2017-08-31 22:18:45 +0000 Version: 26.117 (no subject) commit 25369a650e2fc90f3424c38e0d2e2f7cca317b62d6fcb0c49321178c8e4c3fc5 Date: 2017-08-28 15:53:40 +0000 Version: 26.116 (no subject) # ostree log fedora/26/x86_64/updates/atomic-host | grep f6378bcfdbf3264267f56bb05954aec5dd363b9b4a116ef28fd3a4ff20af3639 # ``` `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/337

2 4

[atomic-wg] Issue #336: F27 branch has been reset
by Micah Abbott 15 Sep '17

15 Sep '17

miabbott reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` Sometime within the last 24 hrs (I think) the F27 branch for Atomic Host got reset. Previously there were multiple commits on the branch, but as of today there is only one commit from Sept 1. ``` # ostree remote add --no-gpg-verify custom https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/atomic/27/ [root@fedora26ah-dev ~]# ostree pull --commit-metadata-only --depth=-1 custom:fedora/27/x86_64/atomic-host 2 metadata, 0 content objects fetched; 775 B transferred in 1 seconds [root@fedora26ah-dev ~]# ostree log fedora/27/x86_64/atomic-host commit fb3870488a644e179ba2ac587ee693ce4203e703e3e39c67257f479a1e28bf1c Date: 2017-09-01 16:41:54 +0000 Version: 27.20170901.n.1 (no subject) ``` `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/336

3 5

[atomic-wg] Issue #330: Unable to deploy older versions of F26AH because commits are not signed
by Micah Abbott 15 Sep '17

15 Sep '17

miabbott reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` It looks like the most recent F26AH release (26.120) has GPG verification turned on in the remote config, but the older commits are not signed. ``` # cat /etc/ostree/remotes.d/fedora-atomic.conf [remote "fedora-atomic"] url=https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/atomic/26/ gpg-verify=true gpgkeypath=/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-26-primary # rpm-ostree status State: idle Deployments: ● fedora-atomic:fedora/26/x86_64/atomic-host Version: 26.120 (2017-09-05 00:05:09) Commit: 0b0127864022dd6ffad1a183241fbd5482ef5a1642ff3c8751c2e6cae6070b1a GPGSignature: Valid signature by E641850B77DF435378D1D7E2812A6B4B64DAB85D # rpm-ostree deploy 26.119 Resolving version '26.119' 1 metadata, 0 content objects fetched; 569 B transferred in 1 seconds error: Commit ec84d8b30ee5de761c19193717de54b2c33fd07e02b51a6b1855815c91f4e81a: GPG verification enabled, but no signatures found (use gpg-verify=false in remote config to disable) ``` Can we sign the older commits after the fact so users don't run into this? `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/330

2 7

[atomic-wg] Issue #312: Enabling CI/CD: Experiment with building Atomic Host out of a module
by Colin Walters 14 Sep '17

14 Sep '17

walters added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` One thing that came up is we might be able to hack the "override" path via working around the `fedora-release` and `fedora-modular-release` package conflicts. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/312

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

Atomic Working Group September 2017