Page 1 of 1
Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 27 October 2013, 19:48
by gioma
Downloaded BETA 2 candidate 64 bit from
https://abf.rosalinux.ru/platforms/open ... lists/1798. Checked md5 is ok.
Burned a dvd with K3B with verification of data. Starting live from dvd give several choices (language and so on), I left all default. It arrive till a desktop with 5 icons (Dolphin icon, ??, Thderbird icon, an icon with a small paint brush and a window) then screen become black and the system is blocked.
Starting live from usb memory prepared with Fedora LiveUSB give immediately several errors:
Code: Select all
ISOLINUX 4.06 … Anvin et al
Unknown keyword in configuration file: ω└ F'█ …....
Unknown keyword in configuration file:
Unknown keyword in configuration file:
Unknown keyword in configuration file:
Unknown keyword in configuration file:
Unknown keyword in configuration file:
No DEFAULT or UI configuration directive found!
boot:
Re: Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 27 October 2013, 19:55
by NicCo
This night will be decided if the Beta 2 candidate will become the official Beta 2 isos,
but from the recent discussions about testing taken in the IRC channel, I guess Not!
It's predictable that in the next days some new ISOs will become Beta 2 candidates...
Re: Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 27 October 2013, 21:49
by gioma
We are going to have quite a lot of ISOs, please suggest add a number to iso name to identify it easily.
Otherwise also bug reports will be difficult.
Re: Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 27 October 2013, 22:34
by rugyada
Identify the iso by build number
And if you have a file iso but don't know what number it is, check its md5sum.
Anyway, keep in mind not all iso are good for bug report! Mostly are made only for internal testing purpose, so better to ignore the "in middle" builds.
Re: Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 28 October 2013, 7:53
by gioma
rugyada wrote:Identify the iso by build number
I see build number only at download.
And if you have a file iso but don't know what number it is, check its md5sum.
I know but it need time. A number added to iso name would be easier.
Anyway, keep in mind not all iso are good for bug report! Mostly are made only for internal testing purpose, so better to ignore the "in middle" builds.
OK. I'll wait beta2. I tested this because it was a "candidate" and I supposed not so different from Beta 2.
Re: Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 28 October 2013, 8:46
by NicCo
Beta 2 isos have not surpassed QA
soon after few bugs will be solved, there will follow other beta 2 candidate isos
http://ml.openmandriva.org/pipermail/om ... 01602.html
Hi all,
the beta 2 candidate from the 25th october has been rejected due to reaching -3.
1 GO, 3 NOGO, 1 NO_RESPONSE, 1 ABSTAIN
While there were very good remarks about the bootup problems fixed,
there seems to have been breakage with plymouth and systemd, as well
as X.
I haven't personally verified this, as I've been on holiday for the
weekend and am currently sitting on a bus traveling back to New York.
QA hopes to receive another ISO ASAP, and emphasizes the weeks that
are coming up. We'd like to note that it's traditionally almost due
time for RC/GA, in about a week or two.
I'd also like to point out the use of email voting - The reason we
have this is because not all of us can meet up on IRC at specified
times and discuss issues and such, and vote. Email voting is a way to
express our opinions; however, due to a possibly unjustified fear of
bias I have been asking testers to send me their votes privately. I
don't think this may be necessary anymore, but I'd like to know your
opinions on this topic.
Also, with email voting we're able to get other people's opinions with
testing, especially from those who are subscribed to om-cooker but not
om-qa, which I personally see as a plus. Again, that's open to
discussion.
--
Robert Xu :: protocol.by/rxu
Re: Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 28 October 2013, 14:42
by rugyada
gioma wrote:rugyada wrote:
And if you have a file iso but don't know what number it is, check its md5sum.
I know but it need time. A number added to iso name would be easier.
The build scripts call it that way and one cannot rename ISOs on ABF.
Re: Beta 2 candidate
Posted: 3 November 2013, 20:01
by gioma
rugyada wrote:The build scripts call it that way and one cannot rename ISOs on ABF.
Perhaps build number could be added to file containing md5. Then build could be immediately identified checking md5 .