Bug 1988236
| Summary: | Update mdadm to latest upstream | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | XiaoNi <xni> | |
| Component: | mdadm | Assignee: | XiaoNi <xni> | |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | ||
| Priority: | unspecified | |||
| Version: | 35 | CC: | agk, awilliam, dledford, jes.sorensen, xni | |
| Target Milestone: | --- | |||
| Target Release: | --- | |||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | |||
| OS: | Unspecified | |||
| Whiteboard: | ||||
| Fixed In Version: | mdadm-4.2-1.fc35 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
| Clone Of: | ||||
| : | 2066149 2066150 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2022-03-29 02:52:47 UTC | Type: | Bug | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | ||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | ||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | ||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | ||
| Embargoed: | ||||
| Bug Depends On: | ||||
| Bug Blocks: | 2066149, 2066150 | |||
|
Comment 1
Ben Cotton
2021-08-10 13:33:07 UTC
Hi Ben Thanks for the help. Can this mdadm update be released with f35? I did fedpkg update before. But now, it looks like the fedpkg update is done automatically. Thanks Xiao Your recent build is tagged for both f35 and f36 (Rawhide) already. You do not need to create updates manually for F35 yet, only after the "Bodhi updates-testing activation point" on 2021-08-24 (see https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-35/f-35-devel-tasks.html ). However, the build was versioned wrong. You cannot just use "rc2" as the 'release' component. Versioning guidelines are here: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/ with examples here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Versioning_Examples this package should have been versioned 4.2-0.1.rc2, the 'release' component should have been "0.1.rc2". If you then updated the package without going to a new upstream release, the next would be "0.2.rc2". If upstream released an rc3, then you'd go to "0.3.rc3". Thanks! Hi Adam Thanks for pointing about this. Do I need to fix this problem this time and do a new build? Or I can fix this in next build in the future? Thanks Xiao In this case it should be OK to just fix it with the next build. 4.2 is out, can we get this updated in F35+? 4.2 will be updated in rawhide. For f35/f36, we only fix bugs. Is it ok? Hi Adam I see mdadm-4.2-rc2 is already in f35/f36/rawhide. In rhel produce, the errata can be change the bug to ON_QA. Then qe team verify the bug and move it to Verified. At last, the bug is closed. How about fedora? It's still New now. What should I do for this one now? close it? Do you know a doc or something else that can help me to understand the process. Thanks Xiao XiaoNi, 4.2rc2 (release candidate) is not 4.2 final release. Changes between rc2 and final are bugfixes, so it's definitely OK to update in F35+. It makes sense. I'll do it this week FEDORA-2022-dc110bf419 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-dc110bf419 FEDORA-2022-dc110bf419 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-dc110bf419` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-dc110bf419 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. FEDORA-2022-dc110bf419 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. |