Bug details: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237986 Information from BlockerBugs App: <img alt="2237986" src="https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/api/v0/bugimg/2237986" />
Commented but haven't voted yet: geraldosimiao, lruzicka, coremodule
The votes have been last counted at 2023-09-11 18:24 UTC and the last processed comment was #comment-873644
To learn how to vote, see: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review A quick example: BetaBlocker +1 (where the tracker name is one of BetaBlocker/FinalBlocker/BetaFE/FinalFE/0Day/PreviousRelease and the vote is one of +1/0/-1)
BetaBlocker +1
BetaBlocker
FinalBlocker
BetaFE
FinalFE
0Day
PreviousRelease
+1
0
-1
This bug must be confirmed first. It looks like @adamwill can run without problems f39 VMs on f39 hosts.
BetaBlocker -1
I am not sure we're blocking on VMs with secureboot fw? Feel free to correct me here.
I cannot reproduce it, using the same ...4M.secboot.qcow2 firmware he used, on a F39 workstation.
Could not reproduce either. I tend to punt, until we know more.
Agree
It works for multiple people, and secureboot is not the default firmware option (correct me if it changed in F39), so I think this can be BetaBlocker -1
AGREED RejectedBetaBlocker
Discussed during the 2023-09-11 blocker review meeting: [0]
The decision to classify this bug as a "RejectedBlocker (Beta)" was made as we don't believe GNOME Boxes offers the affected configuration, and anyone running into it with any other tool should have updates available at the time, so it's fine for this to go as a regular update.
[0] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2023-09-11/f39-blocker-review.2023-09-11-16.00.txt
The following votes have been closed:
Metadata Update from @blockerbot: - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Release F39 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.
Log in to comment on this ticket.