David, have you ask dmorgan if the packages are ready to test ?

CC: (none) => dmorganec
Summary: [New] Update request : firefox-9.0-0.1.mga1 => Update request : firefox-9.0-0.1.mga1

(In reply to comment #1)
> David, have you ask dmorgan if the packages are ready to test ?

No ,I don't ask. :)

I saw him in the media Core_Updates_Testing, so I installed and tested.

A package sent in testing doesn't mean necessarily that it need tested after 9 hours. (and in fact it's to the maintainer to reassign to the QA)

https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Updates_policy

Assignee: qa-bugs => dmorganec
Summary: Update request : firefox-9.0-0.1.mga1 => Update candidate: firefox-9.0-0.1.mga1

Ok , very sorry Manuel.

Currently updating the language packs locally, as they stayed the same as of version 8.0.1. Could actually be fallout of https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2868

Status: NEW => ASSIGNED
CC: (none) => doktor5000
Assignee: dmorganec => doktor5000

New 9.0 language packs uploaded and confirmed working locally, just need to be submitted. Assigning back to dmorgan.

Assignee: doktor5000 => dmorganec

Standard browser testing complete on i586 for the srpms
firefox-9.0-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
firefox-l10n-9.0-0.2.mga1.src.rpm
mozilla-esteid-3.4.0-1.5.mga1.src.rpm

For mozilla-esteid, just confirming the extension is
not being disabled.

Am I missing any srpms?

CC: (none) => davidwhodgins

Tested today the new srpms firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1 on Mageia release 1 (Official) for x86_64 ,and now it work very fine.

-French Language Pack ,Ok
-Installation ,Ok
-flash-player-plugin-11.1.102.55-1.mga1 ,Ok
-Various video on the web ,Ok

Validating the update.

Could someone from the sysadmin team push the srpms
firefox-9.0-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
firefox-l10n-9.0-0.2.mga1.src.rpm
mozilla-esteid-3.4.0-1.5.mga1.src.rpm
xulrunner-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
from Core Updates Testing to Core Updates.

Advisory:  This maintenance update for firefox fixes several
stability issues. See
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/9.0.1/releasenotes/
for details.

https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3833

Keywords: (none) => validated_update
CC: (none) => sysadmin-bugs

Unvalidating for now.

some of you reports testing 9.0 and some reports testing 9.0.1

srpms list is not ok

What I see in updates_testing media is now:
firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
firefox-l10n-9.0.1-0.3.mga1.src.rpm
xulrunner-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
mozilla-esteid-3.4.0-1.5.mga1.src.rpm


advisory also misses the CVE-2011-2372


I also haven't seen dmorgan actually confirming that this update is ready for validation.

Can you please sort out this "mess" and flag it again when it's ok.

Oh, and we are still not rebuilding and validating all rpms depending on xulrunner so we still have security issues on enduser systems:
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2934
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3177

Keywords: validated_update => (none)
CC: (none) => tmb

let me take a look and assign to QA when done.

For CVE-2011-2372 it seems we are OK with this and thunderbird is already with a fixed version in core/updates.

so now we have to test:

firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
firefox-l10n-9.0.1-0.3.mga1.src.rpm
xulrunner-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
mozilla-esteid-3.4.0-1.5.mga1.src.rpm


please tell me if i forgot something

Assignee: dmorganec => qa-bugs

Tested the new srpms firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1 on Mageia release 1(Official) for x86_64 ,and now it work very fine.

For me it's Ok.

Tested the package :

-firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
-firefox-l10n-9.0.1-0.3.mga1.src.rpm
-xulrunner-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm


-French Language Pack ,Ok
-Installation ,Ok
-flash-player-plugin-11.1.102.55-1.mga1 ,Ok
-Various video on the web ,Ok

Testing complete on i586.  In addition to testing firefox, I confirmed
vuze (aka azureus) still works with this version of xulrunner installed.

Could someone from the sysadmin team push the srpms
firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
firefox-l10n-9.0.1-0.3.mga1.src.rpm
xulrunner-9.0.1-0.2.mga1.src.rpm
from Core Updates Testing to Core Updates

Advisory: This maintenance update for firefox fixes several
stability issues. See
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/9.0.1/releasenotes/
for details.

https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3833

Sorry, forgot to add the validated_update keyword.

Could someone from the sysadmin team push the srpms
firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm
firefox-l10n-9.0.1-0.3.mga1.src.rpm
xulrunner-9.0.1-0.2.mga1.src.rpm
from Core Updates Testing to Core Updates

Advisory: This maintenance update for firefox fixes several
stability issues. See
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/9.0.1/releasenotes/
for details.

https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3833

Keywords: (none) => validated_update

And don't forget mozilla-esteid-3.4.0-1.5.mga1.src.rpm.

CC: (none) => sander.lepik

and some firefox-ext-* in testing.

Funda pushed firefox-ext-adblock-plus-2.0.2-1.1.mga1 to testing ~1 hour ago

Testing complete on i586 for the srpms
firefox-ext-adblock-plus-2.0.2-1.1.mga1.src.rpm
mozilla-esteid-3.4.0-1.5.mga1.src.rpm

For the esteid, I can only confirm that it installs and is not
disabled by firefox.

I don't think the extensions should hold back the firefox
security update.

Update pushed.

Status: ASSIGNED => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => FIXED
Source RPM: firefox-9.0-0.1.mga1.src.rpm => firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.src.rpm

Damn!

This update QA completely missed the fact that sqlite3 was updated to 3.7.9-1.1 in order to support firefox 9. I'm pushing it now as the firefox update is broken, and _pray_ it wont mess up anything else.

Confirmed broken update.

I've not been involved but, in checking, I don't see any QA bug for an sqlite3 update candidate and it is not mentioned here or added as a 'depends on' which probably explains how it was missed. This highlights the importance of maintainers providing full information to the QA team.

Pushing from testing to updates will solve the broken dependency and, as it is used by firefox 9, I would say it has already been tested to some degree.

Adding bug 2317 as a 'depends on' as this is clearly affected it.

Depends on: (none) => 2317

I think QA members shouldn't enable Updates Testing by default. And should update only those packages that packager has listed. This way such deps problems would come out.

or packager can fallow the policy and lists the srpms...

As we have so many packages in updates_testing even packager might not know that his/her latest package got some new deps from other packages in updates_testing.

QA must check that listed rpms work. Not just install all packages from Updates Testing.

Actually that is (usually) what we do :)

In this instance it requires a more in depth knowledge to realise a specific sqlite3 version was a requirement of firefox 9 and that it had been provided as part of the update. That is usually part of the information we would expect a maintainer to provide.

Removing bug 2317 again as this isn't affected after all as the require is provided in updates.

Depends on: 2317 => (none)

Yeah, the failure was with this:
https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Updates_policy#Maintainer_.28or_any_interested_packager.29

Maintainer didn't request to validate the update, but it got pulled into qa anyway as everyone wants the newest firefox (and all the fixes) :)

Only in comment #12 dmorgan acked it for qa

Unfortunately when the firefox build failed, and dmorgan pushed the updated sqlite3 to fix it, he apparently forgot to bump requires in firefox to match
the newer sqlite, allowing to break working firefox installs.
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949

(had the requires been correct, people would just had seen a non-installable firefox, not a half-upgrade that stopped firefox from working)

But yes, we are all volunteers and mistakes does happend.

So, lets just learn from this and enforce the updates policy hard:
https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Updates_policy

And for next QA meeting (Jan 5th, 2012 IIRC) think of policy timelines like:
- how long from package in updates_testing until it gets assigned to qa
- how long can a package stay in testing before being removed again 
- ...

(In reply to comment #21)
> 
> This update QA completely missed the fact that sqlite3 was updated to 3.7.9-1.1
> in order to support firefox 9.

(In reply to comment #27)
...
> 
> Unfortunately when the firefox build failed, and dmorgan pushed the updated
> sqlite3 to fix it, he apparently forgot to bump requires in firefox to match
> the newer sqlite, allowing to break working firefox installs.
> https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
> 
> (had the requires been correct, people would just had seen a non-installable
> firefox, not a half-upgrade that stopped firefox from working)
> 

weird, I don't understand how this can happen, because firefox 9.0.1 had the correct requires on lib(64)sqlite3_0[>= 3.7.9] (1)
urpmq --requires firefox-9.0.1|grep sqlite
lib64sqlite3_0[>= 3.7.9]
libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit)

and when I tried to update to firefox 9.0.1 skipping sqlite update, it blocked the update:
urpmi --update --auto-update --skip=/sqlite/
[...]
Some requested packages cannot be installed:
firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.x86_64 (due to unsatisfied lib64sqlite3_0[>= 3.7.9])
firefox-ext-adblock-plus-2.0.2-1.1.mga1.noarch (due to unsatisfied firefox-9.0.1-0.1.mga1.i586)
lib64xulrunner-devel-9.0.1-0.2.mga1.x86_64 (due to unsatisfied xulrunner-9.0.1-0.2.mga1.i586)
lib64xulrunner9.0.1-9.0.1-0.2.mga1.x86_64 (due to unsatisfied lib64sqlite3_0[>= 3.7.9])
xulrunner-9.0.1-0.2.mga1.x86_64 (due to conflicts with lib64xulrunner9.0.1-9.0.1-0.2.mga1.x86_64)
Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)

(1) to prevent such broken partial update (that we had in the past mdv #58754), the required versions for sqlite3, nss and nspr are automatically extracted at build time (pkg-config --modversion).

CC: (none) => lmenut