BetaBlocker +1

Yeah, I don't really see a way around this one:
BetaBlocker +1

BetaBlocker +1

These two criteria apply, imo:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria#Package_sets
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria#Expected_installed_system_boot_behavior

With those criteria, it seems a clear:
BetaBlocker +1

However, I wouldn't object moving this to the Final milestone. We have a pretty simple workaround ready, and the impact of Everything netinst + custom/minimal package set is probably much smaller than Workstation/Server/etc.

Hmm, I'm not sure about that...I'd guess it's a pretty common "just give me a basic system and I'll install what I need from there" case.

Anyhow, it seems we have the votes for:

AGREED AcceptedBetaBlocker

The following votes have been closed:

• Accepted BetaBlocker (+4, 0, -0)
  • +1 by geraldosimiao, adamwill, sumantrom, kparal

This behaviour is still present on RC 1.7.

@lruzicka You wrote to bugzilla that the fix works, and here that it doesn't, that is mildly confusing :-) You probably mean that the behavior is still present because the fix is not yet stable (and therefore the old plymouth is still getting installed from netinst) - but if you update plymouth manually, the problem is gone, correct?

@lruzicka You wrote to bugzilla that the fix works, and here that it doesn't, that is mildly confusing :-) You probably mean that the behavior is still present because the fix is not yet stable (and therefore the old plymouth is still getting installed from netinst) - but if you update plymouth manually, the problem is gone, correct?

Yes, if you upgrade manually, then the problem is gone.

In that case that's expected. The update is not yet in stable repos (should be hopefully today). You can check the package version after installation.

Release F40 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.