CSI artwork
Hey everyone! I put a request in to the design service just now to get some banners and logos made. CSI is a community based standards set. more info at: https://fedorahosted.org/csi/ The first policy we're rolling out is a security policy: http://mmcgrath.fedorapeople.org/policy/ -Mike ___ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
Re: CSI artwork
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:40:07AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: Hey everyone! I put a request in to the design service just now to get some banners and logos made. CSI is a community based standards set. more info at: https://fedorahosted.org/csi/ The first policy we're rolling out is a security policy: http://mmcgrath.fedorapeople.org/policy/ BTW, I think this is a great chance to break the design mold a bit. I haven't heard of (m)any similar efforts to make free and open content and configurations for system administrators. This work is breaking new ground. Good chance to try something really different from the Design Team? - Karsten -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41 pgpLriIhwIPKy.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
Re: CSI artwork
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:41:03AM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: Good chance to try something really different from the Design Team? I'm not even sure what CSI could be represented as if it were an actual object, instead of a document. Any ideas? -- Ian Weller ianwel...@gmail.com http://ianweller.org GnuPG fingerprint: E51E 0517 7A92 70A2 4226 B050 87ED 7C97 EFA8 4A36 Technology is a word that describes something that doesn't work yet. ~ Douglas Adams pgp9KN3LRL0iM.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
Re: CSI artwork
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 03:13:58PM -0600, Ian Weller wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:41:03AM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: Good chance to try something really different from the Design Team? I'm not even sure what CSI could be represented as if it were an actual object, instead of a document. Any ideas? Just my dumb ideas: * One person handing another a screwdriver or gear * Two people holding something up like a pair of Atlas figures, working together to support the weight * A series of blocks forming a shape, possibly just a rectangular shape; one block is still being fitted into place. There is an emblem on the shape which will be completed when the block fits in, and the emblem is a handshake between people. -- Paul W. Frieldshttp://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug pgphmXs5SF47V.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
Re: CSI artwork
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 15:13 -0600, Ian Weller wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:41:03AM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: Good chance to try something really different from the Design Team? I'm not even sure what CSI could be represented as if it were an actual object, instead of a document. Any ideas? Platonic solids? -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez...@gmail.com PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
Suggestions for this web page.
Hi, We have been moving the freemedia infrastructure from fedoranews to our own servers. Towards this goal, we have managed to setup this[1] form and a TRAC[2] . Now, can you please suggest, how to keep this[1] form consistence with rest of the Fedora website/wiki? I tried to use http://fedoraproject.org/static/css/fedora.css but without much result. On using this, I am getting only the left side bar. Nothing else. :) Some help will be nice to have. Thanks. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/freemedia/FreeMedia-form.html [2] https://fedorahosted.org/freemedia/ -- Regards, Susmit. = ssh 0x86DD170A http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/user:susmit = ___ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
Re: Suggestions for this web page.
I tried to use http://fedoraproject.org/static/css/fedora.css but without much result. On using this, I am getting only the left side bar. Nothing else. :) Some help will be nice to have. Sorry to disturb. I managed to find it out and get it working from fedorapeople. :) Thanks. -- Regards, Susmit. = ssh 0x86DD170A http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/user:susmit = ___ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
[Bug 253813] Package Review: cjkunifonts (split from fonts-chinese) [renamed to cjkuni-fonts]
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253813 --- Comment #40 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-01-20 03:26:11 EDT --- I don't know, the whole renaming process is under-formalised. Ask nirik -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477375] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477375 Roy Rankin rran...@ihug.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RELEASE_PENDING --- Comment #4 from Roy Rankin rran...@ihug.com.au 2009-01-20 04:17:06 EDT --- Split into denemo and denemo-music-fonts packages in devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480458] [hedgewars] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480458 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 04:20:36 EDT --- Fixed package is on its way to rawhide, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Bug 480443 depends on bug 480458, which changed state. Bug 480458 Summary: [hedgewars] Adapt to font package renamings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480458 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480466] [openoffice.org] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480466 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Bug 480443 depends on bug 480465, which changed state. Bug 480465 Summary: [ogre] Adapt to font package renamings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480465 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Bug 480443 depends on bug 480476, which changed state. Bug 480476 Summary: [trackballs] Adapt to font package renamings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480476 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480465] [ogre] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480465 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 04:58:18 EDT --- Fixed package is on its way to rawhide, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480476] [trackballs] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480476 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 04:59:01 EDT --- Fixed package is on its way to rawhide, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Bug 480443 depends on bug 480475, which changed state. Bug 480475 Summary: [TnL-data] Adapt to font package renamings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480475 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Bug 480443 depends on bug 480471, which changed state. Bug 480471 Summary: [scorched3d] Adapt to font package renamings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480471 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480475] [TnL-data] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480475 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 04:58:52 EDT --- Fixed package is on its way to rawhide, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477435] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477435 --- Comment #8 from Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 05:01:58 EDT --- needs another attempt, will be = 3.0.1-15.3 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480750] New: liberation-fonts1-.04.93-5 fails to install
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: liberation-fonts1-.04.93-5 fails to install
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480750
Summary: liberation-fonts1-.04.93-5 fails to install
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: liberation-fonts
AssignedTo: ccha...@redhat.com
ReportedBy: quen...@armitage.org.uk
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: ccha...@redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com,
fedora-i18n-b...@redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
yum update fails reporting liberation-{serif|mono|sans}-fonts all require
liberation-common-fonts, however, the package name appears to be
liberation-fonts-common
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
1.04-93-5
How reproducible:
Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.yum update
2.
3.
Actual results:
yum reports missing dependencies
Expected results:
update succeeds
Additional info:
The liberation-fonts.spec file creates a package liberation-fonts-common, but
liberation-{serif|mono|sans}-fonts have a dependency on liberation-common-fonts
(i.e. comman and fonts reversed).
The same applies for baekmuk-ttf-fonts.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480471] [scorched3d] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480471 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 04:58:30 EDT --- Fixed package is on its way to rawhide, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477425] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477425 Sarantis Paskalis paska...@di.uoa.gr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #6 from Sarantis Paskalis paska...@di.uoa.gr 2009-01-20 06:04:13 EDT --- All the previous comments fixed in 0.20050515-11 (rawhide). Thanks for the feedback. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477448] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477448 --- Comment #9 from Hedayat Vatankhah heda...@grad.com 2009-01-20 07:04:15 EDT --- :) Are you referring to a missing change log or something else?! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457955 --- Comment #20 from Ankur Sinha sanjay_an...@yahoo.co.in 2009-01-20 07:37:24 EDT --- hi, I changed the fontconfig in accordance with the basic font config template. I think the rest is fine now? Here are the packages : http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/cf-bonveno-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1-3.fc10.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/cf-bonveno-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts.spec regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477332] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 Nicholas Wourms nwou...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nwou...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Nicholas Wourms nwou...@gmail.com 2009-01-20 11:14:49 EDT --- Please update the publican package to reflect this change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477336] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477336 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||480473 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480473] [slingshot] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480473 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||477336 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477336] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477336 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@jcomserv.net --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-01-20 12:30:42 EDT --- Adding CC for slingshot. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-01-20 13:02:01 EDT --- How's this? http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=79532 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 457947] Review Request: oldstandard-sfd-fonts - Old Standard Fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457947 --- Comment #31 from Ankur Sinha sanjay_an...@yahoo.co.in 2009-01-20 13:14:21 EDT --- :D my first approved package! thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Bug 480443 depends on bug 480480, which changed state. Bug 480480 Summary: [xmoto] Adapt to font package renamings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480480 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480456] [gnubg] Adapt to font package renamings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480456 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-01-20 14:13:17 EDT --- Fixed in rawhide for dejavu. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Bug 480443 depends on bug 480456, which changed state. Bug 480456 Summary: [gnubg] Adapt to font package renamings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480456 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480774] Fontconfig cache files in bogus ~/${localstatedir}
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480774 --- Comment #1 from Behdad Esfahbod besfa...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 15:58:05 EDT --- I built fontconfig-2.6.92-1.git.64.g167bb82.fc11 on the same day. That fixes this. Not sure why that one didn't show up in rawhide instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/liberation-fonts/devel liberation-fonts.spec,1.31,1.32
Author: mclasen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14119
Modified Files:
liberation-fonts.spec
Log Message:
Fix busted inter-subpackage dependencies. Yay, font activism
Index: liberation-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel/liberation-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.31
retrieving revision 1.32
diff -u -r1.31 -r1.32
--- liberation-fonts.spec 20 Jan 2009 02:36:24 - 1.31
+++ liberation-fonts.spec 20 Jan 2009 22:53:43 - 1.32
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
Name: %{fontname}-fonts
Summary: Fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Windows fonts
Version: 1.04.93
-Release: 5%{?dist}
+Release: 6%{?dist}
# The license of the Liberation Fonts is a EULA that contains GPLv2 and two
# exceptions:
# The first exception is the standard FSF font exception.
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@
%package -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts
Summary: Sans-serif fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Arial
Group:User Interface/X
-Requires: %{fontname}-common-fonts = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: %{fontname}-fonts-common = %{version}-%{release}
%description -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts
%common_desc
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@
%package -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts
Summary: Serif fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Times New Roman
Group:User Interface/X
-Requires: %{fontname}-common-fonts = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: %{fontname}-fonts-common = %{version}-%{release}
%description -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts
%common_desc
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@
%package -n %{fontname}-mono-fonts
Summary: Monospace fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Courier New
Group:User Interface/X
-Requires: %{fontname}-common-fonts = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires: %{fontname}-fonts-common = %{version}-%{release}
%description -n %{fontname}-mono-fonts
%common_desc
@@ -115,6 +115,9 @@
rm -rf %{buildroot}
%changelog
+* Tue Jan 20 2009 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com - 1.04.93-6.fc11
+- Fix busted inter-subpackage dependencies
+
* Tue Jan 20 2009 Caius Chance ccha...@redhat.com - 1.04.93-5.fc11
- Resolved: rhbz#477410
- Refined .spec file based on Mailhot's review on rhbz.
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477410] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 --- Comment #14 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 18:04:54 EDT --- thanks mclasen: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=79588 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477332] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 --- Comment #8 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 18:06:16 EDT --- thanks mclasen: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=79589 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 253813] Package Review: cjkunifonts (split from fonts-chinese) [renamed to cjkuni-fonts]
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253813 --- Comment #42 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 18:31:49 EDT --- http://fedorapeople.org/~cchance/packages/cjkuni-fonts/cjkuni-fonts.spec http://fedorapeople.org/~cchance/packages/cjkuni-fonts/cjkuni-fonts-0.2.20080216.1-16.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 477410] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||quen...@armitage.org.uk --- Comment #15 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 18:44:28 EDT --- *** Bug 480750 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480750] liberation-fonts1-.04.93-5 fails to install
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480750 Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 18:44:28 EDT --- fixed on rawhide *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 477410 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 475743] Many chinese glyphs on Japanese environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475743 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||i18n Component|VLGothic-fonts |fontconfig Blocks||446452 AssignedTo|ryo-dair...@users.sourcefor |besfa...@redhat.com |ge.net | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480774] Fontconfig cache files in bogus ~/${localstatedir}
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480774 Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jkeat...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 20:02:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) I built fontconfig-2.6.92-1.git.64.g167bb82.fc11 on the same day. That fixes this. Not sure why that one didn't show up in rawhide instead. Because your build failed. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=79408 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/fontconfig/devel .cvsignore, 1.33, 1.34 fontconfig.spec, 1.115, 1.116 sources, 1.34, 1.35
Author: behdad
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv5572
Modified Files:
.cvsignore fontconfig.spec sources
Log Message:
* Mon Jan 20 2009 Behdad Esfahbod besfa...@redhat.com -
* 2.6.93-1.git.64.g6aa4dce
- Update to 2.6.93-1.git.64.g6aa4dce
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.33
retrieving revision 1.34
diff -u -r1.33 -r1.34
--- .cvsignore 19 Jan 2009 23:55:36 - 1.33
+++ .cvsignore 21 Jan 2009 01:17:23 - 1.34
@@ -1 +1 @@
-fontconfig-2.6.92.tar.gz
+fontconfig-2.6.93.tar.gz
Index: fontconfig.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/fontconfig.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.115
retrieving revision 1.116
diff -u -r1.115 -r1.116
--- fontconfig.spec 19 Jan 2009 23:55:36 - 1.115
+++ fontconfig.spec 21 Jan 2009 01:17:23 - 1.116
@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
Summary: Font configuration and customization library
Name: fontconfig
-Version: 2.6.92
-Release: 1.git.64.g167bb82%{?dist}
+Version: 2.6.93
+Release: 1.git.64.g6aa4dce%{?dist}
License: MIT
Group: System Environment/Libraries
Source: http://fontconfig.org/release/fontconfig-%{version}.tar.gz
@@ -131,8 +131,11 @@
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Mon Jan 20 2009 Behdad Esfahbod besfa...@redhat.com -
2.6.93-1.git.64.g6aa4dce
+- Update to 2.6.93-1.git.64.g6aa4dce
+
* Mon Jan 19 2009 Behdad Esfahbod besfa...@redhat.com -
2.6.92-1.git.64.g167bb82
-- Update to 2.6.91-1.git.64.g167bb82
+- Update to 2.6.92-1.git.64.g167bb82
* Mon Jan 19 2009 Behdad Esfahbod besfa...@redhat.com -
2.6.91-1.git.64.g9feaf34
- Update to 2.6.91-1.git.64.g9feaf34
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.34
retrieving revision 1.35
diff -u -r1.34 -r1.35
--- sources 19 Jan 2009 23:55:36 - 1.34
+++ sources 21 Jan 2009 01:17:23 - 1.35
@@ -1 +1 @@
-3aef92ac30c2ed24ea89a5007ecbf588 fontconfig-2.6.92.tar.gz
+f5050687560a61a87781c34fdf6a65d9 fontconfig-2.6.93.tar.gz
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #3 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 20:49:42 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329524) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329524) test fix, post auto-hinting applied with fontforge Could you please check if this .ttf has 'u' fixed? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 20:47:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) Would you mean the pixel on bottom left corner? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(c...@zone38.net) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 480774] Fontconfig cache files in bogus ~/${localstatedir}
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480774 --- Comment #3 from Behdad Esfahbod besfa...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 21:22:33 EDT --- I'm extremely sorry Jesse. Not sure what I've been smoking. Anyway. .93 is built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #5 from Cody Boisclair c...@zone38.net 2009-01-20 21:27:37 EDT --- Still broken, but in a different way. See attachment 329526. For what it's worth, the u is OK in version 1.03 of the font - can the hinting be copied from that version? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 Cody Boisclair c...@zone38.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(c...@zone38.net) | --- Comment #4 from Cody Boisclair c...@zone38.net 2009-01-20 21:27:07 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329526) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329526) Appearance of auto-hinted u in Liberation Mono -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #6 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 21:50:20 EDT --- I have checked again. The hinting instructions and cvt are totally same between ver 1.03 and current version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||i18n -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #7 from Cody Boisclair c...@zone38.net 2009-01-20 22:00:23 EDT --- Weird. No idea what would be causing that. I may have to play with it in FontForge some myself to see what might be causing this quirk... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/cjkuni-fonts - New directory
Author: petersen Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/home/fedora/petersen/admin/tmpcvsr21071/rpms/cjkuni-fonts Log Message: Directory /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts added to the repository ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel - New directory
Author: petersen Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/home/fedora/petersen/admin/tmpcvsr21071/rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel Log Message: Directory /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel added to the repository ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/cjkuni-fonts Makefile,NONE,1.1
Author: petersen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts
In directory
cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/home/fedora/petersen/admin/tmpcvsr21071/rpms/cjkuni-fonts
Added Files:
Makefile
Log Message:
Setup of module cjkuni-fonts
--- NEW FILE Makefile ---
# Top level Makefile for module cjkuni-fonts
all : CVS/Root common-update
@cvs update
common-update : common
@cd common cvs update
common : CVS/Root
@cvs checkout common
CVS/Root :
@echo ERROR: This does not look like a CVS checkout exit 1
clean :
@find . -type f -name *~ -exec rm -fv {} \;
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel .cvsignore, NONE, 1.1 Makefile, NONE, 1.1 sources, NONE, 1.1
Author: petersen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel
In directory
cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/home/fedora/petersen/admin/tmpcvsr21071/rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel
Added Files:
.cvsignore Makefile sources
Log Message:
Setup of module cjkuni-fonts
--- NEW FILE .cvsignore ---
--- NEW FILE Makefile ---
# Makefile for source rpm: cjkuni-fonts
# $Id: Makefile,v 1.1 2009/01/21 03:02:14 petersen Exp $
NAME := cjkuni-fonts
SPECFILE = $(firstword $(wildcard *.spec))
define find-makefile-common
for d in common ../common ../../common ; do if [ -f $$d/Makefile.common ] ;
then if [ -f $$d/CVS/Root -a -w $$/Makefile.common ] ; then cd $$d ; cvs -Q
update ; fi ; echo $$d/Makefile.common ; break ; fi ; done
endef
MAKEFILE_COMMON := $(shell $(find-makefile-common))
ifeq ($(MAKEFILE_COMMON),)
# attept a checkout
define checkout-makefile-common
test -f CVS/Root { cvs -Q -d $$(cat CVS/Root) checkout common echo
common/Makefile.common ; } || { echo ERROR: I can't figure out how to
checkout the 'common' module. ; exit -1 ; } 2
endef
MAKEFILE_COMMON := $(shell $(checkout-makefile-common))
endif
include $(MAKEFILE_COMMON)
--- NEW FILE sources ---
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 253813] Package Review: cjkunifonts (split from fonts-chinese) [renamed to cjkuni-fonts]
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253813 Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #43 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 22:03:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #41) ok, so this is a rename of an existing font? Yep, new package required for rename under new fonts packaging guidelines. cvs admin done Caius please import and build new package there so that Nicolas can review it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #8 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 22:15:04 EDT --- I have triaged on my Fedora 10 and Liberation Mono Bold looks fine (attached screenshots). Since I didn't have problem on my OpenOffice, I currently have no idea about this yet. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #9 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 22:16:35 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329532) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329532) screenshot w/ fix sample -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #12 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 22:20:14 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329537) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329537) screenshot w/ fix sample -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #11 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-20 22:19:12 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329536) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329536) screenshot w/ fix sample -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #13 from Cody Boisclair c...@zone38.net 2009-01-20 22:22:53 EDT --- It looks fine with hinting turned off on my system too; same if I set fontconfig to use auto-hinting. Only if I use bytecode hinting (which is enabled by default in Ubuntu) does it look wrong. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel CIDFnmap.zh_CN, NONE, 1.1 CIDFnmap.zh_TW, NONE, 1.1 FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN, NONE, 1.1 FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW, NONE, 1.1 cidfmap.zh_CN, NONE, 1.1 cidfmap.zh_TW, NONE, 1.1 cjkuni-fonts.spe
Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv28457/devel Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Added Files: CIDFnmap.zh_CN CIDFnmap.zh_TW FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW cidfmap.zh_CN cidfmap.zh_TW cjkuni-fonts.spec cjkunifonts-0.2.20080216.1-2.patch import.log Log Message: renamed from cjkunifonts --- NEW FILE CIDFnmap.zh_CN --- %! % Copyright (C) 2001 Taiji Yamada and gs-cjk project % % This file is part of GNU Ghostscript. % % GNU Ghostscript is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but % WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY. No author or distributor accepts responsibility % to anyone for the consequences of using it or for whether it serves any % particular purpose or works at all, unless he says so in writing. Refer % to the GNU General Public License for full details. % % Everyone is granted permission to copy, modify and redistribute GNU % Ghostscript, but only under the conditions described in the GNU General % Public License. A copy of this license is supposed to have been given % to you along with GNU Ghostscript so you can know your rights and % responsibilities. It should be in a file named COPYING. Among other % things, the copyright notice and this notice must be preserved on all % copies. % $Id: CIDFnmap.zh_CN,v 1.2 2003/05/23 04:42:46 llch Exp $ % CID fontmap for the Arphic trutype fonts % See ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/non-gnu/chinese-fonts-truetype/LICENSE % for license information regarding these fonts. % Adobe-GB1 /BousungEG-Light-GB (/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-uming/uming.ttf) ; /GBZenKai-Medium(/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-ukai/ukai.ttf); /Adobe-GB1 /BousungEG-Light-GB ; /MSungGBK-Light /BousungEG-Light-GB ; --- NEW FILE CIDFnmap.zh_TW --- %! % Copyright (C) 2001 Taiji Yamada and gs-cjk project % % This file is part of GNU Ghostscript. % % GNU Ghostscript is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but % WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY. No author or distributor accepts responsibility % to anyone for the consequences of using it or for whether it serves any % particular purpose or works at all, unless he says so in writing. Refer % to the GNU General Public License for full details. % % Everyone is granted permission to copy, modify and redistribute GNU % Ghostscript, but only under the conditions described in the GNU General % Public License. A copy of this license is supposed to have been given % to you along with GNU Ghostscript so you can know your rights and % responsibilities. It should be in a file named COPYING. Among other % things, the copyright notice and this notice must be preserved on all % copies. % $Id: CIDFnmap.zh_TW,v 1.1 2003/03/31 15:44:38 tagoh Exp $ % CID fontmap for the Arphic trutype fonts % See ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/non-gnu/chinese-fonts-truetype/LICENSE % for license information regarding these fonts. % Adobe-CNS1 /ZenKai-Medium (/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-ukai/ukai.ttf); /ShanHeiSun-Light (/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-uming/uming.ttf) ; /Adobe-CNS1 /ShanHeiSun-Light ; --- NEW FILE FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN --- %! % The map is a set of records like this : % % /CIDfont_name options_dict ; % % where options_dict is a dictionary with the following entries : % % Key Type Description % PathstringAbsolute path to font file, or relative path to font file from % the GS_EXTFONTPATH value. % CIDFontType integer PostScript type for this CID font. Only 0 is currently allowed. % Note that this is unrelated to the real type of the font file - % the bridge will perform format conversion. % FAPIname Name of the renderer to be used with the font. /AgfaUFST and % /FreeType is now allowed -- depends on which options Ghostscript % was built with. % SubfontId integer (optional) Index of the font in font collection, such as FCO or TTC. % It is being ignored if /Path doesn't specify a collection. % CSI array Must have strongly 2 elements. % The first element of the array specifies Ordering of CIDSystemInfo. % The second element specifies Supplement of CIDSystemInfo. % % Use regular Postscript syntax. % /BousungEG-Light-GB /Path (/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-uming/uming.ttf) /CIDFontType 0 /FAPI /FreeType /CSI [(GB1) 4] ; /GBZenKai-Medium /Path (/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-ukai/ukai.ttf) /CIDFontType 0 /FAPI /FreeType /CSI [(GB1) 4] ; % /MSungGBK-Light /Path (/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-uming/uming.ttf) /CIDFontType 0 /FAPI /FreeType /CSI [(GB1) 4] ; /Adobe-GB1 /Path (/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts-uming/uming.ttf) /CIDFontType 0 /FAPI /FreeType /CSI [(GB1) 4] ; --- NEW FILE FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #14 from Cody Boisclair c...@zone38.net 2009-01-20 22:44:50 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329538) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329538) fixed by copying hinting from u in v1.03 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 479371] Broken hinting on u in Liberation Mono Bold
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #16 from Cody Boisclair c...@zone38.net 2009-01-20 22:48:04 EDT --- I fixed it by using Edit - Copy From - TrueType Instructions to copy the u character from version 1.03 to 1.04. The font file itself is in attachment 329538, and a screenshot of how the fixed version appears under bytecode hinting is in attachment 329539. Feel free to adopt this patched version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 --- Comment #13 from Caius kaio Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2009-01-21 00:21:16 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329546) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329546) oowriter shows R is displayed nicely 6px-18px -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Broken dependencies: tetex-font-kerkis
tetex-font-kerkis has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On x86_64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On i386: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On ppc64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 Please resolve this as soon as possible. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Broken dependencies: elisa
elisa has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-good = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-bad = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires mgopen-fonts On x86_64: elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-good = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-bad = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires mgopen-fonts On i386: elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-good = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-bad = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires mgopen-fonts On ppc64: elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-good = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires elisa-plugins-bad = 0:0.5.20 elisa-0.5.20-1.fc11.noarch requires mgopen-fonts Please resolve this as soon as possible. ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Fwd: [Guidelines Change] Changes to the Packaging Guidelines]
Message transféré De: Tom spot Callaway À: fedora-devel-announce Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 16:16:09 -0500 As usual, the Fedora Packaging Committee has been busy adding and amending the Fedora Packaging Guidelines. Specifically: The Packaging Guidelines describing desktop-file-install have been changed. Specifically, new packages no longer need to set vendor (existing packages must keep using vendor for the lifetime of that package). https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage The Packaging Guidelines have been changed to reflect the fact that Fedora packages must adhere to the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS), with the exception of libexecdir (as specified in the GNU Coding Standards) and /usr/target for cross-compilers. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#layout The Font Packaging Guidelines have been changed. There is a new section which covers Font Package Layout: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Package_layout_for_fonts In addition, there is a new set of Guidelines covering the naming of Font Packages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Naming Also, there is a new set of Guidelines covering the technical implementation of Font Packages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Technical_implementation The Eclipse Plugin Guidelines were updated to reflect Eclipse 3.4: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:EclipsePlugins The Ruby Guidelines were updated to better handle situations where a Ruby Gem includes an extension library written in C: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#Ruby_Gem_with_extension_libraries_written_in_C These guidelines (and changes) were approved by the Fedora Packaging Committee (FPC) and ratified by FESCo. Many thanks to Andrew Overholt, Mamoru Tasaka, Nicolas Mailhot, and all of the members of the FPC and FESCo, for assisting in drafting, refining, and passing these guidelines. As a reminder: The Fedora Packaging Guidelines are living documents! If you find something missing, incorrect, or in need of revision, you can suggest a draft change. The procedure for this is documented here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Committee#GuidelineChangeProcedure Thanks, ~spot ___ Fedora-devel-announce mailing list fedora-devel-annou...@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-announce -- Nicolas Mailhot signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée ___ Fedora-fonts-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-list
Re: Fedora Weekly news
On Tue, 20 Jan 2009, Huzaifa Sidhpurwala wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Nicu Buculei wrote: Mike McGrath wrote: Any volunteers to keep in touch with FWN about our goings on? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue159 It is usually covered by Huzaifa Sidhpurwala. Don't know why, but it looks like he was busy lately with no time to update his beat https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Beats/Infrastructure But Huzaifa is not just a beat writer, he is also an editor so I expect him to restart his activity. Mike, yeah i am one of editors of FWN, and have been really busy lately with $DAYJOB, but that is done now and from next week, you i will continue my work for FWN. :) Thanks Huzaifa! -Mike ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Infrastructure FAD?
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Mike McGrath wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: Regarding: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-January/msg00017.html What do people think of having an Infrastructure-related FAD (Fedora Activity Day)? Something more along the lines of a hackfest rather than a barcamp style thing. Rel-Eng folks would be welcome too since I'm sure buildsystem stuff will get discussed. Having it in Chicago or the vicinity would be cool since Mike McGrath and Dennis Gilmore are nearby (and I'm not that far off either). Or if you really wanted to get crazy we could have it in Des Moines and I'd be willing to take care of most of the legwork. I might even be able to get some conference space at $DAYJOB for relatively little cost (one bonus of this would be better-than-most-hotel wireless and Internet). Timewise I'm thinking a Saturday in February... So for me at least, February is out. The first weekend is to close to organize anything, the next two I'll have classes during the week and an exam on Friday and will likely be exhausted on the weekend. The last weekend (combined with march 1st) I have plans that I can't break :-/. While I'd hate for an entire event to hinge on me, it'd be kind of silly to have a small infrastructure hackfest in my home town that I can't attend :) So +1 the following dates (pretend lodging and travel aren't an issue right now) March 6-8 March 13-15 March 20-22 March 27-29 So there's not been much response to this thread, is this a lack of interest, poor timing or just people that aren't sure yet? -Mike ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Fedora Security Policy
So I've added some suggested changes and would like to do this on the list instead of on IRC. So here's what I propose: http://mmcgrath.fedorapeople.org/policy/ [1] 1) I'd like everyone in a sysadmin* group to be compliant with this policy as part of orientation for new members. 2) I'd like everyone who is already in a sysadmin* group to become compliant with this standard by March 31st 2009. PLENTY of time to make whatever changes you need to make. 3) We'll continue to refine this policy but never with the assumption that everyone is immediately compliant. Notice will be given. -Mike [1] I'm working on finding permanent hosting for that, but for now fedorapeople will work. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
TMOUT
Hey guys, so we talked about this... well, a long time ago and decided to do it but it never got implemented. So I'm going to implement it now and its likely going to cause some people pain for now. I'm going to set the default bash TMOUT value to 32400 (9 hours). If you need to overwrite this, you can do it in your bashrc though its recommended that you not do that. I'm going to add this to the security policy as this is a security measure. I'll do it tomorrow morning so get ready. -Mike ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Fedora Security Policy
Hi there, in iptables config, why not, change the default forward policy to drop ? by default ip forwarding is off, but I think is a good practice deny everything by default, just in case. cheers, ./bras On Jan 20, 2009, at 4:34 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: So I've added some suggested changes and would like to do this on the list instead of on IRC. So here's what I propose: http://mmcgrath.fedorapeople.org/policy/ [1] 1) I'd like everyone in a sysadmin* group to be compliant with this policy as part of orientation for new members. 2) I'd like everyone who is already in a sysadmin* group to become compliant with this standard by March 31st 2009. PLENTY of time to make whatever changes you need to make. 3) We'll continue to refine this policy but never with the assumption that everyone is immediately compliant. Notice will be given. -Mike [1] I'm working on finding permanent hosting for that, but for now fedorapeople will work. ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
Jeremy Katz wrote: On Monday, January 19 2009, Avi Kivity said: Jeremy Katz wrote: That said, we currently do install the PAE kernel if you have 4 GB+ of RAM[1]. Switching to it by default is problematic because then we're back to using different kernels for different cases You have that now, don't you? One case for 4GB and one for =4GB. Worse, if you install more memory, the kernel doesn't see it. Downgrading your CPU to one which does not support PAE should be rare. Yes, but at least the running a different kernel case is currently the relatively rare one. It will become more and more frequent as machines get beefier. If we switch to PAE, it will be the non-PAE case which is rare. btw, what's wrong with running a different kernel? So long as the configs match, there shouldn't be a difference in reliability. and it also makes the 'what do you with the live image' case a lot more complex. I'd just go with PAE here. Can't do so -- the live image is definitely used on a lot of hardware that isn't PAE capable. Many/most Pentium M's didn't support it, the OLPC doesn't[1]. And those are common hardware targets for the live image So either put both kernels there, or the non-PAE kernel. The _real_ fix here is to get PAE runtime much like was finally done with SMP :-) Patches, as they say, are welcome. Low-level x86 setup code isn't quite my forte... Hence I go for goading others into doing it ;-) I meant, this requires a monumental amount of work. But you could install both kernels and have the bootloaded choose (sticks wax balls into ears). Want to write code for syslinux and grub to do the auto-choosing? Not really. I don't see it as particularly difficult. With grub, you could use multiboot to add a module to select the correct kernel, maybe. I think Windows works this way, with the /PAE switch on the kernel command line causing a different kernel to be loaded. Then we also have to figure out a way to shoe-horn another 50 MB of stuff into the already full live image Cut away the drivers for Infiniband and similarly useless hardware (for livecds, that is). Put them in a separate subpackage or use steam-powered rm -rf. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
Eric Paris wrote: I've got a P3 (Coppermine) with 256M memory running F10. My significant other took it with her to Antarctica (Well F9 has been to Antarctica but it'll be F10 in Antarctica next month). You can only run one app at a time and have to be patient, but it's perfectly usable (and noone cares if this laptop is lost, stolen or destroyed [aside from her being pissed she lost all her research data]). I wouldn't/couldn't to use it as a daily machine, so while I'm in favor of -PAE default, F10 is usable on such small machines. I don't care if old machines need some bit twiddling to get to work, but we aren't dead yet :) By F12 you'll be down to zero apps at the same time, and slow... We can keep the non-PAE kernel, but as non-default in recognition that technology has moved on. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
On Tuesday 20 January 2009 01:06:17 am Avi Kivity wrote: Eric Paris wrote: I've got a P3 (Coppermine) with 256M memory running F10. My significant other took it with her to Antarctica (Well F9 has been to Antarctica but it'll be F10 in Antarctica next month). You can only run one app at a time and have to be patient, but it's perfectly usable (and noone cares if this laptop is lost, stolen or destroyed [aside from her being pissed she lost all her research data]). I wouldn't/couldn't to use it as a daily machine, so while I'm in favor of -PAE default, F10 is usable on such small machines. I don't care if old machines need some bit twiddling to get to work, but we aren't dead yet :) By F12 you'll be down to zero apps at the same time, and slow... We can keep the non-PAE kernel, but as non-default in recognition that technology has moved on. I have a P1 with 128M of memory running F9 just fine, I just keep it at runlevel 3. It works great. -- Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:06:17AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: Eric Paris wrote: I've got a P3 (Coppermine) with 256M memory running F10. My significant other took it with her to Antarctica (Well F9 has been to Antarctica but it'll be F10 in Antarctica next month). You can only run one app at a time and have to be patient, but it's perfectly usable (and noone cares if this laptop is lost, stolen or destroyed [aside from her being pissed she lost all her research data]). I wouldn't/couldn't to use it as a daily machine, so while I'm in favor of -PAE default, F10 is usable on such small machines. I don't care if old machines need some bit twiddling to get to work, but we aren't dead yet :) By F12 you'll be down to zero apps at the same time, and slow... We can keep the non-PAE kernel, but as non-default in recognition that technology has moved on. Look, I'm sorry if I'm just not thinking big picture enough here, but what exactly is the use case for a PAE kernel these days? The compat code in x86_64 should be more than good enough for the apps that require an i686 chroot. I just don't see the status quo as doing any real harm, as the only generations of CPU that benefit are really P4 (which aren't worth the electricity used to power them) or Core (One) Duo (which didn't exist for a particularly long time...) Neither of which actually supported more than 3GB of RAM on their northbridges except for the Xeon chipsets anyway. I have no idea what the installer and livecd do, but to me, it would seem to be a waste of space to carry two sets of installable kernels on the discs, when one would do. That said again, I'm suprised we aren't installing i586 kernels by default... Odd. I think the ideal solution here is to support x86_64 kernel, i686 userspace more actively. What, honestly, are the odds of someone with a bunch of P4 Xeons these days with 32GB of ram running Fedora? Are there really enough of them that it's worth caring? ;-) Of course, take what I say with a grain of salt. I don't particularly care at all, I'm just trying to play the pragmatist. Another question is what's the perf penalty of going to PAE on a 2GB of ram machine versus the vanilla HIGHMEM4G config? The only argument I really buy into is the NX one, honestly... What about a yum plugin that recommends a kernel that the user could override? I'll poke at it this afternoon (hey, I've always wanted to learn python...) cheers, Kyle ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
Avi Kivity wrote: Kyle McMartin wrote: Unless we keep the non-PAE i586 kernel around as a fallback, we're not going to be able to boot on a whole raft of crappy i386 chips (original Pentium M most notably...) I'm not suggesting dropping non-PAE. Simply defaulting to PAE where possible. Are Pentium Ms (really the memory that comes with them) actually capable of running recent Fedoras? Well, we can switch the default for F11, then watch the smolt statistics to figure ;) cheers, Gerd ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
Kyle McMartin wrote: Look, I'm sorry if I'm just not thinking big picture enough here, but what exactly is the use case for a PAE kernel these days? The compat code in x86_64 should be more than good enough for the apps that require an i686 chroot. It's certainly very good. I converted my i386 install to an x86_64 one, and the intermediate step of running the i386 userspace on x86_64 kernel worked well. I just don't see the status quo as doing any real harm, as the only generations of CPU that benefit are really P4 (which aren't worth the electricity used to power them) or Core (One) Duo (which didn't exist for a particularly long time...) Neither of which actually supported more than 3GB of RAM on their northbridges except for the Xeon chipsets anyway. I have no idea what the installer and livecd do, but to me, it would seem to be a waste of space to carry two sets of installable kernels on the discs, when one would do. That said again, I'm suprised we aren't installing i586 kernels by default... Odd. I think the ideal solution here is to support x86_64 kernel, i686 userspace more actively. I'm all in favor of pushing x86_64. But I think currently most installs are i386. What, honestly, are the odds of someone with a bunch of P4 Xeons these days with 32GB of ram running Fedora? Are there really enough of them that it's worth caring? ;-) Of course, take what I say with a grain of salt. I don't particularly care at all, I'm just trying to play the pragmatist. Another question is what's the perf penalty of going to PAE on a 2GB of ram machine versus the vanilla HIGHMEM4G config? I'm guessing, pretty low. The only argument I really buy into is the NX one, honestly... What about a yum plugin that recommends a kernel that the user could override? I'll poke at it this afternoon (hey, I've always wanted to learn python...) Users won't be running yum. They're running that applet thing. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:28:10PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: Users won't be running yum. They're running that applet thing. Which just shells out to yum... ;-) ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Switching Fedora to pae kernel by default?
Kyle McMartin wrote: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:28:10PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: Users won't be running yum. They're running that applet thing. Which just shells out to yum... ;-) Great, but any 'suggestions' need to find their way to the user. I'd prefer to do the right thing in the first place rather than offer suggestions about the kernel. What's a kernel anyway? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Gnome apps font size on KDE Live CD
What if I have the opposite problem, I have installed Fedora 10 with Gnome and my favorite KDE apps K3B and Amarok looks very ugly with a big font size. Could you help me with this problem? Thanks!! -- This is an email sent via The Fedora Community Portal https://fcp.surfsite.org https://fcp.surfsite.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=319459topic_id=60944forum=10#forumpost319459 If you think, this is spam, please report this to webmas...@fcp.surfsite.org and/or blame christ...@gmail.com. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Question for our users
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 03:23 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: No, I was referring to deploying Fedora in office-like situation, i.e. to be used by non-technical people, who are using not much more than text processor, spreadsheet, internet browser, email, scanner, printer, fax. For them, an OS and the SW they are using are supposed to just work out of the box. They will throw away Fedora at the very moment, they'll be confronted with SELinux alerts or package-kits update alerts or when they experience the poor shape of certain key components in Fedora currently are in. Funny how NONE of them do the same when it comes to Windows - throw it away with the myriad of gobbledegook error messages (even to the technically minded), continual stuff-ups that it does, and all the other annoying things about it. They just keep on using it. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.9-73.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Zoneminder broken after F8 - F10 upgrade
Around about 19/01/09 14:44, Craig White typed ... the only error seems to be an error w/mysql complaining about a missing column (StreamReplayBuffer). Actually, I was more concerned by the crashes, but I took your advice and blatted the SQL d/b, set it up again, and it's all happy now, thanks. Not sure what happened, though. -- [n...@fnx ~]# rm -f .signature [n...@fnx ~]# ls -l .signature ls: .signature: No such file or directory [n...@fnx ~]# exit -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Package Manager Denies Permission to Install
On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 10:16 -0800, Kam Leo wrote: What's the difference whether the package got installed by root or via su? No difference. The difference is that if you're loading a GUI to do it, you're running 500,000 lines of code as root in an untrusted environment. Richard. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
RE: Package Manager Denies Permission to Install
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 04:31 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: bruce wrote: just saw this thread. so, is there a way/solution to allow a root user to use the gui/gnome/package update app You need to patch both PolicyKit and gnome-packagekit. PolicyKit patch here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=323469 Sorry, I don't have a patch for gnome-packagekit (using kpackagekit). I don't think you need to patch gnome-packagekit, just fixing PolicyKit would do it. You'll still get the nag-dialog, but that's still part of the design. I wish this kind of stupid arbitrary restrictions just got removed. It's up to David upstream to make that call, not me. Richard. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: nfs / mount.nfs: mount to NFS server 'rpcbind' failed
after some digging around I found that the kernel task [lockd] is missing on one of the systems. The other the [lockd] magically reappeared and nfs is working on it. I know that somehow /etc/init.d/nfslock spawn this kernel task, but not sure why this would be happening. It seemed to begin with installing nfs-utils, but I'm to tired to go on investigating. Please help if you can, thanks Gary On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:05 PM, gary artim gar...@gmail.com wrote: Hi -- Applied updates tonight and now both servers that connect to my nfs server are failing to connect, complete error messge is: mount.nfs: mount to NFS server 'rpcbind' failed: RPC Error: Program not registered mount.nfs: internal error stuck with basically 2 down clients since all directories are nfs'ed. Any help is greatly appreciated. rpm -qa|grep nfs nfs-utils-1.1.2-9.fc9.x86_64 nfs-utils-lib-1.1.1-5.fc9.x86_64 i tried reverting back to nfs-utils-1.1.2-2.fc9.x86_64 no help Gary -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Question for our users
Tim wrote: On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 03:23 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: No, I was referring to deploying Fedora in office-like situation, i.e. to be used by non-technical people, who are using not much more than text processor, spreadsheet, internet browser, email, scanner, printer, fax. For them, an OS and the SW they are using are supposed to just work out of the box. They will throw away Fedora at the very moment, they'll be confronted with SELinux alerts or package-kits update alerts or when they experience the poor shape of certain key components in Fedora currently are in. Funny how NONE of them do the same when it comes to Windows Right, Windows has similar issues, ... nagging ordinary users with popups they are not supposed/not knowledgeable to process is a very questionable design. It's appropriate for single-user/single-seat personal setups, but not for office/production environment desktop and networked/centrally adminstrated installations. Ralf -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Evolution broken
Without any apparent reason, Evolution has suddenly become unable to send or receive messages. I set up Thunderbird instead and that works fine. However, it downloaded about 3500 messages that should have been deleted, so it looks as though there has been a problem for some time. Webmail shows that the messages have now been deleted but Evolution still has the Send/Receive button greyed out. Anyone else had similar problems? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F10 HD install - anyone successfully done this?
I'd like to report success! Here's the details of how the system looked. An interesting point is that I was doing this on a remote machine with only a serial console (and SSH) so the kernel and GRUB options all include serial console commands. ISO used was: http://ftp.uni-kl.de/pub/linux/fedora/linux/releases/10/Fedora/x86_64/iso/Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD.iso [1] I used the /home partition as the one to install from. (The other partitions were subsequently reformatted by the Fedora 10 install.) I followed guidance in this thread as to extracting the initrd.img and vmlinuz files from the ISO in to /home/isolinux/ The filesystem layout I ended up with, which worked, looked as follows. Note that my /home partition was /dev/sda7 , which is called (hd0,6) in grub. [r...@s15332110 [2] ~]# cd /home [r...@s15332110 [3] home]# ls -l total 32 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2009-01-14 17:15 boot drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-01-14 16:18 images drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2009-01-14 17:57 iso-images drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2008-11-20 02:17 isolinux drwx-- 2 root root 16384 2009-01-14 17:46 lost+found [r...@s15332110 [4] home]# ls -lR .: total 32 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2009-01-14 17:15 boot drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-01-14 16:18 images drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2009-01-14 17:57 iso-images drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2008-11-20 02:17 isolinux drwx-- 2 root root 16384 2009-01-14 17:46 lost+found ./boot: total 4 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-01-14 17:17 x86_64 ./boot/x86_64: total 19948 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17759712 2009-01-14 17:16 initrd.img -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2637056 2009-01-14 17:17 vmlinuz ./images: total 111840 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 114405376 2008-11-20 02:17 install.img ./iso-images: total 4 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2009-01-14 17:58 Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD ./iso-images/Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD: total 4078484 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4172283904 2008-11-20 02:21 Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD.iso drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-01-14 16:18 images ./iso-images/Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD/images: total 111840 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 114405376 2008-11-20 02:17 install.img ./isolinux: total 20756 -r--r--r-- 1 root root 2048 2008-11-20 02:19 boot.cat -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 219 2008-11-20 02:17 boot.msg -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 919 2008-11-20 02:17 general.msg -r--r--r-- 1 root root 166 2008-11-20 02:17 grub.conf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17759712 2008-11-20 02:17 initrd.img -r--r--r-- 1 root root12331 2008-11-20 02:17 isolinux.bin -r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 873 2008-11-20 02:17 isolinux.cfg -r--r--r-- 1 root root 112076 2008-11-20 02:17 memtest -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 817 2008-11-20 02:17 options.msg -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 517 2008-11-20 02:17 param.msg -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 490 2008-11-20 02:17 rescue.msg -r--r--r-- 1 root root 514636 2008-11-20 02:17 splash.jpg -r--r--r-- 1 root root 3104 2008-11-20 02:19 TRANS.TBL -r--r--r-- 1 root root 128364 2008-11-20 02:17 vesamenu.c32 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2637056 2008-11-20 02:17 vmlinuz ./lost+found: total 0 The grub /boot/grub/grub.conf was as follows (actually it had other title sections as well, but I only used the one given below: # cat /boot/grub/grub.conf serial --unit=0 --speed=57600 terminal --timeout=5 serial console default=0 timeout=5 title Install Fedora 10 x86_64 (from example on website) Number 3 root (hd0,6) kernel /boot/x86_64/vmlinuz root=/dev/ram0 console=tty0 console=ttyS0,57600 repo=hd:/dev/sda7:/iso-images/Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD initrd /boot/x86_64/initrd.img Links: -- [1] http://ftp.uni-kl.de/pub/linux/fedora/linux/releases/10/Fedora/x86_64/iso/Fedora-10-x86_64-DVD.iso [2] mailto:r...@s15332110 [3] mailto:r...@s15332110 [4] mailto:r...@s15332110 -- This is an email sent via The Fedora Community Portal https://fcp.surfsite.org https://fcp.surfsite.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=319551topic_id=64577forum=10#forumpost319551 If you think, this is spam, please report this to webmas...@fcp.surfsite.org and/or blame gareth.rand...@scivisum.co.uk. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F8 - F10 and Bluetooth broken
Around about 19/01/09 19:28, Patrick O'Callaghan typed ... Works for me. Mine is a Broadcom dongle (marked as: Anycom USB-250). Dmesg shows: I get something very similar (albeit at only one level [5-2] where you have 3-1 3-1.1: usb 5-2: new full speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 3 usb 5-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice usb 5-2: New USB device found, idVendor=0a5c, idProduct=200a usb 5-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=3 usb 5-2: Product: Belkin Bluetooth Device usb 5-2: Manufacturer: Broadcom usb 5-2: SerialNumber: 000A3A64F1EB Then: Bluetooth: Core ver 2.13 NET: Registered protocol family 31 Bluetooth: HCI device and connection manager initialized Bluetooth: HCI socket layer initialized Bluetooth: Generic Bluetooth USB driver ver 0.3 ... Bluetooth: L2CAP ver 2.11 Bluetooth: L2CAP socket layer initialized Bluetooth: BNEP (Ethernet Emulation) ver 1.3 Bluetooth: BNEP filters: protocol multicast Bluetooth: SCO (Voice Link) ver 0.6 Bluetooth: SCO socket layer initialized Bluetooth: RFCOMM socket layer initialized Bluetooth: RFCOMM TTY layer initialized Bluetooth: RFCOMM ver 1.10 ... Bluetooth: HIDP (Human Interface Emulation) ver 1.2 And again after re-plugging: usb 5-2: new full speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 15 usb 5-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice usb 5-2: New USB device found, idVendor=0a5c, idProduct=200a usb 5-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=3 usb 5-2: Product: Belkin Bluetooth Device usb 5-2: Manufacturer: Broadcom usb 5-2: SerialNumber: 000A3A64F1EB I get a HAL entry for it: udi = '/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/usb_device_a5c_200a_000A3A64F1EB' info.bus = 'usb_device' (string) info.linux.driver = 'usb' (string) info.parent = '/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/usb_device_1d6b_1__00_1d_3' (string) info.product = 'Bluetooth dongle' (string) info.subsystem = 'usb_device' (string) info.udi = '/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/usb_device_a5c_200a_000A3A64F1EB' (string) info.vendor = 'Broadcom Corp.' (string) linux.device_file = '/dev/bus/usb/005/015' (string) linux.hotplug_type = 2 (0x2) (int) linux.subsystem = 'usb' (string) linux.sysfs_path = '/sys/devices/pci:00/:00:1d.3/usb5/5-2' (string) usb_device.bus_number = 5 (0x5) (int) usb_device.can_wake_up = true (bool) usb_device.device_class = 224 (0xe0) (int) usb_device.device_protocol = 1 (0x1) (int) usb_device.device_revision_bcd = 1 (0x1) (int) usb_device.device_subclass = 1 (0x1) (int) usb_device.is_self_powered = false (bool) usb_device.linux.device_number = 15 (0xf) (int) usb_device.linux.sysfs_path = '/sys/devices/pci:00/:00:1d.3/usb5/5-2' (string) usb_device.num_configurations = 1 (0x1) (int) usb_device.num_ports = 0 (0x0) (int) usb_device.product = 'Bluetooth dongle' (string) usb_device.product_id = 8202 (0x200a) (int) usb_device.serial = '000A3A64F1EB' (string) usb_device.speed = 12.0 (12) (double) usb_device.vendor = 'Broadcom Corp.' (string) usb_device.vendor_id = 2652 (0xa5c) (int) usb_device.version = 1.1 (1.1) (double) Everything looks OK except for the messages error: 2009-01-20T11:55:39.368062+00:00 host bluetoothd[15829]: Registered interface org.bluez.Service on path /org/bluez/15829/any 2009-01-20T11:55:39.368172+00:00 fnx bluetoothd[15829]: HCI dev 0 registered 2009-01-20T11:55:39.369903+00:00 host bluetoothd[15829]: HCI dev 0 already up 2009-01-20T11:55:39.389237+00:00 host bluetoothd[15829]: Starting security manager 0 2009-01-20T11:55:44.391301+00:00 host bluetoothd[15829]: Can't read version info for /org/bluez/15829/hci0: Unknown error 4294967186 (-110) 2009-01-20T11:55:49.369263+00:00 host bluetoothd[15834]: Can't set link policy on hci0: Connection timed out (110) What's /org/bluez/15829/hci0 come from? It's not a HAL ref., nor something I can see under /proc or /sys. -- [n...@fnx ~]# rm -f .signature [n...@fnx ~]# ls -l .signature ls: .signature: No such file or directory [n...@fnx ~]# exit -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Evolution broken
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 10:45 +, Noel James Bridge wrote: Without any apparent reason, Evolution has suddenly become unable to send or receive messages. I set up Thunderbird instead and that works fine. However, it downloaded about 3500 messages that should have been deleted, so it looks as though there has been a problem for some time. Webmail shows that the messages have now been deleted but Evolution still has the Send/Receive button greyed out. Anyone else had similar problems? Is Evolution offline? (Disconnected icon in the lower-left corner, or FileWork Online/Offline) This is the only time I see the Send/Receive button greyed out. -Chris -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Question for our users
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 11:06 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: It's appropriate for single-user/single-seat personal setups, but not for office/production environment desktop and networked/centrally adminstrated installations. An administrator *IS* able to reconfigure the computer to work the way that they want it to. They're not stopped from doing so. And that's what they generally do - customise the setup. Not spit the dummy and install some other OS. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.9-73.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: network manager / vpnc question
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:40:45PM -0800, Patrick Mansfield wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 03:01:49PM -0500, Mail Lists wrote: I have set up a vpnc connection just fine (to cisco) - while there is a button to add routes, it seems to not understand the usual ip route arguments ... I need to keep a default route via a standard gateway (not using the vpnc tun0 route) and then set a bunch of other routes to tun0 .. ie i need to create these routes and am stumped how to do them - At its simplest, i'd like the routing table to be unchanged from before I connect vpnc (esp the default route) which I asume 'ignore automatically obtained routes' radio button will do - and in addition add these 2 routes - which I cannot find how to do: ip route add x.x.x.x/16 dev tun0 ip route add y.y.y.y/17 dev tun0 Also I don't know for sure I will get 'tun0' so it should probably be a meta token but the window to add routes only takes gateway ip type of routes ... I'm on Fedora 9, with NetworkManager-vpnc-0.7.0-0.11.svn4326.fc9.i386 I used entries like this in the routes table gui thing (nm - VPN connections - configure VPN, click VPN tab, click vpn connection, click edit, click IPv4 settings, click routes): address netmask gateway metric x.y.0.0 255.255.0.0 f.g.0.0 255.255.0.0 With nothing set for gateway or metric. Note: I haven't been able to find the file with this data! It was easy to find with earlier versions, it's a real pain to add a lot of routes, plus you can't cut and paste via the gui form. It's stored in the GConf registry under /system/networking/connections/#/ipv4 where # is a simple integer assigned by NM. The actual key is routes and the format appears to be a list of integers, in the order [addr, mask, gw, metric] with each integer being a net-ordered (?) value. So if your route is 172.16.0.0/16, you'd see the values [4268, 16, 0, 0] in the list. 4268 = 0x10AC = 0x10AC ~= 0.0.16.172 Not the easiest thing to edit directly by hand, you're definitely right. -- Paul W. Frieldshttp://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug pgpbqnuuscQCU.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Restoring NetworkManager settings
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:35:47PM -0800, Dave Roberts wrote: On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 18:47 -0800, Alan Evans wrote: I wanted to temporarily assign static IP settings for eth0, and like a dufus I used system-config-network. Unchecked Controlled by Network Manager and entered the desired addresses. This worked fine as far as it went. When I was finished with the temporary settings, I went back and re-checked the box for NetworkManager control. But NM never really took control of eth0 again. I looked in Edit Connections... from NM and saw that what used to be Auto eth0 now said System eth0. There was no obvious way to change or delete it. Even root wasn't allowed to delete it from the NM dialog. I eventually did manage to get Auto eth0 back by manually deleting /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0. But I can't edit anything about the connection, which is what I should have done instead of involving system-config-network. Everything under the edit dialog for Auto eth0 is grayed out. I booted the LiveCD just to confirm that it was not always so. Sure enough, from the LiveCD boot, I can freely edit eth0 using NetworkManager. How do I get that back? I did almost the same thing and I'm in the same state. In my case, I was trying to give my Ethernet a static IP. Now, for whatever reason, NetworkManager (maybe better called NetborkManager) has all the interface config grayed out and it says System eth1. If I try to set DNS configuration in system-config-network, it gets overwritten whenever NetworkManager does its thing. Any assistance in diagnosing what's happening would be of great help. As a base question, are these two utilities supposed to play well together? If not, why aren't isn't there correct conflict information in the RPMs? Try this: * Select System Administration Network, give the root password, and in the Devices tab, deselect the checkbox for the eth1 device. That removes it from the common profile. Your system may go offline when this happens. * Right-click your NetworkManager applet, choose Edit Connections, and the Wired tab. If you don't see one, add a connection called Auto eth1. Edit it as desired, including changing the IPv4 settings to eschew DHCP for a manually set static IP address. This works for me on the station I'm using right now, which is running Fedora 10. Most of the time that I see people having trouble with NetworkManager, it comes from trying to fight NM using the old tools, when in fact you can generally do everything you want from the NM interface nowadays. The Auto interface connection name may be the one trick you were missing. -- Paul W. Frieldshttp://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug pgpCUMkOID8qv.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Evolution broken
Chris Tyler wrote: On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 10:45 +, Noel James Bridge wrote: Without any apparent reason, Evolution has suddenly become unable to send or receive messages. I set up Thunderbird instead and that works fine. However, it downloaded about 3500 messages that should have been deleted, so it looks as though there has been a problem for some time. Webmail shows that the messages have now been deleted but Evolution still has the Send/Receive button greyed out. Anyone else had similar problems? Is Evolution offline? (Disconnected icon in the lower-left corner, or FileWork Online/Offline) This is the only time I see the Send/Receive button greyed out. -Chris Duh! That was it. Thanks, Chris James -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Gnome apps font size on KDE Live CD
On Tuesday 20 January 2009 08:42:35 christoxl wrote: What if I have the opposite problem, I have installed Fedora 10 with Gnome and my favorite KDE apps K3B and Amarok looks very ugly with a big font size. Could you help me with this problem? Yes. Google for gtk-chtheme. Follow the instructions on the website. It's very easy to set up, and one setting you can use tells gtk apps to use your kde setting for fonts. Anne signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: VMware server 2.0, /usr/src/linux?
I found a problem, don't know if it is related but kernel-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64.rpm fails to install with the following error below. # yum update . Downloading Packages: kernel-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64.rpm | 20 MB 00:28 Entering rpm code Running rpm_check_debug Member: kernel.x86_64 0-2.6.27.9-159.fc10 - i Adding Package kernel-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64 in mode i rpm_check_debug time: 0.065 Running Transaction Test Member: kernel.x86_64 0-2.6.27.9-159.fc10 - i Adding Package kernel-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64 in mode i Finished Transaction Test Transaction Test Succeeded Transaction Test time: 0.160 Member: kernel.x86_64 0-2.6.27.9-159.fc10 - i Adding Package kernel-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64 in mode i Running Transaction Installing : kernel 1/1 Error unpacking rpm package kernel-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64 error: unpacking of archive failed on file /boot/System.map-2.6.27.9-159.fc10.x86_64: cpio: rename Warning: scriptlet or other non-fatal errors occurred during transaction. Running posttrans handler for refresh-packagekit plugin Transaction time: 0.373 Leaving rpm code = Installed: kernel.x86_64 0:2.6.27.9-159.fc10 # # rpm -q -a kernel kernel-2.6.27.5-117.fc10.x86_64 You can see that kernel-2.6.27.*9* is NOT installed only kernel-2.6.27.*5*is. Any one know what the error above means? - Jamie On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 6:49 PM, iarly selbir iar...@gmail.com wrote: install kernel-devel # yum install kernel-devel and run again vmware-config.pl Regards, - - iarly selbir ( ski0s ) :wq! On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Jamie Bohr jamieb...@gmail.com wrote: I must be missing something ... I can install VMWare server but vmware-config.pl fails because /usr/src/linux/include is not present. From that I can tell from reading this forum and others there should be no problem running vmware-config.pl. I had VMware server 2 installed on FC8 but because of a disk crash I had to start over. I did a yum provides /usr/src/liux and nothing came back. Can someone tell me what I am missing to get VMWare Server 2.0 vmware-config.pl to complete? I have Selinux disabled, 8 gigs of ram, 900G of RAID 1 (now) disks and three VM on a backup drive that I would like to use. -- Jamie Bohr -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- Jamie Bohr -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
