Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 21:49 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 05:43 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: and no, glxgears is not a benchmark! Indeed, glxgears really sucks as as a benchmark, Phoronix's benchmark suite (as imperfect as it is) is definitely more useful. I keep meaning to file a feature request for glxgears - remove the FPS display...if it's not a benchmark, let's not make it look like one. While not an effective benchmark, but a good tool to check that DRI/DRM is working. Grated, it would have been nice if out-of-the-box OSS OpenGL benchmarking and testing tools (outside the closed benchmarks and game demos used by the Phoronix suite), but for now, we are more-or-less limited to glxgears... - Gilboa -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Gilboa Davaragilb...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 21:49 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 05:43 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: and no, glxgears is not a benchmark! Indeed, glxgears really sucks as as a benchmark, Phoronix's benchmark suite (as imperfect as it is) is definitely more useful. I keep meaning to file a feature request for glxgears - remove the FPS display...if it's not a benchmark, let's not make it look like one. While not an effective benchmark, but a good tool to check that DRI/DRM is working. Grated, it would have been nice if out-of-the-box OSS OpenGL benchmarking and testing tools (outside the closed benchmarks and game demos used by the Phoronix suite), but for now, we are more-or-less limited to glxgears... There are alot of open source games[1} that are useable to for benchmarking. glxgears is NOT a benchmark. If you don't have anything but glxgears than you have NO benchmark. [1]: openarena, nexuiz, ... -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: unable to include capability.h
On Friday 12 June 2009 09:02:39 am Daniel Lezcano wrote: As I only need the CAP_SYS_BOOT, I will define it manually in the source code and will remove the include, that's ugly but anyway... :/ Alternatelyas of today, libcap-ng is now in Fedora. It has a far simpler API and you should be able to do things in 2-3 lines of code. For example, if you wanted to use it to retain only CAP_SYS_BOOT, the code would be: capng_clear(CAPNG_SELECT_BOTH); capng_update(CAPNG_ADD, CAPNG_EFFECTIVE|CAPNG_PERMITTED, CAP_SYS_BOOT); capng_apply(CAPNG_SELECT_CAPS); You're done. If you know you application has no children, then you would want to change the last line to use CAPNG_SELECT_BOTH so that the bounding set is cleared. libcap-ng has 1 relocation and libcap has 35, so it starts up faster. Its also smaller in size and has better analysis tools. More info can be found here: http://people.redhat.com/sgrubb/libcap-ng/ I'll be setting up a Fedora 12 project in the next few days to drop privs everywhere. -Steve -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 06:05:52AM +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote: Up until 30 minutes ago, I was unaware of the fact that they use test-suite compiled binaries. Though I'd imagine that in Phoronix' view, having (far) different compile options in the distribution supplied binaries might generate invalid results. (Due to missing features, non-standard optimization, etc) It depends what they're trying to test. The name of the benchmark is really misleading, and causes bad extrapolation -- it's called Apache Benchmark, but really all they mean is Apache-BASED benchmark. They're not benchmarking http performance on the distro: they're benchmarking *something* represented by exercising a certain bit of code (which happens to be Apache httpd) in a certain way. -- Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org Senior Systems Architect Cyberinfrastructure Labs Computing Information Technology Harvard School of Engineering Applied Sciences -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Do we need split media CDs for F12?
(Reposting to f-d-l from my blog post last night. http://domsch.com/blog/?p=85 includes a couple nice graphs to help illustrate.) CDs are Dead. Long live CDs. I was running some stats on the Fedora 11 release, and an interesting thing caught my eye. Very few people are downloading the six (or in the case of PPC, seven) CDs to perform a Fedora install. Very Very few. In fact, at most, six people downloaded split media CDs using the Fedora mirror servers in the first few days. This in contrast to the over 234,000 direct downloads of DVDs and LiveCDs in the same amount of time. BitTorrent statistics are a little better for CDs: 908 completed downloads of the split media CDs, out of 41,235 total downloads (or ~2.2 %). Which leads to the question, Do we really need split media CDs for Fedora 12? A few more points lend credence to this idea. Looking only at the BitTorrent stats for Fedora 9, 10, and now 11, we see an interesting trend. Figure 1 shows that the interest in split media CDs has been decreasing over the past year. Figure 1 shows % of bittorrent downloads that were the split CD set, by version. F9: 6.32%. F10 4.58% F11 so far: 2.2%. I have a suspicion. As the number of x86_64 users grows, it's more likely that x86_64 systems will have DVD readers as opposed to older CD readers. Figure 2 shows the growth of x86_64 vs x86 over the past year, again extracted from BitTorrent statistics. Figure 2 shows x86 vs x86_64 bittorrent downloads. ArchF9 F10 F11 x86 72.99 63.55 57.52 X86_64 27.01 36.45 42.48 The entire Fedora 11 release as sent to the mirrors is ~143GB. Of that, CD and DVD ISOs represent ~34GB; the split media CD ISOs represent ~15.5GB of that. As most of the rest of that 143GB is all hardlinked, we're really only transferring out all these ISO files. 10% of the disk space, and 45% of the time/bandwidth needed to get a release out to the mirrors, for about 2% of the user base, and declining. CDs had their place, back when DVD readers weren't commonplace, and before we had LiveCD/LiveUSB medias. Now, DVDs are fairly common, the LiveCDs work great for a lot of installs, and we have both a small (158MB) network-based bootable CD installer for new installs that would require a CD, and preupgrade for upgrading from an older distro version to the next. Let's kill off split media CDs for Fedora 12. Your thoughts? Thanks, Matt -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com www.dell.com/linux -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 12:20 +0200, drago01 wrote: On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Gilboa Davaragilb...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 21:49 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 05:43 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: and no, glxgears is not a benchmark! Indeed, glxgears really sucks as as a benchmark, Phoronix's benchmark suite (as imperfect as it is) is definitely more useful. I keep meaning to file a feature request for glxgears - remove the FPS display...if it's not a benchmark, let's not make it look like one. While not an effective benchmark, but a good tool to check that DRI/DRM is working. Grated, it would have been nice if out-of-the-box OSS OpenGL benchmarking and testing tools (outside the closed benchmarks and game demos used by the Phoronix suite), but for now, we are more-or-less limited to glxgears... There are alot of open source games[1} that are useable to for benchmarking. glxgears is NOT a benchmark. If you don't have anything but glxgears than you have NO benchmark. [1]: openarena, nexuiz, ... True, But nexuiz, open arena and the rest of the ioquake / cube are unavailable on most distributions (E.g. EL5) and their sheer size (100's of MBs) makes them far less effective. glxgears, on the other hand is available more-or-less out of the box and requires 50K. As long as you respect the fact that glxgears can -only- be used to verify that your OpenGL stack is more-or-less working as it should, I see no problem in using it. - Gilboa -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 08:46 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: Your thoughts? If we don't do split CDs, Fedora Unity is likely to do them. If we don't produce and test split media as part of our beta/release cycle, we'll likely not find bugs with their usage until after the release is made and Fedora Unity attempts to make them. As long as /somebody/ within the Fedora project is going to create them and offer them to our users it is in our best interest to create them as part of our normal development cycle and iron out all the bugs before users attempt to use them. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 09:34 -0500, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com said: CDs had their place, back when DVD readers weren't commonplace, and before we had LiveCD/LiveUSB medias. Now, DVDs are fairly common, the LiveCDs work great for a lot of installs, and we have both a small (158MB) network-based bootable CD installer for new installs that would require a CD, and preupgrade for upgrading from an older distro version to the next. Let's kill off split media CDs for Fedora 12. Your thoughts? Sounds good to me. Keep the LiveCDs and netboot CD and remove the other CD images. Hmm, I'd want netboot.img back, since I normally use a USB stick to start the network install (OK, there is the possibility of using livecd-iso-to-disk, but that's a lot more hassle than downloading a minimalistic img and running dd). -- Jussi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussileht...@fedoraproject.org -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 07:04:12PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote: On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 09:34 -0500, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com said: CDs had their place, back when DVD readers weren't commonplace, and before we had LiveCD/LiveUSB medias. Now, DVDs are fairly common, the LiveCDs work great for a lot of installs, and we have both a small (158MB) network-based bootable CD installer for new installs that would require a CD, and preupgrade for upgrading from an older distro version to the next. Let's kill off split media CDs for Fedora 12. Your thoughts? Sounds good to me. Keep the LiveCDs and netboot CD and remove the other CD images. Hmm, I'd want netboot.img back, since I normally use a USB stick to start the network install (OK, there is the possibility of using livecd-iso-to-disk, but that's a lot more hassle than downloading a minimalistic img and running dd). We have it, it's now called netinst.iso http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/11/Fedora/i386/iso/Fedora-11-i386-netinst.iso (and other architectures too). -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com www.dell.com/linux -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com writes: On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 08:46 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: Your thoughts? If we don't do split CDs, Fedora Unity is likely to do them. Are we sure about that? The reasons not to bother would be just as strong for Unity, no? If we don't produce and test split media as part of our beta/release cycle, we'll likely not find bugs with their usage until after the release is made and Fedora Unity attempts to make them. As long as /somebody/ within the Fedora project is going to create them and offer them to our users it is in our best interest to create them as part of our normal development cycle and iron out all the bugs before users attempt to use them. I agree with that chain of reasoning, but am not convinced of the starting premise. regards, tom lane -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Strange /etc/fedora-release and smolt help
Can anyone with F11 installed look at what is in their /etc/fedora-release and tell me which one you have, and how you installed? Also what version of fedora-release you have. $ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 11 (Leonidas) Installed this morning using x86_64 DVD. $ rpm -q fedora-release fedora-release-11-1.noarch Rich -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
- Tom Lane t...@redhat.com wrote: Are we sure about that? The reasons not to bother would be just as strong for Unity, no? I agree with that chain of reasoning, but am not convinced of the starting premise. OK lets remove any doubt, if Fedora Project does not produce them Fedora Unity will if at all possible. The last time the CD media was dropped the crys and screams of terror from the third world that have never seen a DVD rom were considerable. If CD media was dropped I would say go half way, drop it for x86_64, people installing on 64 bit capable hardware are probably going to have a DVD rom. Those installing i?86 really might not. - Bob | Robert 'Bob' Jensen|| Fedora Unity Founder | | b...@fedoraunity.org|| http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | |http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 11:12 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 07:04:12PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote: Hmm, I'd want netboot.img back, since I normally use a USB stick to start the network install (OK, there is the possibility of using livecd-iso-to-disk, but that's a lot more hassle than downloading a minimalistic img and running dd). We have it, it's now called netinst.iso Yes but not netboot.img that could be dd'd straight away to a USB drive or whatnot; the iso needs livecd-iso-to-disk which a) is extra work and b) is only available on Fedora and Windows. [Also, the livecd tools need an own homepage so that users of other distros can get them.] -- Jussi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussileht...@fedoraproject.org -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Robert 'Bob' Jensenb...@fedoraunity.org wrote: OK lets remove any doubt, if Fedora Project does not produce them Fedora Unity will if at all possible. The last time the CD media was dropped the crys and screams of terror from the third world that have never seen a DVD rom were considerable. If CD media was dropped I would say go half way, drop it for x86_64, people installing on 64 bit capable hardware are probably going to have a DVD rom. Those installing i?86 really might not. I think you are right about x86_64 probably is going to have a DVD Rom, I only have needed the CDs when installing i386 servers isolated from the internet. I think we should start considering the option to ship the net install ISO as a hard disk image to be used for USB boot, I frequently install systems without optical media and that conversion step (ISO to HD) is not intuitive for all users -- Robert Marcano -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
the user's still able to install using netboot.iso. On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Robert 'Bob' Jensenb...@fedoraunity.org wrote: - Tom Lane t...@redhat.com wrote: Are we sure about that? The reasons not to bother would be just as strong for Unity, no? I agree with that chain of reasoning, but am not convinced of the starting premise. OK lets remove any doubt, if Fedora Project does not produce them Fedora Unity will if at all possible. The last time the CD media was dropped the crys and screams of terror from the third world that have never seen a DVD rom were considerable. If CD media was dropped I would say go half way, drop it for x86_64, people installing on 64 bit capable hardware are probably going to have a DVD rom. Those installing i?86 really might not. - Bob | Robert 'Bob' Jensen || Fedora Unity Founder | | b...@fedoraunity.org || http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | | http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen | -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- Itamar Reis Peixoto e-mail/msn: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br sip: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br skype: itamarjp icq: 81053601 +55 11 4063 5033 +55 34 3221 8599 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Anybody know how to contact Axel Thimm?
Hi, as per the process at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers, does anybody know how to contact Axel Thimm? We've been pinging him at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484855 for over two weeks now, although the bug has sat there for much longer already. Thanks, Ricky pgppMePRZAYjm.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Once upon a time, Robert Marcano rob...@marcanoonline.com said: I think you are right about x86_64 probably is going to have a DVD Rom, I only have needed the CDs when installing i386 servers isolated from the internet. Remember, the minimum CPU for 32-bit x86 today is i586 (Pentium), and IIRC there was discussion about rebuilding for i686 (Pentium Pro). -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote: Remember, the minimum CPU for 32-bit x86 today is i586 (Pentium), and IIRC there was discussion about rebuilding for i686 (Pentium Pro). If we really want to decrease the mirror foot print how about we off load some of the 640MB+ data and docs files that are showing up in the repository? - Bob | Robert 'Bob' Jensen|| Fedora Unity Founder | | b...@fedoraunity.org|| http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | |http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Chris Adamscmad...@hiwaay.net wrote: Remember, the minimum CPU for 32-bit x86 today is i586 (Pentium), and IIRC there was discussion about rebuilding for i686 (Pentium Pro). You are technically right , but I am talking about the Fedora release Tag (that was i386), so If you want to be picky we must rename all directories on the mirrors to i686 or better x86 :-) -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- Robert Marcano -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
- Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br wrote: the user's still able to install using netboot.iso. Yeah some guy in a mud hut with no DSL only a 56k modem, Power 4 hours a day... NetInst FAIL. I remember Seth talking a while back about yum's performance. As I remember, sure yum worked fine on his computers but try it on the OLPC. He then understood what the bugs and complaints were about. Some including myself will and have said that Fedora is not for everyone. But I still think we should look at those that are not in the technical situation we are fortunate enough to be in. - Bob | Robert 'Bob' Jensen|| Fedora Unity Founder | | b...@fedoraunity.org|| http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | |http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Anybody know how to contact Axel Thimm?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 02:38:28PM -0300, Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote: that's true. I am also have a bug reported for nx package waiting for a long time. There are new nx packages in updates-testing since a week now. Which bug are you referring to? On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Ricky Zhouri...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Hi, as per the process at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers, does anybody know how to contact Axel Thimm? I know. We've been pinging him at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484855 for over two weeks now, although the bug has sat there for much longer already. It's correct that the bug is open a while, but technically your first ping as on 2009-06-05 00:05:35 EDT, that's hardly two weeks. I was waiting for 1.15.0 (out three days ago) to check whether the patch is still neccessary. But it looks like it still is. Anyway there will be an upgrade and I'll try to fix the issue en passant. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net pgp1zU6Eb5E0t.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Anybody know how to contact Axel Thimm?
He recently responded, though he seems to be not so active now: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474017 Milos On 13.6.2009 19:38, Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote: that's true. I am also have a bug reported for nx package waiting for a long time. On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Ricky Zhouri...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Hi, as per the process at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers, does anybody know how to contact Axel Thimm? We've been pinging him at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484855 for over two weeks now, although the bug has sat there for much longer already. Thanks, Ricky -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On 13/06/09 19:22, Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote: - Itamar Reis Peixotoita...@ispbrasil.com.br wrote: the user's still able to install using netboot.iso. Yeah some guy in a mud hut with no DSL only a 56k modem, Power 4 hours a day... NetInst FAIL. Just curious. But if a user has bandwidth problems, how is\are mutiple CD's going to help, or is it purely on hardware grounds, no dvd-rom. Frank -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Anybody know how to contact Axel Thimm?
On 2009-06-13 09:24:12 PM, Axel Thimm wrote: It's correct that the bug is open a while, but technically your first ping as on 2009-06-05 00:05:35 EDT, that's hardly two weeks. I was waiting for 1.15.0 (out three days ago) to check whether the patch is still neccessary. But it looks like it still is. Anyway there will be an upgrade and I'll try to fix the issue en passant. My apologies, I thought the first one counted as well - good to see you're still around though. I really really hope we can get rid of this non-upstream patch, I've commented more about this on the bug. Talk to you in bugzilla, Ricky pgpInMp3G381Z.pgp Description: PGP signature -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote: Just curious. But if a user has bandwidth problems, how is\are mutiple CD's going to help, or is it purely on hardware grounds, no dvd-rom. No/slow internet is commonly followed by old hardware, it is a common combination in my country. Recently on Fedora Venezuela mailing list we were discussing creating a special respin just because of the bandwidth problem here -- Robert Marcano -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
- Robert Marcano rob...@marcanoonline.com wrote: No/slow internet is commonly followed by old hardware, it is a common combination in my country. Recently on Fedora Venezuela mailing list we were discussing creating a special respin just because of the bandwidth problem here These are the exact people that Fedora Project should be talking to about this, not mirror admins, IMO anyhow. - Bob | Robert 'Bob' Jensen|| Fedora Unity Founder | | b...@fedoraunity.org|| http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | |http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Matt Domschmatt_dom...@dell.com wrote: Your thoughts? Is there a geographic regional bias in the data? 1) Are all countries/regions downloading the split cds at less than 5% of the download activity for the given country region? 2) Is there a geographical bias in the direct download data pool? It could be that some regions are using local mirrors for downloading the isos more heavily than others. Are countries/regions equally representative in the direct iso download data logs relative to the mirrormanager mirrorlist polling logs? Answer 1 and 2 together should be able to give you a way to put all regions on an equal activity scale...to see if there are certain regions who are using split media more heavily. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance
drago01 wrote: There are alot of open source games[1} that are useable to for benchmarking. glxgears is NOT a benchmark. If you don't have anything but glxgears than you have NO benchmark. +1 [1]: openarena, nexuiz, ... Also etracer, torcs etc. Basically everything 3D with an FPS display option. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
- Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: Just curious. But if a user has bandwidth problems, how is\are mutiple CD's going to help, or is it purely on hardware grounds, no dvd-rom. Does no one remember what happened last time the CD ball was dropped? Lets not repeat history just for fun. We have been down this road before, it was ugly and only lasted one release. Torrent tracker numbers BTW do not always tell the truth. In many cases in these less fortunate areas one person will download the ISO images, then make CDs for any one in the surrounding villages. Sneakernet is alive and well. I asked about this topic a few minutes ago in the #fedora-social IRC channel because we seemed to have a pretty diverse mix of people chatting. There was a resounding response that the CDs need to be kept. - Bob | Robert 'Bob' Jensen|| Fedora Unity Founder | | b...@fedoraunity.org|| http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | |http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Once upon a time, Robert 'Bob' Jensen b...@fedoraunity.org said: I remember Seth talking a while back about yum's performance. As I remember, sure yum worked fine on his computers but try it on the OLPC. He then understood what the bugs and complaints were about. Uh, OLPC doesn't have a CD drive either AFAIK. -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance
Gilboa Davara wrote: I subscribed to Phoronix' RSS feed and at least 1/3-1/2 of their news stories are on OSS driver (mostly Intel and ATI) driver development - far more than any other OSS new site. [1] Too bad their hardware benchmarks do not match the development news, and too bad they also feel it necessary to continuously warn about alleged unsuitability of the Free drivers for production use (when in reality they just work as long as you pick hardware which is already fully supported, but their hardware section makes no effort to recommend such hardware). However, the sad truth is that -currently- neither xorg-drv-intel nor xorg-x11-drv-ati / xorg-x11-drv-radeonhd are capable of generating competitive 3D performance (Especially the recent GEM'ed versions of xorg-drv-intel) and far less mature than, say, nvidia.ko. I don't care how they compare with proprietary modules. I want comparisons between the different Free drivers and recommendations for the best hardware when benchmarked using Free drivers. They have no such benchmark. Asking Phoronix not to report this and/or skew the benchmarks simply because the results are politically inconvenient to us is, in my view, simply unacceptable. I disagree, they should not be promoting proprietary software, they should focus on graphics in Free Software, not with proprietary drivers on an otherwise Free system. But even if they did 2 sections about hardware, one with proprietary drivers and one with Free drivers, comparing what is comparable (i.e., at this stage, in most cases, proprietary vs. proprietary and Free vs. Free), that'd already be an improvement. Of course, if the Free drivers manage to beat the proprietary ones for comparably-priced hardware, that's always worth reporting! But they shouldn't be required to to even get mentioned at all in the benchmarks. Indeed, glxgears really sucks as as a benchmark, Phoronix's benchmark suite (as imperfect as it is) is definitely more useful. Oh, there's a start :) Too bad I have to correct myself on that, since you pointed out that their game benchmark uses proprietary games, and thus their benchmark suite is NOT a contribution to Free Software. There are plenty of Free Software 3D games which can be used for benchmarking (and in fact I care much more about the results with those games than with proprietary games I'm not going to play anyway). Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Jesse Keating wrote: If we don't do split CDs, Fedora Unity is likely to do them. If we don't produce and test split media as part of our beta/release cycle, we'll likely not find bugs with their usage until after the release is made and Fedora Unity attempts to make them. As long as /somebody/ within the Fedora project is going to create them and offer them to our users it is in our best interest to create them as part of our normal development cycle and iron out all the bugs before users attempt to use them. If Fedora Unity wants to create them, the burden of making them work should be on them. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Robert 'Bob' Jensenb...@fedoraunity.org wrote: Does no one remember what happened last time the CD ball was dropped? Lets not repeat history just for fun. We have been down this road before, it was ugly and only lasted one release. Torrent tracker numbers BTW do not always tell the truth. In many cases in these less fortunate areas one person will download the ISO images, then make CDs for any one in the surrounding villages. Sneakernet is alive and well. I asked about this topic a few minutes ago in the #fedora-social IRC channel because we seemed to have a pretty diverse mix of people chatting. There was a resounding response that the CDs need to be kept. How do we do a better job getting an accurate picture of install media usage patterns? To be honest I don't have a good idea on how to trend completely sneakernet activity..even as a historic relative measurement against itself. If the resulting installs never touch a network for updates, I don't have a way to see them at all. If you have ideas I'm all ears. Matt's attempt at trending it is just a starting point. We could do more, and I'm willing to help build up trendable metrics from the logs. But we need to agree that the metrics will help us make decisions as to how to support niche media. Is there a need to define a concept of secondary or legacy media for niche media? I don't have a problem keeping niche media in production (if there's room for it in our infrastructure), but I'd like to see a process that empowered the users and supporters of the media target to take more responsibility for it during releases inside the Fedora process. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote: Yeah some guy in a mud hut with no DSL only a 56k modem, Power 4 hours a day... NetInst FAIL. We can't support everything. I'm sure there are some people still using a 486, we already don't support them anymore. A reasonably fast Internet connection is basically required to fetch updates for Fedora. While yum-presto, and in the near future also LZMA compression, lower the bar of reasonably fast a bit, there's a certain minimum which will always be there. And there's not just the netinstall option, there are also the live CDs. Choose your desktop environment (KDE or GNOME), get the corresponding live CD, install it, install all the other needed stuff through PackageKit. If your Internet connection is too slow for that, it's also too slow for the routine updates. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
Hello everbody,
can somebody please explain me, why we've multilib wrappers for packages
at non-multilib architectures such as arm, alpha, ia64 and sh?
- http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/gmp/gmp-mparam.h?view=co
-
http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/e2fsprogs/ext2_types-wrapper.h?view=co
- http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/apr/apr-wrapper.h?view=co
- http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/openssl/opensslconf-new.h?view=co
Where's the reason to have a whatever-archname.h if there's no multilib
available on that architecture? From my point of view, multilib wrappers
only make sense on the architectures %{ix86}/x86_64, ppc/ppc64, s390/s390x,
%{sparc}/%{sparcx} and %{mips}/%{mipsel}/%{mipsx}. Tell me, if I'm wrong,
but %{arm}, alpha, ia64 and sh are single-lib, ie. they've only 32 or 64
bit and no multi-arch.
I've already raised up the question to the package maintainers, and Joe
has suggested me to ask on fedora-devel for the correct list or reasons
for the current behaviour.
Greetings,
Robert
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Outage Notification - 2009-06-15 23:00 UTC
There will be an outage starting at 2009-06-15 23:00 UTC, which will last approximately 1.5 hours. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2009-06-15 23:00 UTC' Affected Services: Buildsystem Websites specifically, PackageDB, Bodhi, and Fedora Community Unaffected Services: CVS / Source Control Database DNS Fedora Hosted Fedora People Fedora Talk Mail Mirror System Torrent Translation Services Ticket Link: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1460 Reason for Outage: Upgrading the PackageDB to version 0.4. This requires an update to the data inside the database which requires an outage. Contact Information: Please join #fedora-admin in irc.freenode.net or respond to this email to track the status of this outage. -Toshio signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
Once upon a time, Robert Scheck rob...@fedoraproject.org said:
can somebody please explain me, why we've multilib wrappers for packages
at non-multilib architectures such as arm, alpha, ia64 and sh?
multiarch != multilib
Just for starters, long before x86_64 came into the picture, we had
i386, i486, i586, and i686. On Alpha, you have (IIRC) ev4, ev5, ev6,
ev67, etc.
When the distro was i386 targeted, we still had a few packages (where it
made a performance difference) that were built for i386, i586, and i686,
all of which are %{ix86}.
--
Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: [Phoronix] Ubuntu 9.04 vs. Fedora 11 Performance
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Gilboa Davaragilb...@gmail.com wrote: I apologize in advance, for the overly harsh language. (Not specifically directed at you, Kevin). I don't believe that you're being overly harsh. I've been surprised in general in the amount of whining that I've been reading in this thread. Phoronix is the only one that's doing benchmarks of the various distributions and major parts. I suppose that I should use the Anandtech and Tom's Hardware reviews that are all done using Windows to see how well the competing hardware stacks up against each another. As far as I can tell, the code for the Phoronix benchmark suite is open source so it's open for others to look at for methodology and potential improvement. Someone could use the existing Phoronix suite to create a benchmark that's specific to fedora that has the seal of approval from the community. The complaint about comparing the opensource video drivers versus the proprietary ones baffles me. It's the only place that I can go to see what's happening from a perforamance perspective. While the opensource driver is usable on some hardware, the performance/capabilities for newer hardware still doesn't match the proprietary. That does matter for those that need it. I'm just waiting for someone to request permission to change the user agreement to disallow the usage of the Fedora name in benchmarks. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Chris Adams wrote:
Just for starters, long before x86_64 came into the picture, we had
i386, i486, i586, and i686. On Alpha, you have (IIRC) ev4, ev5, ev6,
ev67, etc.
You have seen, that these wrappers treat alpha as alpha and %{ix86} as i386
and that's it?! So your explanation doesn't make any sense to me, sorry.
Greetings,
Robert
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote: Probably because it's less maintenance work in the specfile to just always add the wrapper. (On the other hand, it means extra work (adding an #ifdef) when adding a secondary arch.) Well, how would it help to have a wrapper for ia64 if no non-ia64 packages are getting installed on ia64? Replace ia64 by alpha and rerun my question. Why a wrapper file, if there's nothing, that could conflict? Greetings, Robert -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Robert Scheck wrote: On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote: Probably because it's less maintenance work in the specfile to just always add the wrapper. (On the other hand, it means extra work (adding an #ifdef) when adding a secondary arch.) Well, how would it help to have a wrapper for ia64 if no non-ia64 packages are getting installed on ia64? Replace ia64 by alpha and rerun my question. Why a wrapper file, if there's nothing, that could conflict? Because as a Fedora packager, neither am I responsible nor do I care about ia64 packages. Replace ia64 by alpha (or any other secondary arch) and rerun my answer. Orcan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
- Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: If Fedora Unity wants to create them, the burden of making them work should be on them. If Fedora Project will not or can not give the community what it needs that is where the community steps up, this is exactly what we did for Fedora 7. There is no requirement that mirror admins have to mirror everything that I am aware of, has something changed? If they are not required to mirror everything then why is this even an issue? Those that want to mirror the CDs will those that don't want to move on with their lives mirroring what they want to or what they can which ever applies. Facts are that most mirror admins will always want to use less space, less bandwidth this is nothing new. How enormous is a debian release on a mirror? Are they being... strong armed in to trimming their distro's options? I feel Fedora is being manipulated. - Bob | Robert 'Bob' Jensen|| Fedora Unity Founder | | b...@fedoraunity.org|| http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | |http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: system-config-firewall picking up slack where firestarter fell off
On 06/12/2009 04:54 PM, Adam Miller wrote: I'm retired firestarter, I picked it up recently as it was orphaned but as we are moving towards PolicyKit and there's no upstream to assist with the port and after a discussion we had here on the list I decided it was time to retire it. Now, with that being said, I have some users on the firestarter-users mailing list that have some features they would like to request and I wanted to pose a couple questions here in respect to their requests and find out if others feel that these requests are feasible and/or are even in the scope of system-config-firewall. 1) Cisco VPN I don't use this myself but I was told it just needs these rules, so I don't see a big issue here: $IPT -A FORWARD -i $IF -o $INIF -p udp --dport 500 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT $IPT -A FORWARD -i $IF -o $INIF -p tcp --dport 500 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT $IPT -A FORWARD -i $IF -o $INIF -p 50 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT $IPT -A FORWARD -i $INIF -o $IF -p 50 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT This is more or less standard IPSEC. port 500/udp is used for IKE and proto 50 is esp. I have not seen 500/tcp ever to be used, but I think that Cisco's client can use it. openswan for sure does not use tcp. Only problem is that cisco's vpn client can use _any_ port for communication, it depends solely on the way the VPN concentrator is configured. In the company I work for, the client is configured to use a high port, and we can switch between tcp and udp at will. What I want to say here is that blindly adding port 500 because we know it's used might lead to unpleasant surprises (as in we added the rule but the client does not work) 2) Auto setup of Internet Sharing, so autoconfig of dhcpd and providing a bridge between WAN and LAN. This is one that I'm not entirely sure there is really in the scope of system-config-firewall and might need to be its own utility. not sure what to say here. A tool to do that would be nice, but I do not think that s-c-f is _that_ tool either -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Packaging Request: pdftkgui
On 06/12/2009 01:08 AM, Mani A wrote: The GUI is well designed and is worth packaging http://www.paehl.de/pdf/gui_pdftk.html It is not present in the package database. feel free to add it to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintainers_wishlist (unless you want to package, submit for review and maintain it in fedora yourself) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: Because as a Fedora packager, neither am I responsible nor do I care about ia64 packages. Replace ia64 by alpha (or any other secondary arch) and rerun my answer. Sorry, but wrong answer for a Fedora packager. If you lack knowledge, you should try to get the missing knowledge. And some of the architectures I mentioned in my initial e-mail are secondary architectures of Fedora, thus they shouldn't get ignored or wrong handled. Greetings, Robert -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Help needed for undefined symbol _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_
Good evening, I'm still on the way to get the Zarafa Groupware into Fedora (see Fedora Package review request https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498194) and beside of the ongoing legal issue, I've also found a technical issue where I need some help. At the moment, it's a bit difficult: I'm using a non-public pre-release of Zarafa which will public available and AGPL licensed once it's final. That means for now, investigating is a bit hard but I'm looking for some tips or hints to get the issue solved. The error message itself is as follows: May 31 17:11:57 tux /usr/bin/zarafa-spooler: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/libmapi.so.0: undefined symbol: _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ Well, there's a symbol missing somewhere, so I executed following: $ nm -D /usr/lib/libmapi.so.0 | grep _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ U _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ $ Okay, looks like the symbol is really missing. So let's have a look to the files in the build dir and how it behaves there: $ nm ./common/.libs/libcommon_mapi.a | grep _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ 3da0 T _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ $ versus $ nm -D ./mapi4linux/src/.libs/libmapi.so | grep _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ U _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ $ versus $ nm -D ./inetmapi/.libs/libinetmapi.so.1 | grep _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ 0005f270 T _ZN10ECMemTable6CreateEP14_SPropTagArrayjPPS_ $ So far. Interestingly, that issue only exists on Fedora 11 and above, not on Fedora 10 or below. As it seems, the issue is not GCC 4.4 relevant, so it is maybe a libtool linking issue? Ideas? Hints? Suggestions? What else could I check? Upstream doesn't have a pointer for me, but given that Fedora and bleeding edge are not their default target (they focus to the long-term supported distributions where Zarafa mostly gets used), it's understandable to me... Note, that OpenChange libmapi.so is not involved anywhere here, it's only Zarafa libmapi.so everywhere above. Greetings, Robert -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
Robert Scheck rob...@fedoraproject.org writes: On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote: Probably because it's less maintenance work in the specfile to just always add the wrapper. (On the other hand, it means extra work (adding an #ifdef) when adding a secondary arch.) Well, how would it help to have a wrapper for ia64 if no non-ia64 packages are getting installed on ia64? Kevin already told you: it simplifies the specfile to not have the install action be conditional on the arch. I think it's pretty much up to the individual package maintainer's taste which way to handle it. Personally I don't use multilib wrappers on arches that don't need it; I think not needing extra cases in the wrapper header outweighs the added complexity in the specfile. But I'm not going to tell the gmp maintainer he's wrong for doing it the other way. regards, tom lane -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Robert Marcano rob...@marcanoonline.com writes: I think you are right about x86_64 probably is going to have a DVD Rom, I only have needed the CDs when installing i386 servers isolated from the internet. I think we should start considering the option to ship the net install ISO as a hard disk image to be used for USB boot, I frequently install systems without optical media and that conversion step (ISO to HD) is not intuitive for all users Indeed, if Fedora cared about 2% of users then there would be an USB install/upgrade option. Since there isn't one, PXE will have to do, but that isn't likely to fly for the inexperienced user. /Benny -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
bind-chroot in F11
I checked the contents of the bind-chroot package in both F10 and f11 - as I was puzzled about running bind-chroot since things seemed rather different to previous behaviour. In F11 the contents contain /var/named/chroot and within this directory are /dev containing file null, random and zero and /etc containing file localtime and nothing else. In F10 the contents contain /usr/sbin/bind-chroot-admin and /var/named/chroot and within this directory are /dev containing file null, random and zero /etc/ containing files named.conf, named.rfc1912.zones and rndc.key /var/ containing log/named.log and also containing named/ containing named.ca, named.empty, named.localhost and named.loopback So this is a big difference in the bind-chroot package in F11 - with lots not there compared to F10 Can anyone enlighten me on why there is such a huge difference? Has there been some fundamental policy change since F10? Thanks -- mike -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Why a multilib wrapper for non-multilib architectures?!
Tom Lane wrote: Personally I don't use multilib wrappers on arches that don't need it; I think not needing extra cases in the wrapper header outweighs the added complexity in the specfile. But I'm not going to tell the gmp maintainer he's wrong for doing it the other way. +1 -- Rex -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 09:04:30PM +, Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote: - Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: If Fedora Unity wants to create them, the burden of making them work should be on them. If Fedora Project will not or can not give the community what it needs that is where the community steps up, this is exactly what we did for Fedora 7. There is no requirement that mirror admins have to mirror everything that I am aware of, has something changed? They can omit on a per-directory basis, but not on a per-file basis. MM tracks whole directories, not each file. By keeping the DVD and CD ISOs in the same directory, mirror admins are expected to carry both. One could argue that MM should be enhanced to track on a per-file basis. One could also argue that simply changing the directory layout, as is proposed for F12 (to also make it match the torrent layout) would alleviate this. If they are not required to mirror everything then why is this even an issue? Those that want to mirror the CDs will those that don't want to move on with their lives mirroring what they want to or what they can which ever applies. Facts are that most mirror admins will always want to use less space, less bandwidth this is nothing new. How enormous is a debian release on a mirror? Are they being... strong armed in to trimming their distro's options? I feel Fedora is being manipulated. The mirror admins themselves are not complaining. In fact, I haven't heard a huge uprising from anyone about it. I merely observed two things: 1) very few people are using the mirror system to download the CD set. Certainly more are using the torrents to get them, but even that number is low, and decreasing every release. 2) Several days each week-pre-release is set aside to ensure adequate time to get the release to the mirrors. The bits have to be posted by Thursday to ensure they're on sufficient numbers of mirrors by Tuesday morning. 45% of the content pushed during this week are the CD sets, which by the logs are downloaded by very few people. I'm not opposed to keeping the CD sets around, and hosting them via alt.fedoraproject.org or other non-mirror methods. That would let the few people who need direct download access to them still get them, and match service delivery resources to the expected load. But I also think it's fair to ask the question of do we need them at all anymore. I was hopeful that in the time since F7 when this last came up, the situation had changed. And I think I've shown that it has; changed enough to warrant dropping them altogether will be the subject of this debate. -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com www.dell.com/linux -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
Don't be clouded by who is requesting it. Releng qa anaconda et al would love to stop doing split cds. Less confusion on what to download would be appreciated by many too. We are one of the last distros to still do cd media outside of live media. Is this a case of users not knowing there are better choices than split CDs? Research into those demanding splits should be done and documented by those eager to continue seeing them produced. -- Jes. (apologies for the top post) On Jun 13, 2009, at 14:04, Robert 'Bob' Jensen b...@fedoraunity.org wrote: - Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: If Fedora Unity wants to create them, the burden of making them work should be on them. If Fedora Project will not or can not give the community what it needs that is where the community steps up, this is exactly what we did for Fedora 7. There is no requirement that mirror admins have to mirror everything that I am aware of, has something changed? If they are not required to mirror everything then why is this even an issue? Those that want to mirror the CDs will those that don't want to move on with their lives mirroring what they want to or what they can which ever applies. Facts are that most mirror admins will always want to use less space, less bandwidth this is nothing new. How enormous is a debian release on a mirror? Are they being... strong armed in to trimming their distro's options? I feel Fedora is being manipulated. - Bob -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Strange /etc/fedora-release and smolt help
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/06/09 09:40 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: Can anyone with F11 installed look at what is in their /etc/fedora-release and tell me which one you have, and how you installed? Also what version of fedora-release you have. -Mike $ cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 11 (Leonidas) $ rpm -qa fedora-release fedora-release-11-1.noarch $ yum info fedora-release Loaded plugins: allowdowngrade, dellsysidplugin2, downloadonly, keys, merge- : conf, post-transaction-actions, presto, protect-packages, : refresh-packagekit, upgrade-helper Installed Packages Name : fedora-release Arch : noarch Version: 11 Release: 1 Size : 26 k Repo : installed - From repo : rawhide Summary: Fedora release files URL: http://fedoraproject.org License: GPLv2 Description: Fedora release files such as yum configs and various /etc/ files : that define the release. As seen, the box went from Rawhide to stable release. - -- Luya Tshimbalanga Graphic Web Designer P: (604) 682-6618 E: l...@fedoraproject.org W: http://thefinalzone.net -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAko0eJ8ACgkQa10Jb0NOz+GwUACcCQlVGcTAoGgUaYrpNkzhJIl6 hgwAn1N5xvxAJ0YS9FOHXuByY3KDIY2q =m6p8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Do we need split media CDs for F12?
On 14/06/09 04:53, Robert 'Bob' Jensen wrote: - Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote: Just curious. But if a user has bandwidth problems, how is\are mutiple CD's going to help, or is it purely on hardware grounds, no dvd-rom. Does no one remember what happened last time the CD ball was dropped? Lets not repeat history just for fun. We have been down this road before, it was ugly and only lasted one release. Torrent tracker numbers BTW do not always tell the truth. In many cases in these less fortunate areas one person will download the ISO images, then make CDs for any one in the surrounding villages. Sneakernet is alive and well. I asked about this topic a few minutes ago in the #fedora-social IRC channel because we seemed to have a pretty diverse mix of people chatting. There was a resounding response that the CDs need to be kept. What about a script that takes the DVD image and produces CD .isos? That saves on mirror space, but still allows people who want/need CDs to make them. Although it would require (temporarily) 2-3 times the disk space for that process, I guess. Bradley -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: What I HATE about F11
On 6/14/09, Charles Butterfield charles.butterfi...@nextcentury.com wrote: [...] Root gdm login - gets harder every release - SHAME ON YOU root nazis! Interesting. Godwin's law right from the start of a thread? I must buy a lottery ticket today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law Christian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
[Bug 451744] Review Request: root - The CERN analyzer for high to medium energy physics
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=451744 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-fonts-bugs-l...@redh ||at.com --- Comment #33 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-06-13 04:31:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0) 4) Not an issue, but I will mention it upfront. Upstream includes the MS TrueType fonts The licensing of those fonts does not comply with our guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Legal_considerations We basically require the same freedom to distribute and modify of our fonts than of our software. Also, even if they did, we'd ask to locate the font upstream and package it separately http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Package_layout_for_fonts Bundling fonts is prohibited. Fonts must be split out cleanly so they can be installed separately and reused by other packages Also, when a project relies on default fonts from another OS or Linux distribution, you have to ask yourself if the look, feel and metrics of those fonts is required before hunting for the closest substitute. If the software does not rely on some exact font characteristic, reconfiguring it to use Fedora default fonts instead is much preferred. The Liberation fonts are metrically-equivalent to some MS fonts. However they are *not* our default font, so forcing their use will make your application stand out in Fedora. Also they have a lot less Unicode coverage than Dejavu Fonts. GNU free fonts are not installed at all by default in Fedora and are not present on liveCDs and other physical distribution media. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_FreeSans.2C_Linux_Libertine.2C_Droid_or_Liberation_fonts.3F A lot of the symbols in symbol.ttf have long been attributed standard unicode values. If this software properly references those symbols by their unicode codepoint (and not the old legacy symbol-specific codepoint) any unicode font with coverage of the associated unicode blocks will work for you (DejaVu includes most common symbols). If this is not good enough for you, you can look at openoffice's opensymbol (and open a bug dejavu-side to request the missing symbol). Lastly, if you have all those problems, that's probably because this software does not use fontconfig. Fontconfig has been the default font management stack for many years on modern Unixes and anything using X. It will locate for you the most appropriate installed font transparently. Using something else is broken by design nowadays, and you'll have no end of font-related problems till the software is switched to use fontconfig (unlike under windows, the font complement varies from Unix to Unix and release to release, Unix font Unicode coverage is not and won't ever be exactly the same as windows fonts, etc). The only correct mid-term solution is getting this software ported to fontconfig, usually using a higher-level library like pango-cairo. (and if it manages PDFs is should probably take a look at poppler too) -- 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 455510] Undisplayable glyphs on Wikipedia
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=455510 --- Comment #11 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-06-13 04:39:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) I believe this is the new feature that was mentioned: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AutoFontsAndMimeInstaller This feature mostly works for gnome-based apps nowadays. Not sure what firefox uses. You should ask in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=467729 -- 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 455510] Undisplayable glyphs on Wikipedia
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=455510 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gecko-bugs-nob...@fedorapro ||ject.org, ||walt...@verbum.org Component|dejavu-fonts|firefox AssignedTo|besfa...@redhat.com |gecko-bugs-nob...@fedorapro ||ject.org --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-06-13 04:46:28 EDT --- Moving to Firefox component as we do have fonts supporting Phœnician in the distro nowadays so it should plug in the autofonts install framework and propose to install them (@ben: adding Phœnician to dejavu would be nice though) -- 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 22268] New: [RFE] Add Phœnician support
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22268 Summary: [RFE] Add Phœnician support Product: DejaVu Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: General AssignedTo: dejavu-b...@lists.freedesktop.org ReportedBy: nicolas.mail...@laposte.net CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com See http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455510 -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/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 505757] file does not identify properly some pcf.gz files
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=505757 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-fonts-bugs-l...@redh ||at.com -- 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 505758] New: inconsistent opentype font label
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: inconsistent opentype font label https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505758 Summary: inconsistent opentype font label Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: file AssignedTo: dnovo...@redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mail...@laposte.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com, dnovo...@redhat.com Blocks: 473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: file identifies OTF font files as OpenType font data (trailing space) when the label for TTF font files is TrueType font data (no trailing space) Please make them consistent Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): file-5.03-2.fc12.x86_64 -- 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 505759] file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with groff
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=505759 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|file does not identify |file does not identify |properly some pfa files |properly some pfa files ||shipped with groff -- 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 505759] New: file does not identify properly some pfa files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505759 Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: file AssignedTo: dnovo...@redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mail...@laposte.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com, dnovo...@redhat.com Blocks: 473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: file thinks the pfa files in groff-1.18.1.4-17.fc11.x86_64.rpm are PostScript document text conforming DSC level 3.0 They should be identified as PostScript Type 1 font text Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): file-5.03-2.fc12.x86_64 -- 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 505762] New: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with ghostscript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with ghostscript https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505762 Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with ghostscript Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: file AssignedTo: dnovo...@redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mail...@laposte.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com, dnovo...@redhat.com Blocks: 473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: file thinks the pfa files in ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm are PostScript document text (for example hrscc.pfa) They should be identified as PostScript Type 1 font text Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): file-5.03-2.fc12.x86_64 -- 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 505759] file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with groff
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=505759 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-06-13 11:49:55 EDT --- Full list: ./usr/share/groff/1.18.1.4/font/devps/symbolsl.pfa PostScript document text conforming DSC level 3.0 groff-1.18.1.4-17.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/groff/1.18.1.4/font/devps/zapfdr.pfa PostScript document text conforming DSC level 3.0 groff-1.18.1.4-17.fc11.x86_64.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 505762] file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with ghostscript
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=505762 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-06-13 11:49:28 EDT --- Full list ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrger.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrgrr.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hritr.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrpld.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrpldi.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrplt.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrplti.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrscc.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript/hrscs.pfa PostScript document text ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.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 505757] file does not identify properly some pcf.gz files shipped in japanese-bitmap-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=505757 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|file does not identify |file does not identify |properly some pcf.gz files |properly some pcf.gz files ||shipped in ||japanese-bitmap-fonts --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-06-13 11:50:44 EDT --- Full list ./usr/share/fonts/japanese-bitmap/kaname-latin1.pcf.gz empty japanese-bitmap-fonts-0.20080710-5.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/japanese-bitmap/knm12p.pcf.gz empty japanese-bitmap-fonts-0.20080710-5.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/japanese-bitmap/knm12pb.pcf.gz empty japanese-bitmap-fonts-0.20080710-5.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/japanese-bitmap/knmzn12x.pcf.gz empty japanese-bitmap-fonts-0.20080710-5.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/fonts/japanese-bitmap/knmzn12xb.pcf.gz empty japanese-bitmap-fonts-0.20080710-5.fc11.noarch.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 505764] New: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with a2ps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with a2ps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505764 Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with a2ps Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: file AssignedTo: dnovo...@redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mail...@laposte.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com, dnovo...@redhat.com Blocks: 473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: file thinks the pfa files in ghostscript-fonts-5.50-22.fc12.noarch.rpm are PostScript document text They should be identified as PostScript Type 1 font text Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): file-5.03-2.fc12.x86_64 Full list: ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/pcrb-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/pcrbo-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/pcrr-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/pcrro-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/phvb-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/phvbo-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/phvr-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/phvro-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/ptmb-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/ptmbi-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/ptmr-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.rpm ./usr/share/ogonkify/fonts/ptmri-o.pfa PostScript document text a2ps-4.14-8.fc11.x86_64.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 505765] New: file does not identify properly some pfb files shipped in texlive-texmf-fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: file does not identify properly some pfb files shipped in texlive-texmf-fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505765 Summary: file does not identify properly some pfb files shipped in texlive-texmf-fonts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: file AssignedTo: dnovo...@redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mail...@laposte.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com, dnovo...@redhat.com Blocks: 473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: file thinks some pfb files in texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm are 8086 relocatable (Microsoft) They should be identified as PostScript Type 1 font program data Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): file-5.03-2.fc12.x86_64 Full list: ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcb10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbx10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbx12.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbx5.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbx6.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbx7.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbx8.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbx9.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbxsl1.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcbxti1.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmccsc10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmccsc8.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmccsc9.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcinch7.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcitt10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcsl10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcsl12.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcsl8.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcsl9.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcsltt1.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcss10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcss12.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcss17.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcss8.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcss9.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssbx1.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssdc1.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssi10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssi12.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssi17.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssi8.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssi9.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cmcyr/cmcssq8.pfb 8086 relocatable
[Bug 505765] file does not identify properly some pfb files shipped in texlive-texmf-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=505765 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-06-13 12:03:39 EDT --- ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/csti10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/csti12.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/csti7.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/csti8.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/csti9.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/cstt10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/cstt12.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/cstt8.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/cstt9.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/csu10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.rpm ./usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/cs/csvtt10.pfb 8086 relocatable texlive-texmf-fonts-2007-28.fc11.noarch.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 505775] New: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with enscript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with enscript https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505775 Summary: file does not identify properly some pfa files shipped with enscript Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: file AssignedTo: dnovo...@redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mail...@laposte.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com, dnovo...@redhat.com Blocks: 473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: file thinks the pfa file in enscript-1.6.4-12.fc11.x86_64.rpm is a PostScript document text conforming DSC level 3.0, type EPS It should be identified as PostScript Type 1 font text Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): file-5.03-2.fc12.x86_64 Full list: ./usr/share/enscript/afm/matrix.pfa PostScript document text conforming DSC level 3.0, type EPS enscript-1.6.4-12.fc11.x86_64.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
[Issue 102652] Fonts in directory with name having underscore character in it, are not found
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102652 --- Additional comments from frope...@openoffice.org Sat Jun 13 20:34:06 + 2009 --- I reverted the name of the directory to it's old one, including underscore characters. As before, OO Writer didn't show those fonts. Then I ran fc-cache as my normal user. The fonts now show up as they should. The problem is solved. I don't understand, though, why I can add a directory without underscore characters in the name, and the fonts in it are found, whereas directories _with_ underscore in their names are not read. Should this still be considered a bug? If so, is it a Fedora or OOo bug? Thanks for the help in solving my problem. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
[Issue 102652] Fonts in directory with name having underscore character in it, are not found
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102652 User kpalagin changed the following: What|Old value |New value CC|'fedorafonts,kpalagin'|'eroshin,fedorafonts,kpala | |gin,pmike' - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Legal CD/DVD/BD writing software for RedHat and Fedora
Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On 13/06/09 11:10, Joerg Schilling wrote: Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote: On 13/06/09 00:25, Joerg Schilling wrote: Is there no RedHat lawyer in this list? If you believe you have a case. Hire, a lawyer. No one is stopping you. Why should anyone else supply you one. You seem to have a serous problem with understanding the topic. You not understanding, is the topic. OK, it seems that I need to ignore you in future unless you show interest in a fact based diuscussion. So far, I did see from you only unproven claims and quotes to unproven claims from other laymen. These claims, seen from you, are even in conflict with the GPL text. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Legal CD/DVD/BD writing software for RedHat and Fedora
On 13/06/09 11:48, Joerg Schilling wrote: Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote: On 13/06/09 11:10, Joerg Schilling wrote: Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote: On 13/06/09 00:25, Joerg Schilling wrote: Is there no RedHat lawyer in this list? If you believe you have a case. Hire, a lawyer. No one is stopping you. Why should anyone else supply you one. You seem to have a serous problem with understanding the topic. You not understanding, is the topic. OK, it seems that I need to ignore you in future unless you show interest in a fact based diuscussion. When you start one, lmk So far, I did see from you only unproven claims Kettle. and quotes to unproven claims from other laymen. These claims, seen from you, are even in conflict with the GPL text. One layman to another. Frank ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: OpenJDK / IcedTea is ###p
Again, are you sure you do? OpenJDK is 100% compliant to the JCK (Java
Compatibility Kit, the official Java compliance test) and something like
99% identical to Sun Java 1.6 (it supports even several non-standard sun.*
and com.sun.* classes and other implementation details, as it's derived
from the same codebase).
Kevin Kofler
I'm sorry for this rant Kevin. And to the rest the list too. I'm sorry.
Your 'holier that thou' attitude really turns me off. Your Linux
'purist' attitude. Your Linux Zealotry. It SUX! Big time.
As it does for others that can't say this.
{1} I *use* what works for my bread.
If that happens to be pure Linux? Well then Great! If the happens to
*not* be pure Linux? Go back and reread (1).
I need 'the real stuff' for several things. And, in spite of people such
as you, that is what I am going to use. I will continue to 'try' the
Linux 'knock-offs' and when they do the job? Great. Until? I need 'the
real stuff'.
--
David
--
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: OpenJDK / IcedTea is ###p
On 06/13/2009 11:38 AM, David wrote: I need 'the real stuff' for several things. And, in spite of people such as you, that is what I am going to use. I will continue to 'try' the Linux 'knock-offs' and when they do the job? Great. Until? I need 'the real stuff'. Assuming this rant is directed at OpenJDK vs Sun JDK, OpenJDK is almost 100% the same codebase and not really a knock-off. Nothing wrong with knock-offs anyway considering that Linux itself is sort of one. Rahul -- 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: HOWTO? Install TrueType fonts (not MS freefonts) onto Fedora 10
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 13:10 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote: Don't forget that you need to set permissions and selinux context for these. Surely not... If you copy a file to a standard location, it should get set the proper contexts, during the copy. I haven't had to do this when I copied fonts to a standard usr location. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.24-78.2.53.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: Fresh Fedora 11 fetches 362MB+ of updates, where's deltaRPM?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 06:45:03 +0200, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: I also hope we'll see LZMA payloads soon. Gzip is really bad. Other distributions have at least been using bzip2, which compresses significantly better, but Fedora refused it for CPU consumption reasons. LZMA is faster than bzip2, at least for decompression, and usually compresses better. (It compresses a lot better than gzip in any case.) And not just for rpms. I am hoping that mksquashfs is able to use lzma before f12 is released as that will shrink the live images quite a bit. -- 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: F11: Hibernate OK, resume - not so much
Hi Steve, How do I do pstack *with debugging enabled*? Simply install the debug packages for xorg, your driver and other stuff you see in the stack-trace. You can use debuginfo-install to get the appropriate packages. The simply execute a few pstack pid-of-x, open a bug report and report it. Good luck, Clemens -- 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: Cd won't mount normally in fc10
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 02:10:37PM -1000, Dave Burns wrote: Is there some message I should be seeing in dmesg or /var/log/messages that would tell me that what is screwed up? if hal is able to mount removable drives automatically it logs them into /var/log/messages. Did you get any messages in there after you put in the cd drive i.e something about any error ? -- 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: Fresh Fedora 11 fetches 362MB+ of updates, where's deltaRPM?
On 06/13/2009 11:43 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 06:45:03 +0200, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: I also hope we'll see LZMA payloads soon. Gzip is really bad. Other distributions have at least been using bzip2, which compresses significantly better, but Fedora refused it for CPU consumption reasons. LZMA is faster than bzip2, at least for decompression, and usually compresses better. (It compresses a lot better than gzip in any case.) And not just for rpms. I am hoping that mksquashfs is able to use lzma before f12 is released as that will shrink the live images quite a bit. Filed a RFE? Rahul -- 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: OT: Can Reformatting A Hard Drive To ext3 Destroy All the Data On It?
Beartooth wrote: I have it on excellent authority that a .45 acp won't make a hole clear through a hard drive, but that a .30-06 will. factory .45 acp may not. custom .45 acp can. .357 mag good for spindle motor. rem 720 .306 can at 600 yds. .25c print @ 100 yds -- peace out. tc,hago. g . in a free world without fences, who needs gates. ** help microsoft stamp out piracy - give linux to a friend today ** to mess up a linux box, you need to work at it; to mess up an ms windows box, you just need to *look* at it. ** learn linux: 'Rute User's Tutorial and Exposition' http://rute.2038bug.com/index.html 'The Linux Documentation Project' http://www.tldp.org/ 'LDP HOWTO-index' http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/HOWTO-INDEX/index.html 'HowtoForge' http://howtoforge.com/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: OpenJDK / IcedTea is ###p
On 6/13/2009 2:11 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 06/13/2009 11:38 AM, David wrote: I need 'the real stuff' for several things. And, in spite of people such as you, that is what I am going to use. I will continue to 'try' the Linux 'knock-offs' and when they do the job? Great. Until? I need 'the real stuff'. Assuming this rant is directed at OpenJDK vs Sun JDK, OpenJDK is almost 100% the same codebase and not really a knock-off. Nothing wrong with knock-offs anyway considering that Linux itself is sort of one. Rahul Rahul, That rant was directed at Kevin. I greatly appreciate the work that you, and the others at Fedora do every day. Truly I do. I just bothers me when the zealots and purists can not see that what 'feeds' takes precedent over ideals. there are many of us. It is 'really cool' the be a 'Linux person', a zealot, until it does not put the 'bread' on the table. Rant. Rave. Stomp your feet and scream all that you want to. When it come to my kids? Hungry for a 'cause' loses to reality every time. I use what works to provide the bread. -- David -- 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
F11 is requiring root priv to mount DVD/CD - auto-magic method isn't working
When I insert a DVD/CD, the media is detected in KDE device notifier as expected. I'm then given suggested actions for the device. When I select Open with Dolphin I receive the message: Unable to run the command specified. The file or folder file:///mnt/source does not exist. I then open Dolphin and see the device in the left panel under places. When I select it there I receive: An error occurred while accessing DVD_LABEL; the system responded: mount: only root can mount /dev/sr0 on /mnt/source This is a vanilla reinstall from scratch and I've done a yum update to bring everything up to current level. Anyone have any suggestions? I look in the /var/log/messages and don't see any errors. I can create a mount point and mount from root, but shouldn't have to do that. -- 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: Fresh Fedora 11 fetches 362MB+ of updates, where's deltaRPM?
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 14:55 +0930, Tim wrote: On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 22:20 +0300, Jonathan Dieter wrote: The Fedora infrastructure team is trying to streamline the process a bit, but the fact remains that generating deltarpms costs a lot in CPU time and RAM usage, and the more deltarpms you generate, the more time it takes. Isn't that done once on a master server, then mirrored? Rather than each mirror generating them? Yes, but my point is that the compose time, the time it takes to put together a set of updates, for all of the architectures * (all of the releases + rawhide) has gone from I think three or four hours to 8+ since we started generating deltarpms. If we start generating more deltarpms (which is what I think the OP was asking for), it will go up even more. I doubt the infrastructure team is going to accommodate requests for more deltarpms until the compose time has been brought back down again. Please note that I *do not* speak for the infrastructure team. This is just what I'm picking up from those who are on the infrastructure team. Jonathan 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: OpenJDK / IcedTea is ###p
I did installed Sun JDK, and also I added it to the alternatives, but it looks like, that there is no way to get rid of OpenJDK: If you tries to install maven2 with yum, it will still download the openjdk, even if there is no need to do that (in alternatives Sun JDK is the only possibility). What am I doing wrong? And why am I using Sun JDK? Because it's wy faster, then the OpenJDK, and GlassFish is much more stable on it... Peter 2009-06-12 23:45 keltezéssel, Robert L Cochran írta: Arduino software (from http://www.arduino.cc/ ) needs the Sun Java version to run properly. This is what the Java alternatives system is for. You can install the Sun JDK yourself and add it to the alternatives and then make it your default Java system. I also need Sun Java for work-related projects. I think the reality is, most people still do have a real and pressing need (think paycheck and promotion) for the Sun Java version. Bob -- 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: Other host already uses address -
Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: Bob Goodwin wrote: It's difficult without the ethernet connection, I would have to type it manually. but in addition to eth0 or 1 and lo, I also have an pan0? I do not show that on this good computer? I tried plugging in a PCI ethernet card but the probe function in the network setup GUI doesn't see it and if I try to connect it acts like the card is not there. However I see a different mac address in the ifconfig pan0 which I assume is the address of that second card. I think I made all the required entries network-scripts/ifcfg-eth1 ... Wait a moment - are you trying to bring up both eth0 and eth1 on the same network? The pan0 is not the second NIC. I don't remember what it is off hand... No, I don't think I did that, just changed the config from eth0 to eth1 when I plugged in the NIC. I haven't turned that computer on yet this morning. As far as moving messages from one computer to another when having network problems, I find saving the output to a PEN drive, or flash memory card and moding that to another machine works well. (Kind of like the old sneaker net that consisted of moving floppies from machine to machine... :-) Why didn't I think of that? I didn't want to waste Cd's, and disinclined to re-enable the floppy drive, prolly disabled in all my computers that still have one, then finding a floppy that was any good ... But I do have a new thumb drive on my desk that my daughter said would not work on her MAC but worked fine on my Fedora stuff. The HP computer is even supposed to be able boot from USB ... even has jacks on the front. I will do that later after the sun comes over the edge ... will post the appropriate files. The smallest desktop I've owned since the Commodore 64, an HP dc5100, $99 used, looks new, from Discount PC, 2.8 gHz P4, CD drive, SATA hard drive. I have 2 gigs of ram installed, will install a larger hard drive. Bob Mikkel -- 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
reverting from Fedora 11 to Fedora 10 (Intel video trauma)
Is there any simple way to revert an upgrade from Fedora 10 to Fedora 11? I'd like to preserve /home, /usr/local and at least copies of configuration and log files, but I'd rather not have to copy everything onto an external drive and wipe the system. My Intel G45/X4500 motherboard graphics doesn't work with the Fedora 11 drivers - they detect my 1920x1200 monitor as 1920x1200 AND 1024x768 and insist on doing 1024x768, while system-config-display just hangs and requires a reboot - and the bugzilla reports I've found that seem to be for this problem don't show any sign of an imminent fix. Reverting to Fedora 10 seems like the only quick way of getting back to a usable system. Danny. -- 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: VM questions
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 01:43 +, Amadeus W.M. wrote: I have a dual Xeon 64 bit processor, which I don't believe has hardware VM support. Can I still run a VM machine in F11 with XP as guest OS? Which F11 disk should I download? Could you post the output of $ cat /proc/cpuinfo? In theory, if your CPU doesn't support Intel-VT, you could either use plain qemu w/ qemu-kqemu (You'll have use the rpmfusion repository for the kqemu kernel driver - without it qemu is more-or-less brain dead) or revert to non-Fedora shipped VM solutions such as Virtualbox (good for desktop virtualization; works OK on Fedora) and VMWare server (Bloated, Bit*h to setup on Fedora [they only support RHEL], very problematic web interface, good for server virtualization) - Gilboa -- 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: Fresh Fedora 11 fetches 362MB+ of updates, where's deltaRPM?
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 5:13 AM, Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com wrote: Nobody is talking about stopping deltarpms. The real question is how many deltarpms we will generate, and that's going to be decided once compose times (see my other reply on this thread) go down. Throwing hardware at the problem *may* be the solution, but before anybody does that, the process needs to be streamlined. Jonathan Thanks for this reply Jonathan. It´s good to hear that deltaRPMs are here to stay. I misinterpreted some of the responses on this list as questioning the whole idea of smaller downloads. FC -- 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
Auto-installed HP printer not working due to missing hpijs
Hi, while installing Fedora 11, my HP PhotoSmart PSC 2610 (USB+Ethernet) got automatically detected and installed as USB printer. So far so nice and shiny. Unfortunately, any attempt to print a test page results in a failure, stating that foomatic-rip failed. No indication in any syslog why and how it failed. I then added the printer again as ethernet network printer in the GNOME GUI, _there_ it said that this printer needs hpijs to work and that I should install it. Now, question is to which Bugzilla component I should log this problem. As far as I can see, this problem is not a bug of a specific component, but a systemic problem in that printers get auto-installed without the necessary drivers being available in the base installation, and no proper reporting done to the user about this fact. Any clues how to proceed on that? Best regards, Daniel PS: printer (USB and network) working fine after manually installing hpijs and its dependencies. -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: d...@cluenet.de -- d...@ircnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0 -- 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
ti_usb_3410_5052: probe of 3-2:1.0 failed with error -5 ??
Hi
I have a Huawei device that I have been using on fc 8 and fc 10. But
now with fc 11 it does not work.
Here is the log file entries for the device.
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: USB disconnect, address 26
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: new full speed USB device
using uhci_hcd and address 27
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: New USB device found,
idVendor=0451, idProduct=3410
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: New USB device strings:
Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=3
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: Product: TUSB3410 Boot Device
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: Manufacturer: Texas Instruments
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: SerialNumber: TUSB3410
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: configuration #1 chosen
from 2 choices
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: ti_usb_3410_5052 3-2:1.0: TI USB
3410 1 port adapter converter detected
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: ti_usb_3410_5052: probe of 3-2:1.0
failed with error -5
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: ti_usb_3410_5052 3-2:2.0: TI USB
3410 1 port adapter converter detected
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost kernel: usb 3-2: TI USB 3410 1 port adapter
converter now attached to ttyUSB0
Jun 13 15:42:25 localhost NetworkManager: info (ttyUSB0): ignoring
due to lack of mobile broadband capabilties
I have resolved this before by doing the following
create /etc/udev/rules.d/026_ti_usb_3410.rules
#TI USB 3410
SUBSYSTEM==usb_device ACTION==add
SYSFS{idVendor}==0451,SYSFS{idProduct}==3410 \
SYSFS{bNumConfigurations}==2 \
SYSFS{bConfigurationValue}==1 \
RUN+=/bin/sh -c 'echo 2 /sys%p/device/bConfigurationValue'
I have coppied /lib/firmware/ti_3410.fw to /lib/firmware/ti_3410.bin
this fixed it on fc 10
I have coppied /lib/udev/rules.d/77-nm-probe-modem-capabilities.rules
to /etc/udev/rules.d/
Now I'm out of ideas please could someone advise ?
Thanks
--
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: Other host already uses address -
Bob Goodwin wrote: Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: Bob Goodwin wrote: It's difficult without the ethernet connection, I would have to type it manually. but in addition to eth0 or 1 and lo, I also have an pan0? I do not show that on this good computer? I tried plugging in a PCI ethernet card but the probe function in the network setup GUI doesn't see it and if I try to connect it acts like the card is not there. However I see a different mac address in the ifconfig pan0 which I assume is the address of that second card. I think I made all the required entries network-scripts/ifcfg-eth1 ... Wait a moment - are you trying to bring up both eth0 and eth1 on the same network? The pan0 is not the second NIC. I don't remember what it is off hand... No, I don't think I did that, just changed the config from eth0 to eth1 when I plugged in the NIC. I haven't turned that computer on yet this morning. As far as moving messages from one computer to another when having network problems, I find saving the output to a PEN drive, or flash memory card and moding that to another machine works well. (Kind of like the old sneaker net that consisted of moving floppies from machine to machine... :-) Why didn't I think of that? I didn't want to waste Cd's, and disinclined to re-enable the floppy drive, prolly disabled in all my computers that still have one, then finding a floppy that was any good ... But I do have a new thumb drive on my desk that my daughter said would not work on her MAC but worked fine on my Fedora stuff. The HP computer is even supposed to be able boot from USB ... even has jacks on the front. I will do that later after the sun comes over the edge ... will post the appropriate files. The smallest desktop I've owned since the Commodore 64, an HP dc5100, $99 used, looks new, from Discount PC, 2.8 gHz P4, CD drive, SATA hard drive. I have 2 gigs of ram installed, will install a larger hard drive. Bob Mikkel I have another problem! The thumb drives are not being properly detected. They show up in lsusb are listed under Gnome Places but do not appear on the desktop? I believe they should show up under /media, ll or cd there results in No such file or directory I'm beginning to think I've found a computer that doesn't work with Linux? Is there such a thing ... If there is I would find it! Bob -- 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: F11: Hibernate OK, resume - not so much
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/12/2009 04:54 PM, Clemens Eisserer wrote: I guess the following stuff would help: - pstack traces of Xorg with debugging statements enabled, while Xorg is at 100% cpu - hardware used FYI, I'll post to bugzilla, but here's the trace top - 08:36:37 up 7 min, 3 users, load average: 1.00, 0.82, 0.41 Tasks: 162 total, 2 running, 160 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 50.1%us, 0.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 49.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.2%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 2061508k total, 440320k used, 1621188k free,25136k buffers Swap: 4112376k total,0k used, 4112376k free, 218200k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND 1895 root 20 0 90240 27m 7968 R 100.2 1.4 3:10.79 Xorg pstack 1895 #0 0x00fdef0d in nouveau_dma_wait () from /usr/lib/libdrm_nouveau.so.1 #1 0x00fdd132 in nouveau_pushbuf_flush () from /usr/lib/libdrm_nouveau.so.1 #2 0x003be659 in NV04EXAUploadIFC () #3 0x003a1dad in ?? () from /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers//nouveau_drv.so #4 0x00872de4 in ?? () from /usr/lib/xorg/modules//libexa.so #5 0x008733c0 in ?? () from /usr/lib/xorg/modules//libexa.so #6 0x00873aea in exaDoMigration () from /usr/lib/xorg/modules//libexa.so #7 0x0087526c in ?? () from /usr/lib/xorg/modules//libexa.so #8 0x0087590e in exaComposite () from /usr/lib/xorg/modules//libexa.so #9 0x08176dbb in ?? () #10 0x0816905c in CompositePicture () #11 0x0816ef0b in ?? () #12 0x0816bbc5 in ?? () #13 0x080864d7 in Dispatch () #14 0x0806baf5 in main () hardware can be found at http://www.smolts.org/client/show/pub_22210c35-d3f0-4445-ae9d-be8a38ec372b - -- Steve -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkozrC8ACgkQeERILVgMyvBu1QCeLXN6HlpHyPcpSF3JCROQBOAo vTMAn1g2Rn1EvX14Fl/2FTCVsLJMLjF2 =6g/n -END 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: Other host already uses address -
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 08:29:34AM -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote: I have another problem! The thumb drives are not being properly detected. They show up in lsusb are listed under Gnome Places but do not appear on the desktop? I believe they should show up under /media, ll or cd there results in No such file or directory I'm beginning to think I've found a computer that doesn't work with Linux? Is there such a thing ... If there is I would find it! when you plug them in does something appear in /var/log/messages ? what does fdisk -l show ? can you mount them manually ? -- 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
Am I Missing Fedora 11 Updates?
I'm not missing any updates, have I? It has been a few days without them. I'm using a Fedora 11 which was installed way back during the beta period and kept up to date ever since. Perhaps my yum is set up wrong? -- # yum update Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit adobe-linux-i386 | 951 B 00:00 updates/metalink | 13 kB 00:00 Setting up Update Process No Packages marked for Update [r...@deafeng3 ~]# cat /etc/fedora-release Fedora release 11 (Leonidas) Bob -- 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: OpenJDK / IcedTea is ###p
Yeah, I'm sure. Been there. Done that. Bob On 06/13/2009 12:25 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Robert L Cochran wrote: Arduino software (from http://www.arduino.cc/ ) needs the Sun Java version to run properly. Have you actually tried it with OpenJDK? Projects will often say you need Sun Java (mostly due to bad experiences with GCJ- or Classpath-based runtimes), but just work with OpenJDK. Plus, the code is GPL, so it should be trivial to fix if it doesn't work properly. If you have tried it and it doesn't work, please explain what's not working, people here should be able to help you fix it. I also need Sun Java for work-related projects. Again, are you sure you do? OpenJDK is 100% compliant to the JCK (Java Compatibility Kit, the official Java compliance test) and something like 99% identical to Sun Java 1.6 (it supports even several non-standard sun.* and com.sun.* classes and other implementation details, as it's derived from the same codebase). Kevin Kofler -- 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: Am I Missing Fedora 11 Updates?
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 09:43 -0400, Robert L Cochran wrote: I'm not missing any updates, have I? It has been a few days without them. I'm using a Fedora 11 which was installed way back during the beta period and kept up to date ever since. Perhaps my yum is set up wrong? We had noticed this as well. I decided to re-install F11 from the final ISOs just to see, and immediately came up with 62 updates. Not much of anything since then though, but word is there is a very large backlog of updates out there waiting. My take is that something did happen with the Yum configuration on the final RC that caused updates not to come anymore. Not sure what though... Cheers, Chris -- Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first. --Charles de Gaulle -- 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: Am I Missing Fedora 11 Updates?
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 16:47 +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote: On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 09:43 -0400, Robert L Cochran wrote: I'm not missing any updates, have I? It has been a few days without them. I'm using a Fedora 11 which was installed way back during the beta period and kept up to date ever since. Perhaps my yum is set up wrong? No updates have been pushed since Jun 04, so no you are not missing anything. IIRC the next push should happen this weekend or early on next week. ...Well, if that's true, than I really didn't have to re-install, did I!!! Oh well, at least I have a current and validated system backup stored for my trouble. :) Cheers, Chris -- “If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.” --Mark Twain -- 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
